Proceedings of the 2012 9th International Pipeline Conference IPC2012 September 24-28, 2012, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

IPC2012-90365

EFFECT OF THERMAL AGING ON STRAIN CAPACITY OF X80 SAW PIPES

Hidenori Shitamoto Corporate Research and Development Laboratories Sumitomo Metal Industries, Ltd. Amagasaki, Japan Masahiko Hamada Pipe and Tube Company Sumitomo Metal Industries, Ltd. Amagasaki, Japan

Nobuaki Takahashi Kashima steel works Sumitomo Metal Industries, Ltd. Kashima, Japan

Yuki Nishi Kashima steel works Sumitomo Metal Industries, Ltd. Kashima, Japan

ABSTRACT Application of API X80 grade line pipes has been promoted to increase the operating pressure. It is generally known that the deformability of submerged arc welding (SAW) pipes is decreased by increasing strength of the pipes. The assessment of the strain capacity of X80 SAW pipes is required for strainbased design (SBD). In the assessment of the strain capacity, one of the important issues is the effect of thermal aging during the anti-corrosion coating on the yielding phenomenon. In this study, full-scale pipe bending tests of X80 SAW pipes produced by UOE process were performed to evaluate the effect of thermal aging on the strain capacity.

In this study, full-scale pipe bending tests were performed to evaluate the effect of thermal aging on strain capacity by using four-point bending equipment [8]. Two SAW pipes used for the bending tests were API X80 grade UOE pipes of 1220 mm nominal outside diameter (OD) and 23.7mm nominal wall thickness (WT). Although the typical target temperature is about 235 C in the fusion-bonded epoxy (FBE) coating process [9], the thermal aging condition at 280 C for 5 minutes was selected to change the stress-strain (S-S) curves from the round house type to the yield point elongation type.

INTRODUCTION High strength line pipes have been developed for cost reduction of gas transportation by high pressure operation. The main subject in the development of high strength line pipes has been to secure the pressure containment capacity of pipelines. The applicability of high strength line pipes has been studied by full-scale trials of construction and burst tests [1, 2]. As the ductility of steel decreases in high strength line pipes, the deformability of line pipes related to the strain capacity of the pipeline is important for the application of high strength line pipes. In recent years, studies have been done on the strain capacity of line pipes and the relationship between the strain capacity and the strain demand determined by ground movements such as liquefaction of soil or landslide [3-7].

EVALUATION OF X80 UOE PIPES The precise evaluation of two X80 SAW pipes manufactured from the same heat (Mark A and B) was conducted at the first stage of this investigation. The pipes produced by UOE process have nominal OD of 1220 mm and nominal WT of 23.7 mm. OD in two directions and WT at four points in a cross section as shown in Fig.1 were measured with interval of 500 mm in longitudinal direction (L-direction). Table 1 shows the results of OD and WT measurement of the pipes for the bending test. The differences between maximum and minimum are 3.2 mm in OD and 0.3 mm in WT, which correspond to 0.26 % of nominal OD and 1.27 % of nominal WT, respectively. The distributions of OD and WT are within reasonable ranges for X80 SAW line pipes.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Seam weld

WT1

WT4

OD1

WT2

OD2

WT3

Figure 1 Measuring position of OD and WT in a cross section Table 1 Measured OD and WT of X80 SAW pipes OD(mm) WT(mm) Mark A Average (Ave.) 1220.1 24.1 (As weld) Maximum (Max.) 1221.9 24.2 Minimum (Min.) 1219.1 23.9 Max. - Min. 2.7 0.3 Mark B Ave. 1220.2 24.0 (Aged) Max. 1221.8 24.2 Min. 1218.6 23.9 Max. - Min. 3.2 0.3 Tensile properties both in L- and circumferential (C-) directions of the X80 pipes were examined. The pipe of Mark B was heated at 280 C for 5 minutes by induction heating. Round bar specimens were prepared to evaluate the tensile properties as shown in Fig. 2. Specimens with 12.7 mm in diameter and 60 mm in length were machined at 15 , 90 and 180 from the seam weld position. Table 2 summarizes the tensile test results and Fig.3 shows typical S-S curves for L- and C-directions. Yield stress (YS) was measured at 0.2 % offset strain. In the Mark A pipe, both YS and tensile stress (TS) are higher in C-direction than those in L-direction. The values of YS and TS in C-direction satisfy the API specification of X80 for pressure containment capacity. Anisotropy of UOE pipe, which is originated from the plate rolling procedure and the pipe forming method, is observed. The S-S curves in both directions are round house type and the yield to tensile strength ratio (Y/T) in L-direction is 77.0 %, which is favorable for the strain capacity of X80 line pipe. In the Mark B pipe, it is confirmed that the YS increases over 100 MPa by thermal aging. The S-S curves in both directions are yield point elongation types and the Y/T ratio in L-direction is 90.3 %.
Seam weld Round bar (L-direction) Seam weld Round bar (C-direction)

Table 2 Measured mechanical properties of X80 SAW pipes YS TS Y/T Mark A (As weld) (MPa) (MPa) (%) L-direction = 15 573 747 76.7 = 90 569 742 76.7 = 180 586 755 77.6 Ave. 576 748 77.0 Max.-Min. 17 13 0.9 C-direction = 15 677 773 87.6 = 90 668 773 86.4 = 180 683 783 87.2 Ave. 676 776 87.1 Max.-Min. 15 10 1.2 Mark B (Aged) L-direction = 15 = 90 = 180 Ave. Max.-Min. = 15 = 90 = 180 Ave. Max.-Min. YS (MPa) 707 696 706 703 11 776 790 775 780 15 TS (MPa) 774 779 783 779 9 804 824 816 815 20 Y/T (%) 91.3 89.3 90.2 90.3 2.0 96.5 95.9 95.0 95.8 1.5

C-direction

900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 5

Nominal stress (MPa) _

L-direction C-direction 10 15 20 Nominal strain (%) 25

<Mark A ; As weld pipe>

900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 5 Nominal stress (MPa) _

L-direction C-direction 10 15 20 Nominal strain (%) 25

<Mark B ; Aged pipe> Figure 2 Sampling position and definition of position angle Figure 3 S-S curves at = 90 of X80 SAW pipes

Copyright 2012 by ASME

PIPE BENDING TESTS OF X80 UOE PIPES Two X80 SAW pipes, with and without thermal aging, were prepared for the pipe bending tests. The bending test conditions of the two pipes are given in Table 3. Internal pressure is applied at 80 % specified minimum yield stress (SMYS) of the X80 line pipe. Table 3 Pipe bending test conditions Internal pressure Thermal aging % SMYS MPa 80 17.1 280C x 5 minutes

Interval of 500

7000

Mark A B

Figure 5 Schematic illustration of measurement of deformed shapes in the intrados side of the test pipe by DLS

In this study, the four-point pipe bending method was used to apply uniform bending moment to the test pipes. A schematic illustration of the four-point pipe bending equipment is shown in Fig. 4. The test pipe was positioned as the seam weld to be in the neutral position. The pipe was bended by two hydraulic jacks and the bending load was measured by load cells. The lengths between two moving hinges and between two jacks are 29700 mm and 6700 mm, which correspond to 24.3 OD and 5.5 OD, respectively. Displacement of the two moving hinges and stroke of the two hydraulic jacks were measured by displacement laser sensors (DLS). Fifteen DLS were set in the intrados side as shown in Fig. 5 to measure the deformed pipe shape during the pipe bending test. The bending angle was defined by Eq. (1) together with Fig. 6, which gives 1 and 2. Strain gauges were attached on the intrados and extrados sides of the pipe as shown in Fig. 7 to measure C- and L-direction strains during the test. The internal pressure was loaded by water pressure, and the adjustment of the internal pressure was executed during the test to keep the prescribed value. The two hydraulic jacks were controlled by displacement in the test. In this equipment, the pipe was capped at the pipe ends, and the pipe was applied axial force induced by the end cap effect. Figure 8 shows the appearance of the pipe bending equipment.

Figure 6 Schematic illustration of tilt angle of moment arm caused by the pipe bending 1= 1 + 2 Where : Bending angle 1 , 2 : Tilt angle of each arm pipe
4000

(1)

||

||

||

||

Strain gauge

Figure 7 Schematic illustration of attached positions of strain gauges

Left jack

Right jack

26000 Test pipe Arm pipe

Moving hinge

6700 10300 29700

Figure 4 Schematic illustration of four-point pipe bending equipment

< Connection section between jack and pipe >

<Moving hinge>

Figure 8 Pipe bending equipment

Copyright 2012 by ASME

PIPE BENDING TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Figure 9 shows the deformation behaviors during the pipe bending test. The positions where buckling occurred in Mark A and B pipes are shown in Fig. 10. These positions are not the center of the pipe and are not the same positions in L-direction. These deviations are supposed to be the effect of geometric imperfection. Figure 11 shows the buckling shape in the intrados side in Mark A pipe.

Intrados line

Buckling Figure 11 Buckling shape in the intrados side (Mark A) In this study, the bending tests were performed until the jack stroke reached to 2500 mm in Mark A and until the average jack load reached its peak value in Mark B. Figure 12 shows the bending test results of relationship between jack load and jack stroke. In Mark A pipe, since the buckling occurred in the right side from the pipe center, the right jack load decreased and the left jack load increased rapidly after buckling. The jack stroke at the peak average jack load is 2041 mm for Mark A and 1169 mm for Mark B. It is confirmed that there was difference between the tendency of Mark A and that of Mark B.

Extrados side

Intrados side

3000 Jack load (kN) 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 500

Right jack Left jack Ave.

2041 mm

1000 1500 2000 Jack stroke (mm)

2500

3000

Figure 9 Pipe deformation behaviors during pipe bending test

Jack load (kN)

<Mark A>
3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Jack stroke (mm)
1169 mm

Strain gauge

Right jack Left jack Ave. 2500 3000

<Mark B> 2100 mm left side from the pipe center

<Mark A> 600 mm right side from the pipe center

<Mark B>

Figure 12 Relationship between jack load and jack stroke Figure 10 Schematic illustration of positions where buckling occurred by the pipe bending tests

Copyright 2012 by ASME

2500 Displacement of pipe _ intrados line (mm) 2000 1500 1000 500 0 -4000

Stroke of 2000 mm 1500 mm 1000 mm 500 mm

30 Moment (MN-m) 25 20 15 10 5 0 0
1.84% 3.27%

Mark A Mark B 1 2 3 Average compressive strain a (%) 4

-2000

2000

4000

Distance from pipe center (mm)

<Mark A>
2500 Displacement of pipe _ intrados line (mm) 2000 1500 1000 500
450 mm Stroke of 750 mm

Figure 14 Relationship between moment and average compressive strain a

Intrados L-direction Extrados L-direction

Intrados C-direction Extrados C-direction

0 -4000

-2000

2000

4000

Distance from pipe center (mm)

<Mark B> Figure 13 Deformed shapes in the intrados side of the pipe during the pipe bending test Figure 13 shows the measurement results of the deformed shapes in the intrados side of the pipe during the pipe bending test. The displacement of pipe intrados line was measured by DLS as mentioned in Fig.5. This result shows that the test pipes of both Mark A and B were deformed uniformly by using the four-point bending method. In general, strain capacity of the pipe is evaluated by using compressive strain. In this study, the average compressive strain caused by pipe bending was defined by Eq. (2) and gauge length (LG) was set as 6700 mm [3, 10]. a = D a 2 LG (2)

Measured strain sg (%)_

600 mm

4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 0

-2.00%

1 2 3 Average compressive strain a(%)

3.27%

<Mark A>
Intrados L-direction Extrados L-direction Intrados C-direction Extrados C-direction

Where a : Average compressive strain over the given gauge length D : Outside diameter of the pipe a : Bending angle between ends of the gauge length LG : Gauge length

4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 0

Measured strain sg (%)_

-1.13%

1 2 3 Average compressive strain a(%)

1.84%

<Mark B> Figure 15 Relationship between measured strain sg and average compressive strain a

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Figure 14 shows the bending test results of relationship between bending moment and average compressive strain a. Critical average compressive strain defined as the average compressive strain at peak bending moment is 3.27 % for Mark A and 1.84 % for Mark B. It is confirmed that the tendency is the same as in Fig. 11 and the strain capacity of the pipe was decreased by thermal aging at 280 C for 5 minutes. Results of relationship between measured strain by strain gauge (sg) and average compressive strain (a) were shown in Fig.15. The measurement position of sg was chosen at 1000 mm left side from the pipe center in L-direction to eliminate the effect of local buckling as shown in Fig. 10 and the measured sg up to critical average compressive strain were displayed. In the extrados side, sg in L-direction increased at the same rate as a and sg in C-direction hardly changed in the both cases of Mark A and B. This result suggested that the WT in the extrados side decreases. It was confirmed that the tendency in the intrados side differed from that in the extrados side as follows. - There were differences in decreasing rate between sg in Ldirection and a in the both cases of Mark A and B. Values of sg at critical average compressive strain are -2.00 % for Mark A and -1.13 % for Mark B. - sg in C-direction increased with the increase of a. Since the sum of sg in C- and L-direction was close to zero, it is suggested that the WT in the intrados side hardly changes. CONCLUSIONS Full-scale tests were performed to evaluate the effect of thermal aging on strain capacity of X80 SAW pipes. The results are summarized as follows. (1) The S-S curve shape of the X80 SAW pipe changed from the round house type to the yield point elongation type by thermal aging at 280 C for 5 minutes. (2) Full-scale four-point pipe bending tests were performed using before and after thermal aged pipes with nominal OD of 1220 mm and nominal WT of 23.7 mm. Critical average compressive strain decreased from 3.72 % to 1.84 % by thermal aging in this test condition. (3) Although average compressive strain a and measured strain sg in L-direction are almost the same in the extrados side, differences between the a and the sg were confirmed in the intrados side. In the future, further measurement, such as geometric imperfection, distribution of WT and OD, in the pipe bending test and finite element analysis for pipe bending should be conducted to investigate pipe deformation behavior in detail.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Authors acknowledge the contribution of Centro Sviluppo Material S.p.A for the pipe bending tests.

REFERENCES [1] M. L. Macia, D.P. Fairchild, J. Y. Koo, N. V. Bangaru, Evaluation of hydrogen cracking susceptibility in X120 girth welds, Proceedings of IPC 2004, October 4-8, 2004, Calgary, Canada, IPC04-0585 [2] G. Demofonti, G. Mannucci, M. Di Biagio, H. G. Hillenbrand, D. Harris, Fracture propagation resistance evaluation of X100 TMCP steel pipes for high pressure gas transmission pipeline using full scale burst test, Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Pipeline Technology, Ostend, Belgium, 9-13 May, 2004, vol.1 pp467-pp482 [3] H. Shitamoto, M. Hamada, S. Okaguchi, N. Takahashi, N. Yamamoto, I. Takeuchi, S. Fujita, Effect of thermal aging on deformability of X80 SAW pipes, Proceedings of Pipeline Technology Conference, Ostend, Belgium, 12-14 Oct, 2009 [4] H. Tajika, S. Igi, T. Sakimoto, S. Tsuyama, R. Muraoka, T. Arakawa, N. Suzuki, Full-Scale Bending Test of 48 X80 Linepipes, Proceedings of the 2011 International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Maui, USA, June 19-24, 2011 [5] E. J. Wright, Meeting the latest materials and corrosion challenges of hydrocarbon transportation, Proceedings of the 2007 International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Lisbon, Portugal, July 1-6, 2007 [6] I. Takeuchi, M. Matsumura, S. Okaguchi, H. Shitamoto, S. Fujita, A. Yamamoto, Property of X80 grade saw pipes for resistance to ground movement, Proceedings of IPC 2008, September 29-October 3, 2008, Calgary, Canada, IPC2008-64512 [7] H. Shitamoto, M. Hamada, S. Okaguchi, N. Takahashi, I. Takeuchi, S. Fujita, Evaluation of Compressive Strain Limit of X80 SAW Pipes for Resistance to Ground Movement, Proceedings of the 2010 International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Beijing, China, June 20-25, 2010 [8] G. Mannucci, A. Lucci, C. M. Spinelli, A. Baldi, G. Mascia, Full Scale Bend Testing of Strain Based Designed High Grade Buried Gas Pipeline, Proceedings of the 2011 International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Maui, USA, June 19-24, 2011 [9] Chris M. J. Timms, Duane D. DeGeer, Mohamed R. Chebaro, E. Tsuru, Compressive strain limits of large diameter X80 UOE Linepipe, Proceedings of the 2009 International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Osaka, Japan, June 19-24, 2009 [10] E. Tsuru, Y. Shinohara, J. Agata, Y. Nagata, Analytical Methods for Girth-welded UOE Linepipes with Plastic Anisotropy and Geometric Imperfections to Predict the Deformation Limitation, Proceedings of the 2011 International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Maui, USA, June 19-24, 2011

Copyright 2012 by ASME