A Procedure to Include the Additional Fatigue Effects of Thermal Gradients in a B31.1 Butt Weld of Dissimilar Metals and Welding End Transition of Similar Metals for Design and Plant Life Extension

2012 ◽  
Vol 134 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
David H. Creates

Fatigue evaluation in B31.1-2007 is currently done in accordance with para. 102.3.2 and generally considers only the stresses due to displacement load ranges and other cyclic loads. Yet fatigue damage is also occurring due to thermal gradients which are not considered. To exacerbate and complicate this additional type of fatigue damage, power plant design pressures and temperatures are rising, new materials are being introduced, pipes and attached components are becoming increasingly thick, and owners are requiring power plants to heat-up and cool-down at faster rates. Also, power plant owners are more and more interested in extending the life of power plants beyond their original design life. Although the fatigue design of ASME nuclear Class 1 piping components has long required thermal gradients to be considered, no attempt has been made to incorporate this knowledge into the B31.1 Power Piping Code (other than Creates, D. H., 2009, “A Procedure to Evaluate a B31.1 Welding End Transition Joint to Include the Fatigue Effects of Thermal Gradients for Design and Plant Life Extension,” PVP2009-77148, Proceedings of the ASME 2009 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, Volume 3, Design and Analysis, A. Segall, ed., ASME, New York, PVP-Vol. 3, pp. 101–110). To address this pressing need in today’s power plant environment this paper now provides a fully comprehensive methodology for assessing an “as-welded” Butt weld of dissimilar metals and a Welding End Transition (B31.1-2007, Fig. 127.4.2) of similar metals to include the additional fatigue effects of thermal gradients calculated in accordance with ASME Section III-2007 Subarticle NB-3600. The disadvantage of this approach is that the conservatism in these calculations may produce unacceptable results. In that case, this assessment is a warning that something else needs to be done by way of monitoring, modifying the design or the thermal operation, or performing a more rigorous evaluation. The advantage of this methodology is that it maintains the traditional B31.1 approach to fatigue with the same limit of SA except that there is now an additional term, STG, to account for the fatigue contribution due to thermal gradients. Considering the effects of thermal gradients in this way will further help to preserve the integrity of the piping pressure boundary and consequently, the safety of personnel in today’s power plants and into the future.

2010 ◽  
Vol 132 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
David H. Creates

Fatigue evaluation in B31.1 is currently done based on equations 1 and 2 of ASME B31.1-2007 Power Piping, which only considers the displacement load ranges. However, fatigue damage, in addition to displacement load ranges, is occurring in B31.1 piping due to pressure cycling and thermal gradients. To exacerbate this, power plant design pressures and temperatures are rising, new materials are being introduced, pipes and attached components are becoming increasingly thick, and owners are requiring power plants to heat-up and cool-down at faster rates. Also, power plant owners are more and more interested in extending the life of power plants beyond their original design life. This article takes the first step in addressing the pressing need to address this additional fatigue damage by quantifying thermal gradients in the prevalent B31.1 welding end transitions in Fig. 127.4.2, or tapered transition joints (TTJs) in Appendix D, of ASME B31.1-2007 Power Piping by formulae to be able to evaluate their contribution to fatigue (see PVP2009-77148 [A Procedure to Evaluate a B31.1 Welding End Transition Joint to Include the Fatigue Effects of Thermal Gradients for Design and Plant Life Extension]). The disadvantage of this approach is that the conservatisms inherent in the calculations of thermal gradients, as per ASME Section III Subsection NB3600-2007, are also inherent in these calculations and may produce unacceptable results when evaluated as per PVP2009-77148 [A Procedure to Evaluate a B31.1 Welding End Transition Joint to Include the Fatigue Effects of Thermal Gradients for Design and Plant Life Extension]. If the results are unacceptable, it is a warning that something else needs to be done. The advantage of this approach is that it eliminates the need for a computer program to quantify these thermal gradients, a computer program that is not normally accessible to the B31.1 designer anyway. Instead, the formulae use the data that are available to the B31.1 designer, namely, physical geometry, thermal conductivity, and rate of temperature change in the fluid in the pipe. This will further help to preserve the integrity of the piping pressure boundary and, consequently, the safety of personnel in today’s power plants and into the future.


Author(s):  
David H. Creates

Fatigue evaluation in B31.1-2007 is currently done based on B31.1 Equations 1 & 2 and generally considers only the stress due to displacement load ranges as per Equation 13. Yet, fatigue damage is also occurring due to pressure cycling and thermal gradients. To exacerbate this, power plant design pressures and temperatures are rising, new materials are being introduced, pipes and attached components are becoming increasingly thick, and owners are requiring power plants to heat-up and cool-down at faster rates. Also, power plant owners are more and more interested in extending the life of power plants beyond their original design life. This paper addresses the pressing need in today’s power plant environment for additional fatigue evaluation by providing a procedure for assessing an as-welded Butt weld of dissimilar metals and a Weld End Transition (or TTJ) (B31.1-2007 Figure 127.4.2) of similar metals to include the effects of thermal gradients calculated as per ASME Section III-2007 Subarticle NB-3600. The disadvantage of this approach is that the conservatism in the calculation of these thermal gradient stress intensities may produce unacceptable results. In that case, the assessment is a warning that something else needs to be done by way of either monitoring or modifying the thermal operation or more rigorous evaluation. The advantage of this methodology is that it will ensure a fatigue failure does not occur any sooner due to the effects of thermal gradients than would otherwise occur due to other factors. It maintains the traditional B31.1 approach to fatigue with the same limit of SA except that there is now an additional term, STG, to account for the fatigue contribution due to thermal gradients. Considering the effects of these thermal gradients in this way will further help to preserve the integrity of the piping pressure boundary and consequently, the safety of personnel in today’s power plants and into the future.


Author(s):  
David H. Creates

Fatigue evaluation in B31.1 is currently done based on Equation 1 & 2 [B31.1-2007] which considers only displacement load ranges. However, fatigue damage, in addition to displacement load ranges, is occurring in B31.1 piping due to pressure cycling and thermal gradients. To exacerbate this, power plant design pressures and temperatures are rising, new materials are being introduced, pipes and attached components are becoming increasingly thick, and owners are requiring power plants to heat-up and cool-down at faster rates. Also, power plant owners are more and more interested in extending the life of power plants beyond their original design life. This paper takes the first step in addressing the pressing need to address this additional fatigue damage by considering thermal gradients. Granted there are several configurations where thermal gradients could be calculated. As the first step, this paper provides formulae to quantify the thermal gradients in the prevalent B31.1 Welding End Transitions Fig. 127.4.2, or Tapered Transition Joints (TTJ) Appendix D [B31.1-2007] which produce bending loads in the pipe around the full circumference and add to the fatigue damage of these welded joints. The disadvantage of this approach is that the conservatisms inherent in the calculations of thermal gradients as per ASME Section III Subsection NB3600-2007 are also inherent in these calculations and may produce unacceptable results when evaluated as per [PVP2009-77148]. If results are unacceptable, it is warning that something else needs to be done. The advantage of this approach is that it eliminates the need for a computer program to quantify these thermal gradients, a computer program that is not normally accessible to the B31.1 designer anyway. Instead, the formulae use data that is available to the B31.1 designer, namely physical geometry, Thermal Conductivity and the Rate of temperature change of the fluid in the pipe. Calculating the magnitude of thermal gradients in a B31.1 TTJ is an essential step in evaluating their fatigue effects for design and in plant life extension considerations (see PVP2009-77148). This will further help to preserve the integrity of the piping pressure boundary and consequently, the safety of personnel in today’s power plants and into the future.


Author(s):  
David H. Creates

Fatigue evaluation in B31.1 is currently done based on Equation 1 & 2 [B31.1-2007] which considers only displacement load ranges. Yet, fatigue damage is also occurring due to pressure cycling and thermal gradients. To exacerbate this, power plant design pressures and temperatures are rising, new materials are being introduced, pipes and attached components are become increasingly thick, and owners are requiring the power plants to heat-up and cool-down at faster rates. Also, power plant owners are more and more interested in extending the life of power plants beyond their original design life. Although the knowledge of thermal gradients has been available for many years, no attempt has been made to incorporate this into the B31.1 Code. This paper takes the first step in addressing this pressing need in today’s power plant environment. Granted there are several configurations where the effects of thermal gradients could be assessed. As the first step, this paper provides a procedure to evaluate the fatigue effects of thermal gradients in the prevalent Welding End Transition Joint (ASME B31.1 Fig 127.4.2) based on thermal gradients calculated as per [PVP2009-77147]. The disadvantage of this approach is that the conservatism in the calculation thermal gradients inherent in ASME Section III Sub-section NB-3600-2007 is inherent in these calculations as well, and may produce unacceptable results. If the results turn out to be unacceptable, it is a warning that something else needs to be done in the way of either monitoring or modifying or further evaluation. The advantage of this methodology is that it maintains the traditional B31.1 approach to fatigue by controlling SE with the same limit of SA except that there is now an additional term, f ‘, to account for the fatigue effects due to thermal gradients. In addition, it eliminates the need for a computer program to calculate this additional term, a computer program that is not normally accessible to the B31.1 designer anyway. Considering the fatigue effects of thermal gradients in this way will further help to preserve the integrity of the piping pressure boundary and consequently, the safety of personnel in today’s power plants and into the future.


Author(s):  
Xing L. Yan ◽  
Lawrence M. Lidsky

High generating efficiency has compelling economic and environmental benefits for electric power plants. There are particular incentives to develop more efficient and cleaner coal-fired power plants, to permit use of the world’s most abundant and secure energy source. This paper presents a newly-conceived power plant design, the Dual Brayton Cycle Gas Turbine PFBC, that yields 45% net generating efficiency and fires on a wide range of fuels with minimum pollution, of which coal is a particularly intriguing target for its first application. The DBC-GT design allows power plants based on the state-of-the-art PFBC technology to achieve substantially higher generating efficiencies while simultaneously providing modern gas turbine and related heat exchanger technologies access to the large coal power generation market.


Author(s):  
John T. Land

One of the activities of power plant owner’s and equipment providers today is upgrading and/or repair/replacement of original equipment. Plant life extension, and fatigue evaluation are also activities that are being performed routinely. These activities come under the rules and guidance of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, whereas, the original equipment generally came under the rules of Section III.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document