scholarly journals The Determination of the Limit Load Solutions for the New Pipe-Ring Specimen Using Finite Element Modeling

Metals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 749
Author(s):  
Andrej Likeb ◽  
Nenad Gubeljak
Keyword(s):  
Fracture Toughness ◽  
Finite Element ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Ring Specimen ◽  
Loading Mode ◽  
Combined Loads ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Pipeline Segment ◽  
Toughness Testing

To estimate the acceptable size of cracks and predict the loading limit of the pipeline or its resistance to the initiation and crack growth by following the structural integrity, the fracture toughness and limit load solutions are required. Standard fracture toughness testing of thin-walled pipelines is often difficult to perform in order to complete standard requirements. To find an alternative technique for the measurement of the fracture toughness of the already delivered pipeline segment, the new pipe-ring specimen has been proposed; however, the limit load solutions have not been investigated yet. The limit load depends on the geometry of the specimen and loading mode. The ligament yielding of pipe-ring specimens containing axial cracks through the thickness under combined loads was calculated by the finite element method. This paper provides limit load solutions of several different pipe-ring geometries containing two diametric symmetrical cracks with the same depth ratio in a range of 0.45 ≤ a/W ≤ 0.55. The limit load (LL) solutions calculated by numerical analysis are shown as a function of the full ring section’s size and the corresponding crack aspect ratio for determining the normalized load. These can potentially construct the failure assessment diagram to estimate the crack acceptance in a part of the pipe.

Different Structural Integrity Assessment Methods for Pipe Containing Circumferential Through-Thickness Crack

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huifeng Jiang ◽  
Xuedong Chen ◽  
Zhichao Fan
Keyword(s):  
Fracture Toughness ◽  
Finite Element Analysis ◽  
Finite Element ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Load Ratio ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Element Analysis ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Calculated Load

Heretofore, several kinds of codes are applicable to the structural integrity assessment for pipe containing defects, i.e. API 579, R6 and BS 7910 etc. In this paper, different methods from API 579-1/ASME FFS-1: 2007 and R6-2000 were employed to assess the integrity of pipe containing a circumferential through-thickness crack. However, there was a significant difference between the calculated load ratios by these two codes, although the calculated fracture ratios were very close. To verify these results, elastic-plastic finite element analysis was carried out to calculate the limit load and the load ratio. Additionally, the experimental results and our previous engineering experience were also referred to. The final results imply that the larger load ratio obtained from R6-2000 rather than API 579 code is more reasonable for the pipe with good fracture toughness.

Implementation of CSA Z662-15 Annex K Option 2 on a 610mm Liquid Pipeline

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rory Belanger ◽  
Derrick Sarafinchan
Keyword(s):  
Fracture Toughness ◽  
Fracture Mechanics ◽  
Test Specimen ◽  
Critical Assessment ◽  
Fracture Criteria ◽  
Weld Profile ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Toughness Testing ◽  
Considerable Benefit ◽  
Brittle Fracture Criteria

For more than two decades, CSA Z662 Annex K has provided a method for developing alternative acceptance criteria for weld flaws in mechanized welded pipelines. Increasingly, over the years, fracture mechanics practitioners have found the method overly conservative and restrictive with respect to brittle fracture criteria when compared to other accepted fracture mechanics-based engineering critical assessment ECA codes and methods. These limitations rendered the CSA Annex K method difficult to implement on pipelines constructed with materials not possessing optimal toughness and in cases requiring consideration of fracture toughness at temperatures lower than the typical minimum design metal temperature (MDMT) of −5°C. This paper presents experiences implementing CSA Z662-15 Annex K Option 2 methodology on a 610 mm diameter liquids pipeline and compares and contrasts the utility and benefits of the code revision. This pipeline required consideration for installation during winter months, necessitating installation temperatures as low as −30°C. In addition to evaluation of actual ECA results, analytical evaluations of the Option 2 methodology were also conducted considering parameters outside those used on the project. The new Annex K Option 2 method was found to be of considerable benefit in preparation of a practical ECA. Since fracture toughness testing was conducted at the anticipated lowest installation temperature, the flaw criteria were, as expected, principally controlled by elastic/plastic crack growth consideration. The failure assessment diagram implemented into the CSA Z662-15 Annex K Option 2 provided tolerance for both longer and deeper flaws than that afforded by Option 1 (which resorts to the former 2011 Annex K method). Furthermore, the reduced restriction to the surface interaction ligament (p distance) offers additional advantages including increased flexibility in weld profile design and weld pass sequencing. Fracture toughness (CTOD) testing of TMP pipeline steels used in the project at −30°C often produced transitional fracture toughness results. It was found that the particular project materials were quite sensitive to the level of test specimen pre-compression (an acceptable plastic straining method to reduce residual stress gradients) applied to the CTOD specimens to enhance fatigue crack-front straightness. It was found that optimizing the level of pre-compression (to achieve acceptable pre-crack straightness while minimizing plastic pre-strain) achieved a balance between fully satisfying testing requirements, providing a conservative assessment of CTOD, and facilitating a functional Annex K ECA.

The Evaluation of Failure Pressure for Corrosion Defects Within Girth or Seam Weld in Transmission Pipelines

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young-pyo Kim ◽  
Woo-sik Kim ◽  
Young-kwang Lee ◽  
Kyu-hwan Oh
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element Analysis ◽  
Finite Element ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
The Body ◽  
Element Analysis ◽  
Burst Test ◽  
Corrosion Defect ◽  
Seam Weld ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Corrosion Defects

The failure assessment for corroded pipeline has been considered with the burst test and the finite element analysis. The burst tests were conducted on 762mm diameter, 17.5mm wall thickness and API 5L X65 pipe that contained specially manufactured rectangular corrosion defect. The failure pressures for corroded pipeline have been measured by burst testing and classified with respect to corrosion sizes and corroded regions — the body, the girth weld and the seam weld of pipe. Finite element analysis was carried out to derive failure criteria of corrosion defect within the body, the girth weld and the seam weld of the pipe. A series of finite element analyses were performed to obtain a limit load solution for corrosion defects on the basis of burst test. As a result, the criteria for failure assessment of corrosion defect within the body, the girth weld and the seam weld of API 5L X65 gas pipeline were proposed.

Mechanical Properties of Tank Car Steels Retired From the Fleet

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter C. McKeighan ◽  
David Y. Jeong ◽  
Joseph W. Cardinal
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Properties ◽  
Fracture Toughness ◽  
Material Characterization ◽  
Laboratory Testing ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Hazardous Materials ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Test Program ◽  
Testing Program ◽  
Toughness Testing

As a consequence of recent accidents involving the release of hazardous materials (hazmat), the structural integrity and crashworthiness of railroad tank cars have come under scrutiny. Particular attention has been given to the older portion of the fleet that was built prior to steel normalization requirements instituted in 1989. This paper describes a laboratory testing program to examine the mechanical properties of steel samples obtained from tank cars that were retired from the fleet. The test program consisted of two parts: (1) material characterization comprised of chemical, tensile and Charpy V-notch (CVN) impact energy and (2) high-rate fracture toughness testing. In total, steel samples from 34 tank cars were received and tested. These 34 tank cars yielded 61 different pre-1989 TC128-B conditions (40 shell and 21 head samples), three tank cars yielded seven different post-1989 TC128-B conditions (four shell and three head samples), and six tank cars yielded other material (A212, A515, and A285 steel) conditions (six shell and five head samples). The vast majority of the TC128-B samples extracted from retired tank cars met current TC128-B material specifications. Elemental composition requirements were satisfied in 97 percent of the population whereas the required tensile properties were satisfied in 82 percent of the population. Interpretation of the high-rate fracture toughness tests required dividing the pre-1989 fleet into quartiles that depended on year of manufacture or age, and testing three tank cars per quartile. Considering the high-rate fracture toughness results at 0°F for the pre-1989 fleet, 100 percent of the oldest two quartiles, 58 percent of the second youngest quartile, and 83 percent of the youngest quartile exhibited adequate or better fracture toughness (defined as toughness greater than 50 ksi√in). High-rate fracture toughness at –50°F was adequate for 83 percent of two quartiles (the youngest and second oldest), but the other two quartiles exhibited lower toughness with only 33 (2nd youngest) to 50 percent (oldest) exhibiting adequate properties.

Plastic Limit Loads for Through-Wall Cracked Pipes Using Finite Element Limit Analysis

2006 ◽  
Vol 321-323 ◽  
pp. 724-728
Author(s):  
Nam Su Huh ◽  
Yoon Suk Chang ◽  
Young Jin Kim
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Limit Analysis ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Plastic Behavior ◽  
Plastic Limit ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Perfectly Plastic ◽  
Elastic Perfectly Plastic

The present paper provides plastic limit load solutions for axial and circumferential through-wall cracked pipes based on detailed three-dimensional (3-D) finite element (FE) limit analysis using elastic-perfectly plastic behavior. As a loading condition, both single and combined loadings are considered. Being based on detailed 3-D FE limit analysis, the present solutions are believed to be valuable information for structural integrity assessment of cracked pipes.

ECAs, FE and Bi-Axial Loading: A Critique of DNV-OS-F101, Appendix A

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Cosham ◽  
Kenneth A. Macdonald
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Driving Force ◽  
Longitudinal Strain ◽  
Axial Loading ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Fe Analysis ◽  
Plastic Limit ◽  
Crack Driving Force ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Plastic Limit Load

Controlled lateral buckling in offshore pipelines typically gives rise to the combination of internal over-pressure and high longitudinal strains (possibly exceeding 0.4 percent). Engineering critical assessments (ECAs) are commonly conducted during design to determine tolerable sizes for girth weld flaws. ECAs are primarily conducted in accordance with BS 7910, often supplemented by guidance given in DNV-OS-F101 and DNV-FP-F108. DNV-OS-F101 requires that finite element (FE) analysis is conducted when, in the presence of internal over-pressure, the nominal longitudinal strain exceeds 0.4 percent. It recommends a crack driving force assessment, rather than one based on the failure assessment diagram. FE analysis is complicated, time consuming and costly. ECAs are, necessarily, conducted towards the end of the design process, at which point the design loads have been defined, the welding procedures qualified and the material properties quantified. In this context, ECAs and FE are not an ideal combination for the pipeline operator, the designer or the installation contractor. A pipeline subject to internal over-pressure is in a state of bi-axial loading. The combination of internal over-pressure and longitudinal strain appears to become more complicated as the longitudinal strain increases, because of the effect of bi-axial loading on the stress-strain response. An analysis of a relatively simple case, a fully-circumferential, external crack in a cylinder subject to internal over-pressure and longitudinal strain, is presented in order to illustrate the issues with the assessment. Finite element analysis, with and without internal over-pressure, are used to determine the plastic limit load, the crack driving force, and the Option 3 failure assessment curve. The results of the assessment are then compared with an assessment using the Option 2 curve. It is shown that an assessment based Option 2, which does not require FE analysis, can potentially give comparable results to the more detailed assessments, when more accurate stress intensity factor and reference stress (plastic limit load) solutions are used. Finally, the results of the illustrative analysis are used to present an outline of suggested revisions to the guidance in DNV-OS-F101, to reduce the need for FE analysis.

Finite Element Analyses for Thickness Effects on J-Integral Testing using Non-Standard Testing Specimens

2004 ◽  
Vol 261-263 ◽  
pp. 693-698
Author(s):  
J.S. Kim ◽  
Young Jin Kim ◽  
S.M. Cho
Keyword(s):  
Fracture Toughness ◽  
Finite Element ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Specimen Thickness ◽  
J Integral ◽  
Finite Element Analyses ◽  
Single Edge ◽  
Fracture Toughness Testing ◽  
Standard Testing ◽  
Toughness Testing

This paper compiles solutions of plastic η factors for standard and non-standard fracture toughness testing specimens, via detailed three-dimensional (3-D) finite element (FE) analyses. Fracture toughness testing specimens include a middle cracked tension (M(T)) specimen, SE(B), single-edge cracked bar in tension (SE(T)) and C(T) specimen. The ligament-to-thickness ratio of the specimen is systematically varied. It is found that the use of the CMOD overall provides more robust experimental estimation than that of the LLD, for all cases considered in the present work. Moreover, the estimation based on the load- CMOD record is shown to be insensitive to the specimen thickness, and thus can be used for testing a specimen with any thickness.

Z-Factors for Feeder Bends With Planar Axial Flaws

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bogdan S. Wasiluk ◽  
Douglas A. Scarth
Keyword(s):  
Fracture Toughness ◽  
Finite Element ◽  
Lower Bound ◽  
Nuclear Reactors ◽  
Small Diameter ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Finite Element Models ◽  
Straight Pipe ◽  
Bend Testing ◽  
Testing Program

Article C-6000 of Appendix C of ASME Section XI includes Z-factor load multipliers for straight pipes with circumferential flaws. Application of this article is limited to straight pipes with nominal pipe size (NPS) larger than 4 and materials with fracture toughness JIc higher than 105 kJ/m2. Section XI of the ASME B&PV Code does not provide Z-factors for pipes with axial flaws, even for pipes with NPS≥4. Feeders are small diameter pipes (NPS≤2.5) used in a primary heat transport system in the CANDU nuclear reactors. Developments of Z-factor load multipliers for warm-bent feeder bends with axial flaws under pressure are presented in this paper. An empirical approach was adopted using experimental results from the Feeder Bend Testing Program founded by the CANDU Owners Group. The elastic-plastic fracture mechanics stress has been defined by failure stress from the experiments. Limit load solutions for elbow/bends recently published by Kim et al. were discussed. Additionally, lower bound limit load simulations were performed using finite element models implemented for ANSYS. The results from straight pipe models exhibited good correlation with analytical solution. Numerical simulations for elbows/bends showed analogous trends for limit load of elbow/bends with axial cracks as reported by Kim et al.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document