Crack resistance of austenitic pipes with circumferential through-wall cracks

Forster, Kurt W.; Grüter, L.; Setz, W.; Bhandari, S.; Debaene, J.-P.; Faidy, C.; Schwalbe, K.‐H.

doi:10.1016/0308-0161(94)00145-9

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The comparison of fracture resistance curves obtained from CT specimens also shows the same behaviour as in the actual pipe and pipe weld. This observation has also been reported by Forster 12 and Moullin and Delliou 2 …”

Section: Fracture Resistance Using Compact Tension Specimenssupporting

confidence: 89%

“…18. It has been observed that limit load stress curves do not converge at a particular value of stress as reported by Moulin, Clement, Drubay and Goudet 12 for crack angle greater than 30°. Figure 18 shows that limit load stress for GTAW pipe welds is in the range of 415–450 MPa where as for GTAW + SMAW Pipe welds is 325–375 MPa.…”

Section: Analytical Methods For Prediction Of Limit Loadmentioning

confidence: 56%

“…14. Extensive studies carried out by Moulin and Delliou, 2 Shibata et al ., 10 Delliou and Crouzet, 11 Forster et al ., 12 Stadtmuller et al 14 . and Moulin et al 15 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Limit load stress based on the expression for limit moment considering experimental bending moment has been evaluated to show that limit load stress is not unique for the GTAW and GTAW + SMAW pipe welds. The formula of limit load stress can be given as 12 where M exp is the experimental bending moment and θ is the half‐crack angle. Limit load stress variation with fracture resistance J values for pipe welds of 324 mm (GTAW + SMAW) and 168 mm (GTAW) outer diameter have been plotted and are shown in Fig.…”

Section: Analytical Methods For Prediction Of Limit Loadmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Crack resistance of austenitic stainless steel pipe and pipe welds with a circumferential crack under monotonic loading

Singh

Vaze

Ghosh

et al. 2006

Fatigue Fract Eng Mat Struct

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C T This paper describes the experimental studies carried out on cracked austenitic stainless steel pipe and pipe welds under bending loads. Pipe welds were produced by gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW) and shielded metal arc welding (SMAW). Fracture resistance curves for pipe and pipe welds were compared. Results indicate that the fracture resistance of pipe and pipe weld (GTAW) is comparable but that of pipe weld (GTAW+SMAW) is inferior. Cracks do not deviate from their original plane during propagation as observed in the cases of carbon steel pipe and pipe welds. The fracture resistance of pipe welds does not depend on the loading histories to which it has been subjected prior to fracture test. Initiation and crack propagation were observed prior to the maximum moment. An existing limit load expression is applicable for the pipe base material but gives non-conservative results for the pipe welds. Multiplication factors have been suggested for the pipe welds for evaluation of limit loads using the existing expression. Fracture resistance for the pipe and compact tension specimens have also been compared for base material and welds.Keywords austenitic stainless steel; gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW) and shielded metal arc welding (SMAW); fracture resistance; limit load; pipe; pipe welds. I N T R O D U C T I O NModern design and safety considerations require satisfaction of leak-before-break (LBB) criteria for high-energy piping system of nuclear power plants. Evaluation of the fracture the resistance of components and its point of instability is necessary for the demonstration of the safety case. High-energy piping systems in these plants use ductile and strain hardening materials. Fracture resistance of such materials can be characterized by the J-integral parameter, which takes into account extensive plastic deformation ahead of the defect under loading condition. A component integrity test program was started in Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Mumbai to evaluate the application of LBB design criteria to the main heat transport system piping of the advanced heavy water reactors. Generally the fracture resistance of the material is evaluated according to the guidelines given in ASTM E1820 1 for semi ductile materials. But use of test results obtained using compact tension specimen, as in the ASTM E1820 standard, in component analysis remains subjective for Correspondence: P.K. Singh. E-mail: pksingh@barc.gov.in highly ductile materials because of the following reasons. Firstly, minimum thickness requirement for the determination of valid J IC is very high whereas pipes are usually much thinner. Secondly, the range of stable crack growth obtained from the standard compact tension (CT) or three-point bend (TPB) specimens is a few millimetres, which is small compared to that observed in components. Thirdly, there is a considerable range of scatter in the fracture toughness data of welds in the standard specimen test because of limited stable crack growth. Austenitic stainless steel material is one ...

show abstract

Section: Fracture Resistance Using Compact Tension Specimenssupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Analytical Methods For Prediction Of Limit Loadmentioning

confidence: 56%

“…14. Extensive studies carried out by Moulin and Delliou, 2 Shibata et al ., 10 Delliou and Crouzet, 11 Forster et al ., 12 Stadtmuller et al 14 . and Moulin et al 15 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analytical Methods For Prediction Of Limit Loadmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Crack resistance of austenitic stainless steel pipe and pipe welds with a circumferential crack under monotonic loading

Singh

Vaze

Ghosh

et al. 2006

Fatigue Fract Eng Mat Struct

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar type of tests on pipes and its analysis had been reported by several researchers e.g. Moulin and Delliou (1996), Kashima et al (1990), Wilkowski et al (1989), Roos et al (2000), Darlaston et al (1992) and Forster et al (1996). In the present work, tests are conducted on carbon steel pipes under four point bend loading using computer controlled servo-hydraulic actuator of ±1 MN capacity.…”

Section: Test Arrangementmentioning

confidence: 55%

Some recent developments on integrity assessment of pipes and elbows. Part II: Experimental investigations

Chattopadhyay

Kushwaha

Roos

2006

International Journal of Solids and Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integrity assessment of piping components is very essential for safe and reliable operation of power plants. Over the last several decades, considerable work has been done throughout the world to develop a methodology for integrity assessment of pipes and elbows, appropriate for the material involved. However, there are scope of further development/improvement of issues, particularly for pipe bends, that are important for accurate integrity assessment of piping. Considering this aspect, a comprehensive Component Integrity Test Program was initiated in 1998 at Reactor Safety Division (RSD) of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), India in collaboration with MPA, Stuttgart, Germany through Indo-German bilateral project. In this program, both theoretical and experimental investigations were undertaken to address various issues related to the integrity assessment of pipes and elbows. The important results of the program are presented in this two-part paper. In the part II of the paper, the experimental investigations are discussed. Part I covered the theoretical investigations. Under the experimental investigations, fracture mechanics tests have been conducted on pipes and elbows of 200-400 mm diameter with various crack configurations and sizes under different loading conditions. Tests on small tensile and three point bend specimens, machined from the tested pipes, have also been done to evaluate the actual stress-strain and fracture resistance properties of pipe/elbow material. The loaddeflection curve and crack initiation loads predicted by non-linear finite element analysis matched well with the experimental results. The theoretical collapse moments of throughwall circumferentially cracked elbows, predicted by the recently developed equations, are found to be closer to the test data compared to the other existing equations. The role of stress triaxialities ahead of crack tip is also shown in the transferability of J-resistance curve from specimen to component.

show abstract

Evaluation of fracture resistance of AISI type 316LN stainless steel base and welded pipes with circumferential through-wall crack

Krishnan

Nikhil

Sasikala

et al. 2019

International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crack resistance of austenitic pipes with circumferential through-wall cracks

Cited by 5 publications

References 6 publications

Crack resistance of austenitic stainless steel pipe and pipe welds with a circumferential crack under monotonic loading

Crack resistance of austenitic stainless steel pipe and pipe welds with a circumferential crack under monotonic loading

Some recent developments on integrity assessment of pipes and elbows. Part II: Experimental investigations

Evaluation of fracture resistance of AISI type 316LN stainless steel base and welded pipes with circumferential through-wall crack

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About