Prediction of Fully Plastic Collapse Stresses for Pipes With Two Circumferential Flaws

2009 ◽  
Vol 131 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kunio Hasegawa ◽  
Koichi Saito ◽  
Fuminori Iwamatsu ◽  
Katsumasa Miyazaki

Fully plastic collapse stress for a single circumferential flaw on a pipe is evaluated by the limit load criteria in accordance with the JSME Code S NA-1-2004 and the ASME Code Section XI. However, multiple flaws such as stress corrosion cracking are frequently detected in the same circumferential cross section in a pipe. If the distance between adjacent flaws is short, the two flaws are combined as a single flaw in compliance with combination rules. If the two flaws separated by a large distance, it is not required to combine two flaws. However, there is no evaluation method for two separated flaws in a pipe in the JSME and ASME Codes. Plastic collapse stresses for pipes with two symmetrical circumferential flaws based on net-stress approach had been proposed by one of the authors. Bending tests were performed on Type 304 stainless steel pipes with two symmetrical circumferential flaws. Consequently, it was shown that the proposed method can predict well the plastic collapse stresses for pipes with two flaws. In addition, it is also shown that this method is appropriate to use in fitness-for-service procedures, and higher plastic collapse stresses are expected, compared with current prediction methods for pipes with two flaws.

Author(s):  
Fuminori Iwamatsu ◽  
Katsumasa Miyazaki ◽  
Koichi Saito ◽  
Tetsuya Hamanaka ◽  
Yoshiaki Takahashi

Fully plastic failure stress for a single circumferential flaw in a pipe is evaluated by the limit load criteria in accordance with Appendix C in the ASME Code Section XI and Appendix E-8 in the JSME S NA-1-2004. However, multiple flaws such as stress corrosion cracking are frequently detected in the same circumferential cross section in a pipe. Limit load analysis has been validated for pipes with multiple circumferential flaws. Quasi-static four-point bending tests were performed on Type 304 stainless steel pipes with single, double, or triple circumferential flaws. Maximum loads measured in these tests were estimated by limit load analysis for pipes with multiple circumferential flaws. All estimation results using flow stress defined by the JSME S NA-1-2008 are conservative compared to the test results. Estimation results using flow stresses obtained from tests for the pipe with a single flaw quantitatively agree with test results.


Author(s):  
Kunio Hasegawa ◽  
Hideo Kobayashi

Flaw evaluation for fully-plastic fracture uses the limit load criterion. As stainless steels are high toughness ductile materials, limit load criterion is applicable to stainless steel pipes. When a single circumferential flaw is detected in a stainless steel pipe during in-service inspection, the single flaw is evaluated in accordance with Article EB-4000 in the JSME Code or Appendix C in the ASME Code, Section XI. However, multiple flaws such as stress corrosion cracking are sometimes detected in the same circumferential cress-section in a pipe. If the distance between adjacent flaws is short, the multiple flaws are considered as a single flaw in compliance with combination rules. Failure stress is easily calculated by the equations given by Article EB-4000 or Appendix C. If the two flaws are separated by a large distance, it is not required to combine the two flaws. Each flaw is treated as independent. However, there are no equations for evaluating collapse stress for a pipe containing multiple independent flaws in Article EB-4000 and Appendix C. The present paper focus on a proposal of simple equations for evaluating collapse stresses for pipes containing multiple circumferential part-through wall flaws.


Author(s):  
Kunio Hasegawa ◽  
Koichi Saito ◽  
Fuminori Iwamatsu ◽  
Katsumasa Miyazaki

Fully plastic failure stress for a single circumferential flaw on a pipe is evaluated by the limit load criteria in accordance with Appendix E-8 in the JSME S NA-1-2004 and Appendix C in the ASME Code Section XI. However, multiple flaws such as stress corrosion cracking are frequently detected in the same circumferential cross section in a pipe. If the distance between adjacent flaws is short, the two flaws are combined as a single flaw in compliance with combination rules. If the two flaws separated by a large distance, it is not required to combine two flaws. However, there is no evaluation method for two flawed pipe in the JSME and ASME Codes. Failure stress for pipes with two circumferential flaws based on net-stress approach had been proposed by one of the authors. The present paper is concerned with the comparison of experimental data and the proposed theoretical method for pipes with circumferentially multiple flaws.


1985 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 247-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Yagawa ◽  
Y. Takahashi ◽  
N. Kato ◽  
M. Saito ◽  
K. Hasegawa ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Kunio Hasegawa ◽  
Katsumasa Miyazaki ◽  
Koichi Saito ◽  
Bostjan Bezensek

Multiple flaws such as stress corrosion cracks are frequently detected in the same welded lines in pipes. If multiple discrete flaws are in close proximity to one another, alignment rules are used to determine whether the flaws should be treated as non-aligned or as coplanar. Alignment rules are provided in fitness-for-service codes, such as ASME, JSME, API 579, BS 7910, etc. However, the criteria of the alignment rules are different among these codes. This paper briefly introduces these flaw alignment rules, and four-point bending tests performed on stainless steel pipes with two non-aligned flaws. The experimental plastic collapse stresses are determined from the collapse loads and compared with collapse stresses calculated from the limit load criteria. The limit loads are obtained for single non-aligned or aligned coplanar flaws in accordance with the alignment rules. On this basis, the conservatism of the alignment rules in the above codes is assessed.


1992 ◽  
Vol 133 (3) ◽  
pp. 361-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Asada ◽  
T. Shimakawa ◽  
M. Kitagawa ◽  
T. Kodaira ◽  
Y. Wada ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Kunio Hasegawa ◽  
Katsumasa Miyazaki ◽  
Koichi Saito

When multiple flaws are offset flaws, alignment rules are used to determine whether the flaws should be treated as non-aligned or as coplanar. The alignment rules are provided in fitness-for-service codes, and the rules are based on comparison of flaw dimensions. Quasi-static tensile tests were performed on Type 304 stainless steel flat plate specimens with two dissimilar through-wall offset flaws at ambient temperature. It can be seen that, in the experiments, plastic collapse loads were independent of non-alignment dimensions, when the counterpart flaw lengths are smaller enough compared with the main flaw lengths.


1987 ◽  
Vol 53 (495) ◽  
pp. 2097-2100
Author(s):  
Shuzo UEDA ◽  
Ryoichi KURIHARA ◽  
Kiyoshi KATO ◽  
Kunio ONIZAWA ◽  
Hideo SEKIYA ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document