Trans Indian Inst Met (2016) 69(2):579–583
DOI 10.1007/s12666-015-0803-6
TECHNICAL PAPER
Modification of Larson–Miller Parameter Technique
for Predicting Creep Life of Materials
Amitava Ghatak1 • P. S. Robi2
Received: 15 October 2015 / Accepted: 26 November 2015 / Published online: 31 December 2015
 The Indian Institute of Metals - IIM 2015
Abstract Larson–Miller parameter is the most exten-
sively used extrapolation technique for predicting creep life
of metallic materials. In this technique, the Larson–Miller
parameter (P) is empirically expressed as: P = T [C ?
log(t)] where the C is considered as a constant. This is
under the assumption that iso-stress lines in the plot of
log(t) versus 1/T when extended, intersects the vertical axis
at 1/T = 0, which corresponds to the Larson–Miller con-
stant C. Analysis of the literature data reveals that the
intersection of the iso-stress lines at a common point is
rarely met in practice. The present paper is aimed at
investigating the value of Larson–Miller constant C in the
Larson–Miller parameter technique. Accelerated creep
tests on micro-alloyed HP40Nb steel were conducted at
constant stresses in the range 47–120 MPa and tempera-
tures 650–1050 C for the prediction of creep life by
Larson–Miller parameter. The results reveal that the Lar-
son–Miller constant C in the expression for P is not a
constant, rather, it is a linear function of applied stress. The
authors proposed to modify the expression for the Larson–
Miller parameter for predicting the creep life of materials.
Keywords Larson–Miller parameter  Creep life 
HP40Nb micro-alloyed steel
& Amitava Ghatak
amitavaghatak@yahoo.com
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, North Eastern
Regional Institute of Science and Technology, Nirjuli,
Arunachal Pradesh 791109, India
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology Guwahati, Guwahati 781039, India
1 Introduction
Creep life assessment is a major issue for economic and
safe operation of components exposed at high temperature
and pressure in petro-chemical and power generating
industries [1, 2]. During the past few decades, several
methodologies, such as Larson–Miller parameter (P) [3],
Manson–Haferd parameter [4], Orr–Sherby–Dorn parame-
ter [5], Manson–Sucoop parameter [6] and Wilshire
method [7–9], have been suggested by researchers to pre-
dict the creep life of components using short-time creep
test data. Among these, the Larson–Miller parametric
technique of extrapolating stress-rupture data is widely
used to predict the creep life of high temperature materials
due to its simplicity of application [10–14]. The creep-
rupture parameter introduced by Larson and Miller has the
following form:
PðrÞ ¼ T ½C þ logðtÞ ð1Þ
where r is the stress in MPa, T is temperature in K, t is
rupture time in hour. C is the Larson–Miller constant to be
determined from the experimental data. The parameter
P(r) is a function of stress. Stress versus P is reffered as a
master curve. The extended iso-stress lines in log(t) versus
1/T plot is assumed to intersect the vertical axis at 1/T = 0
at the point corresponding to C. In almost all the cases, the
value of C is considered as constant. While arriving at the
master plot, the C value is generally taken as 20, though
depending on the material the optimized values between 10
and 50 have also been reported based on the material. So
far no justification has been provided by any reseracher for
choosing C = 20. Since, the value of C differers for
different materials, Furillo et al. [15] modified the Larson–
Miller parameter to obtain better correlation of stress-
rupture data and obtained the expression:
123
580 Trans Indian Inst Met (2016) 69(2):579–583

 
1 The range of temperatures was chosen such that they are
logðrÞ ¼  ½T fCðT Þ þ logðtÞg ð2Þ typical for the reforming operation in petrochemical
naT
industries. The test temperature was controlled within
where n is the power-law exponent, a the constant near to ±3 C. Creep test were conducted up to the rupture of the
unity and C(T) is a constant obtained by the expression specimen. The longest rupture time was 122.7 h at
C ðT Þ ¼ log½fAexpðQ=RT Þgr=B ð3Þ 47 MPa/800 C.
It has been observed that the value of C depends on initial
microstructure, grain size, chemical composition and cold-
3 Results and Discussion
work [16, 17]. The scatter in the experimental data in
master curve results in a large error in estimating the creep
The constant C of Eq. (1) is obtained graphically by plot-
life at lower stress region. It appears that this is due to the
ting experimental creep data in log(t) versus 1/T plot.
assumption of a constant value for C. This paper aims to
Figure 1 shows the plot of log10(t) versus 1/T for constant
achieve a better understanding of the Larson miller
stresses. The Larson–Miller parametric technique is under
parameter C for the prediction of creep life of engineering
the assumption that these iso-stress lines when extended,
materials.
intersect the vertical axis at 1/T = 0 at a common point, the
Centrifugally cast reformer tube made of HP40Nb
value of which is taken as the value of C. The Fig. 1
micro-alloyed steel is chosen for the present investigation.
indicates that the iso-stress curves when extended intersect
The tube is used in petro-chemical industries for produc-
the vertical axis at different points, each point corresponds
tion of hydrogen-rich gas. The tubes are designed for a long
to different value of C. It is evident that iso-stress plots,
service period (105 h) at temperatures up to 900 C and
when extended, intersect the vertical axis at values between
internal pressure of 25–27.5 bar. Due to the degradation of
14 and 22 for the range of stresses investigated.
microstructure and properties of the material during service
The plot of C versus stress, shown in Fig. 2, indicates
often premature failure of the steel occurs by one or more
that C varies linearly with stress. Equation (1) is modified
damage mechanisms such as creep, corrosion [13, 14, 18–
20]. Accelerated creep tests for various combinations of
stress and temperatures were carried out and the data
obtained was used for the analysis.

2 Experimenal

2.1 Material

The test material, a HP grade austenitic stainless steel

reformer tube of inner diameter 106 mm and thickness
15.3 mm, was supplied by Numaligarh Refineries Limited,
India. The chemical composition of the reformer steel used
in the present study is given in Table 1.

2.2 Creep Test

Flat specimens with gauge dimensions 3 9 6.5 9 25 mm

were machined along the longitudinal direction of reformer
tube by wire-cut electric discharge machining (EDM).
Tensile creep-rupture tests were performed on constant-
stress creep testing machine at stresses of 47, 68 and
Fig. 1 Plot of log(t) versus 1/T to determine Larson–Miller
120 MPa and temperatures ranging from 650 to 1050 C. constant C

Table 1 Chemical composition of the steel (in weight percentage)

C Si Cr Ni Mo Nb Ti Fe

0.41 1.25 23.56 34.95 0.04 0.81 0.04 Balance

123
Trans Indian Inst Met (2016) 69(2):579–583
Fig. 2 Plot of Larson–Miller constant C versus stress for the steel
Fig. 3 Comparison of Larson–Miller master curves for C = 20 and
C = C(r)
considering C as a function of r [i.e., C = C(r)] to obtain
the relationship:
PðrÞ ¼ T ½ða1 þ a2  rÞ þ logðtÞ  103
From the experimental data, values of the constants a1 and
a2 in Eq. (4) for the investigated steel were obtained as
26.937 and -0.1119, respectively.
For austenitic steels, the C value proposed by Larson
and Miller for obtaining the r versus P master plot is 20
[3]. Figure 3 shows the log–log plots of r versus average
581
Table 2 P values from master curves for different stresses
Stress (MPa) Larson–Miller parameter, P
Using C = 20 Using C(r)
5 26.57 33.24
10 26.26 32.35
15 25.95 31.46
P for each stress with C = 20 and C as a function of
applied stress. The coefficient of determination (R2) for
master curve with C = 20 and C = C(r) are found to be
0.94 and 0.996, respectively. Based on the R2 value, the
master curve of the investigated steel considering C as a
function of stress shows a better fit.
The P value at low stress levels are obtained by
extrapolating the master curves for both cases of C values.
The P values for stresses of 5, 10 and 15 MPa for the steel
tube are given in Table 2. The creep life of the steel con-
sidering C = 20 and C = C(r) are determined by Eq. (5)
and (6), respectively.
t ¼ 10½ð1000  T Þ20
P
ð5Þ
t ¼ 10½ð1000  T Þð0:1119  r þ 26:937Þ
P
ð6Þ
Figures 4 and 5 show the predicted creep life of the
reformer tube considering C = 20 and C as a function of
stress. Both the figures show that the creep life decreases
with increase in temperature and/or stress.
Figure 6 compares the creep life of the material pre-
dicted for different combinations of stresses, by consider-
ing C = 20 and C = C(r). Similar comparison of
predicted creep life of the investigated steel at constant
temperatures considering C = 20 and C = C(r) is shown
in Fig. 7. At 800 C and 5 MPa, the estimated creep life of
the steel is 6.5 and 4.5 years for the case of C = 20 and
C = C(r), respectively. At 780 C and 10 MPa, the
respective creep lives are found to be 9.8 and 9.1 years.
Figure 7 shows lower creep life when C is considered as a
function of stress, compared to the case when C is taken as
a constant value of 20.
The result indicates that the creep life of the reformer
tube is very sensitive to small difference in temperature and
C value, even if C is considered as a constant. It is observed
that the iso-stress lines in log10(t) versus 1/T plot are not
intersecting at a single point on the y-axis at 1/T = 0.
ð4Þ
Since, the Larson–Miller constant C value depends on the
applied stress, hence, the modification is required in the
Larson–Miller parametric technique. The results of the
analysis indicates that the creep life prediction of the
material by considering C = C(r) in the Larson–Miller
parametric technique is conservative in nature and will
provide a better realistic prediction.
123
582 Trans Indian Inst Met (2016) 69(2):579–583

Fig. 4 Plot of a temperature (a) (b)

versus creep life and b stress
versus creep life, for C = 20

Fig. 5 Plot of a temperature (a) (b)

versus creep life and b stress
versus creep life, for C = C(r)

Fig. 6 Plot of temperature versus predicted creep life for C = 20 and

C = C(r) Fig. 7 Plot of stress versus predicted creep life for C = 20 and
C = C(r)

123
Trans Indian Inst Met (2016) 69(2):579–583
4 Conclusions
The modified Larson–Miller parameter is proposed to
predict the creep life of micro-alloyed HP40Nb reformer
steel. Following conclusions are obtained:
• The creep-rupture data was analyzed by Larson–Miller
parameter to predict the creep life of the steel.
• It is proposed that C in the P expression be modified by
stress dependent function rather than considering C as a
constant.
Acknowledgments Providing the reformer tube by Numaligarh
Refinery Limited, India is gratefully acknowledged.
References
1. C.J. Moss, P. Barrien and A. Walczynski, Int J Pres Vessels
Piping, 77 (2000) 105.
2. A.K. Koul, R. Castillo and K. Willett, Mater Sci Eng, 66 (1984)
213.
3. F.R. Larson and J. Miller, Trans ASME, 74 (1952) 765.
4. Manson S S, and Haferd A M, A Linear Time-Temperature
Relation for Extrapolation of Creep and Stress-Rupture Data.
NACA TN 2890 (1953).
5. R.L. Orr, O.D. Sherby, and J.E. Dorn, Trans ASM, 46 (1954) 113.
583
6. Manson S S, and Succop G, in Stress-Rupture Properties of
Inconel 700 and Correlation on the Basis of Several Time-Tem-
perature Parameters, (ed.) ASTM, of Symposium on Metallic
Materials for Service Temperatures Above 1600 F, ASTM-STP
174, ASTM, Philadephia, (1956).
7. B. Wilshire and P.J. Scharning, Int Mater Rev, 53 (2008) 91.
8. B. Wilshire and P.J. Scharning, Mater Sci Tech, 24 (2008) 1.
9. Wilshire B, and Bache M R, Proceedings of the Creep & Frac-
ture in High Temperature Components-2nd ECCC Creep Con-
ference, Switzerland (2009), p 44.
10. A. Kim, K. Tunvir, S. Nahm and S. Cho, J Mater Process Tech,
202 (2008) 450.
11. A.K. Ray, K. Diwakar, B.N. Prasad, Y.N. Tiwari, R.N. Ghosh
and J.D. Whittenberger, Mater Sci Eng A, 454-455 (2007) 124.
12. J.E. Indacochea and R.A. Seshadri, Mater Sci Eng A, 234-236
(1997) 555.
13. A.K. Ray, S. Kumar, G. Krishna, M. Gunjan, B. Goswami and
S.C. Bose, Mater Sci Eng A, 529 (2011) 102.
14. J. Swaminathan, K. Guguloth, M. Gunjan, P. Roy and R. Ghosh,
Eng Fail Anal, 15 (2008) 311.
15. F.T. Furillo, S. Purushothaman and J.K. Tien, Scripta Metall, 11
(1977) 493.
16. S. Wignarajah, I. Masumoto and T. Hara, ISIJ Int, 30 (1990) 58.
17. M. Vasudevan, S. Venkadesan, P.V. Sivaprasad and S.L. Man-
nan, J Nucl Mater, 211 (1994) 251.
18. A. Ghatak and P.S. Robi, IJREAS, 5 (2015) 98.
19. A. Ghatak and P.S. Robi, Mater Sci Eng A, 648 (2015) 418.
20. N. Xu, D. Monceau, D. Young, and J. Furtado, Corros Sci, 50
(2008) 2398.
123