This paper contrasts results from the Charpy vee-notch (CVN) test and the drop-weight tear test (DWTT) - two of the laboratory test practices that have been used as the basis to evaluate dynamic fracture resistance. Specimen geometry is considered in terms of plan-form and thickness, while test equipment is evaluated in terms of excess-energy capacity and hammer speed. It is shown that so long as conventional dynamic testing practices are employed, neither of these geometries (nor other similar geometries) are likely to characterize the fracture resistance suitable for direct use in current models of arrest toughness in cases involving very high toughness steels. Changes to conventional testing practices are illustrated that can resolve concerns in such cases. It is shown that differences in dynamic testing equipment can cause significant differences in fracture behavior and the measured toughness.
展开▼
