BS EN 60793-1-33:2017 – TC:2020 Edition
$246.62
Tracked Changes. Optical fibres – Measurement methods and test procedures – Stress corrosion susceptibility
| Published By | Publication Date | Number of Pages |
| BSI | 2020 | 102 |
IEC 60793-1-33:2017 contains descriptions of the five main test methods for the determination of stress corrosion susceptibility parameters. The object of this document is to establish uniform requirements for the mechanical characteristic of stress corrosion susceptibility for silica-based fibres. Dynamic fatigue and static fatigue tests are used to determine the (dynamic) n d value and (static) n s value of stress corrosion susceptibility parameters. Currently, only the n d-value is assessed against specification. Measured values greater than 18 per this procedure reflect the n d-value of silica, which is approximately 20. Higher values will not translate to demonstrable enhanced fatigue resistance. Silica fibre mechanical tests determine the fracture stress and fatigue properties under conditions that model the practical applications as closely as possible. The following test methods are used for determining stress corrosion susceptibility: A:?Dynamic n d value by axial tension; B:?Dynamic n d value by two-point bending; C:?Static n s value by axial tension; D:?Static n s value by two-point bending; E:?Static n s value by uniform bending. These methods are appropriate for category A1, A2 and A3 multimode, class B single-mode fibres and class C intraconnecting single-mode fibres. These tests provide values of the stress corrosion parameter, n, that can be used for reliability calculations according to IEC TR 62048. Information common to all methods is contained in Clauses 1 to 10, and information pertaining to each individual test method appears in Annexes A, B, C, D, and E. Annexes F and G offer considerations for dynamic and static stress corrosion susceptibility parameter calculations, respectively; Annex H offers considerations on the different stress corrosion susceptibility parameter test methods. This second edition cancels and replaces the first edition published in 2001. It constitutes a technical revision. This edition includes the following significant technical changes with respect to the previous edition: removal of RTM; changes to scope.
PDF Catalog
| PDF Pages | PDF Title |
|---|---|
| 58 | undefined |
| 61 | English CONTENTS |
| 64 | FOREWORD |
| 66 | INTRODUCTION |
| 67 | 1 Scope 2 Normative references 3 Terms and definitions |
| 68 | 4 Overview of test methods 5 Reference test methods 6 Apparatus 7 Sampling and specimens 7.1 General 7.2 Specimen length 7.3 Specimen preparation and conditioning |
| 69 | 8 Procedure 9 Calculations 10 Results |
| 70 | 11 Specification information |
| 71 | Annex A (normative) Dynamic n value, nd, by axial tension A.1 General A.2 Apparatus A.2.1 General Figures Figure A.1 – Schematic of translation test apparatus |
| 72 | A.2.2 Support of the specimen Figure A.2 – Schematic of rotational test apparatus Figure A.3 – Schematic of rotational test apparatus with load cell |
| 73 | A.2.3 Stressing application A.2.4 Fracture force measurement A.2.5 Strain rate control |
| 74 | A.2.6 Stress rate characterization A.3 Test sample A.3.1 Sample size A.3.2 Sample size (optional) A.4 Procedure |
| 75 | A.5 Calculations A.5.1 Fracture stress A.5.2 Fracture stress at a given strain rate |
| 76 | A.5.3 Dynamic (tension) stress corrosion susceptibility parameter, nd A.6 Results |
| 77 | Figure A.4 – Representation of dynamic fatigue graph |
| 78 | Annex B (normative) Dynamic n value, nd, by two-point bending B.1 General B.2 Apparatus B.2.1 General B.2.2 Stepper motor control B.2.3 Stepper motor-driven movable platen B.2.4 Stationary platen B.2.5 Platen velocity B.2.6 Fibre fracture detecting system |
| 79 | B.3 Test sample B.4 Procedure |
| 80 | B.5 Calculations B.5.1 Fracture stress B.5.2 Dynamic (two-point bending) stress corrosion susceptibility parameter, nd |
| 81 | B.5.3 Results Figure B.1 – Schematic of two-point bending unit |
| 82 | Figure B.2 – Schematic of possible dynamic fatigue (two-point bending) apparatus Figure B.3 – Schematic of dynamic fatigue data |
| 83 | Annex C (normative) Static n value, ns, by axial tension C.1 General C.2 Apparatus C.2.1 General C.2.2 Gripping the fibre at both ends C.2.3 Stressing the fibre C.2.4 Measuring time to fracture C.3 Test sample C.4 Procedure |
| 84 | C.5 Calculations C.5.1 Fracture stress C.5.2 Static (tension) stress corrosion susceptibility parameter, ns C.5.3 Simple median C.6 Results |
| 85 | Figure C.1 – Schematic of possible static fatigue (tension) apparatus |
| 86 | Annex D (normative) Static n value, ns, by two-point bending D.1 General D.2 Apparatus D.2.1 Test equipment D.2.2 Fibre fracture detection D.3 Test sample D.4 Procedure D.5 Calculations D.5.1 Fracture stress |
| 87 | D.5.2 Static (two-point bending) stress corrosion susceptibility parameter, ns D.6 Results Figure D.1 – Possible test equipment schematic |
| 88 | Annex E (normative) Static n value, ns, by uniform bending E.1 General E.2 Apparatus E.2.1 General E.2.2 Support of the sample E.2.3 Stressing the fibre E.2.4 Measuring time to fracture E.3 Test sample E.4 Procedure |
| 89 | E.5 Calculations E.5.1 Fracture stress E.5.2 Static (uniform bending) stress corrosion susceptibility parameter, ns E.6 Results Figure E.1 – Schematic of possible static fatigue (uniform bending) apparatus |
| 90 | Annex F (informative) Considerations for dynamic stress corrosion susceptibility parameter calculations F.1 Specimen size and sample size F.1.1 Specimen size F.1.2 Sample size |
| 91 | F.2 Numeric algorithm for calculation of dynamic stress corrosion susceptibility parameter, nd Table F.1 – 95 % confidence interval for nd |
| 92 | F.3 Complete method to calculate fracture stress |
| 94 | Annex G (informative) Considerations for static stress corrosion susceptibility parameter calculations G.1 Homologous method G.2 Maximum likelihood estimate |
| 95 | Annex H (informative) Considerations on stress corrosion susceptibility parameter test methods H.1 General H.2 Crack growth |
| 96 | H.3 Types of stress corrosion susceptibility test methods H.4 Comparison of n value obtained with different methods |
| 97 | H.5 Conclusion Figure H.1 – COST 218 round robin results of fracture strength versus “effective”time-to-fracture for dynamic and static axial tension, dynamic and static two-point bending and static mandrel test methods |
| 98 | Figure H.2 – COST 218 round robin results of fracture strength versus “effective”time-to-fracture for dynamic and static axial tension, dynamic and static two-point bending and static mandrel test methods |
| 99 | Bibliography |
