scholarly journals Erratum: “Assessment Procedure for Multiple Cracklike Flaws in Failure Assessment Diagram (FAD)” [Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, 2009, 131, p. 041402]

2009 ◽  
Vol 131 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinji Konosu
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Assessment Procedure ◽  
Failure Assessment Diagram ◽  
Failure Assessment

Some Fundamental Aspects of High Temperature Defect Assessment

2005 ◽  
Vol 297-300 ◽  
pp. 428-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shan Tung Tu ◽  
Fu Zhen Xuan
Keyword(s):  
High Temperature ◽  
Assessment Method ◽  
Damage Effect ◽  
Assessment Procedure ◽  
Continuum Damage ◽  
Creep Failure ◽  
Failure Assessment Diagram ◽  
Defect Assessment ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Dependent Failure

Current research efforts in the development of high temperature defect assessment procedure are summarized. Creep exemption criteria are proposed for the assessment of defective structures at high temperature in consideration of the effects of loadings, operating temperature and service time. Time-dependent failure assessment diagram (TDFAD) is developed that covers major failure mechanisms of defective high temperature structures. Challenges due to the welding effect are discussed. TDFAD for weldments is derived for various combinations of materials. In order to develop a unified assessment method to cope with material and loading complexity, a new failure assessment diagram based on continuum damage concept is proposed to reflect the damage effect on ductile creep failure and brittle creep fracture.

Assessment Procedure for Multiple Cracklike Flaws in Failure Assessment Diagram (FAD)

2009 ◽  
Vol 131 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinji Konosu
Keyword(s):  
Body Force ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
The Body ◽  
Assessment Procedure ◽  
Failure Assessment Diagram ◽  
Reference Stress ◽  
Body Force Method ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Common Problems ◽  
Shielding Effects

Assessment of multiple discrete cracklike flaws is one of the most common problems relating to pressure vessels and piping components. Under the current fitness for service (FFS) rules, such as ASME, BS, and so on, multiple cracklike flaws are usually recharacterized as an enveloping crack (defined as a single larger crack), following their assessment rules. The procedure, however, varies significantly in these FFS codes. In this paper, the interaction between nonaligned multiple unequal cracks is clarified by applying the body force method. Based on the interaction that indicates the magnification and shielding effects and the reference stress solutions, a newly developed assessment procedure for multiple discrete cracklike flaws in the failure assessment diagram is proposed.

Technical Basis for the Extension of ASME Code Case N-494 for Assessment of Austenitic Piping

1996 ◽  
Vol 118 (4) ◽  
pp. 513-516 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. M. Bloom
Keyword(s):  
Lower Bound ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Strain Curve ◽  
Stress Strain Curve ◽  
Stress Strain ◽  
Failure Assessment Diagram ◽  
Strain Behavior ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Asme Code ◽  
Constraint Effects

In 1990, the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code for Nuclear Components approved Code Case N-494 as an alternative procedure for evaluating flaws in light water reactor (LWR) ferritic piping. The approach is an alternate to Appendix H of the ASME Code and allows the user to remove some unnecessary conservatism in the existing procedure by allowing the use of pipe specific material properties. The Code case is an implementation of the methodology of the deformation plasticity failure assessment diagram (DPFAD). The key ingredient in the application of DPFAD is that the material stress-strain curve must be in the format of a simple power law hardening stress-strain curve such as the Ramberg-Osgood (R-O) model. Ferritic materials can be accurately fit by the R-O model and, therefore, it was natural to use the DPFAD methodology for the assessment of LWR ferritic piping. An extension of Code Case N-494 to austenitic piping required a modification of the existing DPFAD methodology. Such an extension was made and presented at the ASME Pressure Vessel and Piping (PVP) Conference in Minneapolis (1994). The modified DPFAD approach, coined piecewise failure assessment diagram (PWFAD), extended an approximate engineering approach proposed by Ainsworth in order to consider materials whose stress-strain behavior cannot be fit to the R-O model. The Code Case N-494 approach was revised using the PWFAD procedure in the same manner as in the development of the original N-494 approach for ferritic materials. A lower-bound stress-strain curve (with yield stress comparable to ASME Code specified minimum) was used to generate a PWFAD curve for the geometry of a part-through wall circumferential flaw in a cylinder under tension and bending. Earlier work demonstrated that a cylinder under axial tension with a 50-percent flaw depth, 90 deg in circumference, and radius to thickness of 10, produced a lower-bound FAD curve. Validation of the new proposed Code case procedure for austenitic piping was performed using actual pipe test data. Using the lower-bound PWFAD curve, pipe test results were conservatively predicted (failure stresses were predicted to be 31.5 percent lower than actual on the average). The conservative predictions were attributed to constraint effects where the toughness values used in the predictions were obtained from highly constrained compact test specimens. The resultant development of the PWFAD curve for austenitic piping led to a revision of Code Case N-494 to include a procedure for assessment of flaws in austenitic piping.

Continuing Development of a Simplified Method to Account for the Interaction of Primary and Secondary Stresses

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter M. James ◽  
Dennis G. Hooton ◽  
Lorna A. Higham ◽  
Colin J. Madew ◽  
John K. Sharples ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Crack Opening ◽  
Full Range ◽  
Nuclear Industry ◽  
Assessment Procedure ◽  
Average Characteristic ◽  
Failure Assessment Diagram ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Simplified Method ◽  
Out Of Plane ◽  
The Look

The R6 defect assessment procedure, used commonly in the UK nuclear industry to assess the significance of defects in structures, uses the Failure Assessment Diagram to evaluate limiting parameters whilst accounting for the effects of plasticity. The interaction of primary and secondary stress is accounted for within R6 through the use of the ρ, or an equivalent V, term. ‘Look-up’ tables are provided in order to evaluate parameters required to derive the ρ or V terms. In some circumstances, the current methodology has been shown to be excessively conservative and the use of the ‘look-up’ tables is somewhat complex and cumbersome anyway. Previous work has shown that an Alternative Method derived from the Time-Dependent Failure Assessment Diagram approach of the R5 high temperature procedure could potentially be considered. This has since been further modified and termed the Simplified Method. This Simplified Method has the benefit of being less conservative than the current R6 method and of not requiring ρ (or V) factors, and hence not requiring the use of the ‘Look-up’ tables. This paper presents the Simplified Method through comparisons within an extended range of Finite Element Analyses upon both an axial and circumferentially cracked pipe and a centre cracked plate. In addition to the use of the Simplified Method, further work is presented in order to include both out of plane primary and secondary stresses when determining the combined reference stress. A full range of crack opening and out of plane forces, as well as a full range of thermally induced secondary stresses, have been included to provide a broad basis upon which to compare the different methods investigated. Through comparing the full range of cases, some of the assumptions made within the R6 procedure have been reassessed. This has led to an average characteristic length, a¯, being defined to account for differences in loading type and in and out of plane ratios. However, within this paper further positive evidence for the use of the Simplified Method has been demonstrated.

A Procedure for the Assessment of the Structural Integrity of Nuclear Pressure Vessels

1983 ◽  
Vol 105 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. M. Bloom
Keyword(s):  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Assessment Procedure ◽  
Plastic Collapse ◽  
Failure Assessment Diagram ◽  
Linear Elastic ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Deformation Plasticity ◽  
Margin Of Safety ◽  
Two Parameters

This paper presents a simple engineering procedure that the utility industry can use to assess the integrity of typical nuclear-grade pressure vessels. The procedure recognizes both brittle fracture and plastic collapse and is based on a set of proposed failure assessment curves which make up a safety/failure plane. The plane is defined by the stress intensity factor/fracture toughness ratio as the ordinate and the applied stress/reference plastic collapse stress ratio as the abscissa. The failure assessment procedure is based in part on the British Central Electricity Generating Board’s R-6 failure assessment diagram and the deformation plasticity solutions of the General Electric Company. Two parameters, a plastic collapse parameter (Sr′) and linear elastic fracture mechanics parameter (Kr′) are calculated by the user. The point (Sr′, Kr′) is plotted on the appropriate failure assessment diagram. If the point lies inside the respective curve, the structure is safe from failure. Moreover, for a given pressure and a postulated or actual flaw size, the margin of safety of the structure can be simply determined. Consistent with Appendix A of Section XI, (Division 1) of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code the procedure presented in this paper is limited to ferritic materials 4 in. (102 mm) and greater in thickness. Details of the derivation of the proposed set of failure assessment curves are provided along with a sample problem illustrating the use of these curves.

Modification of the Failure Assessment Diagram for Non-Sharp Defects

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony J. Horn ◽  
Andrew H. Sherry
Keyword(s):  
Fatigue Cracks ◽  
Safety Margin ◽  
Assessment Method ◽  
Assessment Procedure ◽  
J Integral ◽  
Element Analysis ◽  
Failure Assessment Diagram ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Notch Tip ◽  
Failure Predictions

Current defect assessment procedures assume all flaws to be sharp. While this assumption may be appropriate for fatigue cracks, in other cases such as voids, mechanical dents or welding defects it can be an over-conservative assumption that can lead to pessimistic assessment of structures and significant under-estimation of their safety margin against fracture. This study has developed an assessment procedure for predicting the cleavage fracture resistance of structures containing non-sharp defects. The new assessment method was developed using the Weibull stress based toughness scaling model and an approach based on a modification of the Failure Assessment Diagram (FAD). In the new assessment procedure, the notch driving force is described by the notch J-integral, the notch tip loading severity by the elastic notch tip opening stress σN, the notch geometry by a load-independent parameter βN, and the sensitivity of the material toughness to the notch effect by the material parameters γ and l. Finite element analysis of SE(B) specimens containing U-notches was used to demonstrate that the notch J-integral can be estimated using existing expressions in fracture toughness testing standards intended for pre-cracked specimens. A test programme of SE(B) specimens containing U-notches was used to validate the new assessment procedure. Failure predictions of the SE(B) specimens using the notch-modified FAD approach result in significantly reduced conservatism compared to the standard FAD assessment approach for sharp cracks.

scholarly journals Predicting the Influence of Residual Stresses on Brittle Fracture Using Local Approach

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Mirzaee-Sisan ◽  
Saeid Hadidi-Moud ◽  
David Smith
Keyword(s):  
Residual Stress ◽  
Brittle Fracture ◽  
Residual Stresses ◽  
Surface Flaw ◽  
Assessment Procedure ◽  
Local Approach ◽  
Failure Assessment Diagram ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Fracture Assessment ◽  
Failure Predictions

This paper explores the application of the local approach to brittle fracture to predict the influence of residual stresses in a relatively thick pipe. Three different surface flaw sizes were assumed on the outside surface of the pipe and failure predictions were made using the local approach. Then the results of local approach prediction were compared with the well-known fracture assessment procedure, BS7910 which uses a failure assessment diagram (FAD). It has found that the local approach has an advantage of taking into account the details of stress re-distribution of residual stress around the crack tip compared to the conventional assessment procedure.

Use of the Failure Assessment Diagram to Evaluate the Safety of the Reactor Pressure Vessel

2015 ◽  
Vol 137 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mingya Chen ◽  
Feng Lu ◽  
Rongshan Wang
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Failure Modes ◽  
Mechanical Load ◽  
Reactor Pressure Vessel ◽  
Plastic Collapse ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Failure Assessment Diagram ◽  
Single Criterion ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Reactor Pressure

Analysis of multiple failure modes is the key element of the integrity evaluation of the nuclear reactor pressure vessel (RPV). While the simple single-criterion failure code provides the guidance for structural integrity, the guidance ignores the interaction between fast fracture and plastic collapse. In this paper, the differences between the reserve factor (RF) in the R6 two-criteria failure procedure and the safety coefficient (SC) in the single-criterion failure code were compared. Based on 3D finite element (FE) analyses, the option 3 failure assessment diagram (FAD) of the beltline of the RPV was established according to the R6 basic route and alternative approaches, respectively. Also, the nonconservation of the secondary stress correction parameter ρ was reviewed. In this paper, it was shown that the effect of crack sizes on the FAD is considered to be limited, and the influence of the thermal stress on the FAD is obvious in the transition region of the failure assessment curve (FAC). The FAD only considering the mechanical load encloses the FAD considering the thermal–mechanical load for the Lr smaller than 1, but it is contrary when the Lr is bigger than 1. It is not enough to just satisfy the requirement in the IWB-3612 of the ASME code because the risk of plastic-collapse failure is ignored. And in this study, the maximum nonconservation of the fracture toughness RF is more than 7% due to the approximate value of ρ. Accordingly, the accurate method in the R6 procedure should be used in the integrity assessment of the RPV under the faulted transient.

Estimation of the V-Factor for Circumferentially Cracked Pipes Under Combined Thermal and Mechanical Stresses Using a Strain-Based Failure Assessment Diagram

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chang-Young Oh ◽  
Yun-Jae Kim ◽  
Dong-il Ryu ◽  
P. J. Budden ◽  
R. A. Ainsworth
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Thermal Load ◽  
Thermal Stresses ◽  
Mechanical Stresses ◽  
Estimation Methods ◽  
Finite Element Analyses ◽  
3 Dimensional ◽  
Failure Assessment Diagram ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Dimensional Finite Element

This paper presents finite element solutions for elastic-plastic J for circumferentially cracked pipes under combined mechanical and thermal loads in terms of the V/Vo factor used within a strain-based failure assessment diagram. In this study, 3-dimensional finite element analyses are conducted to calculate the V-factor under combined mechanical and thermal load. It is found that estimation of V/Vo is sensitive to the method used for its evaluation. For larger thermal stresses, currently proposed estimation methods are overly conservative.

Defective Pipeline Fatigue-Life Prediction Using Failure Assessment Diagram Technique

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinheng Luo ◽  
Xinwei Zhao ◽  
Qingren Xiong ◽  
Chunyong Huo
Keyword(s):  
Fatigue Life ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Life Prediction ◽  
Safety Evaluation ◽  
Load Ratio ◽  
Test System ◽  
Full Scale ◽  
Oil Pipeline ◽  
Failure Assessment Diagram ◽  
Failure Assessment

The life prediction, whose results can be used to define the inspection, repair or replacement cycle of in-service pipeline, is a main component of safety assessment of gas and oil pipeline. At present, failure Assessment Diagram (FAD) technique has been widely used in quantitative engineering safety evaluation system of pipeline that contains crack-like flaws. In past work, the authors developed a very useful model to predict the fatigue life of defective pipeline and established a computer calculating method. Based on FAD technique, toughness ratio and load ratio are calculated repeatedly with every crack increment in the model. With the self-developed full-scale test system, the full-scale pipe fatigue test was collected to verify the applicability of this method.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document