Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 285288

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Computational Materials Science

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/commatsci

Validated numerical analysis of residual stresses in safety relief valve (SRV) nozzle mock-ups: Inuence of axial restraint on distortion and residual stress predictions
P.J. Bendeich a,, O. Murnsky a, C.J. Hamelin a, M.C. Smith b, L. Edwards a
a b

ANSTO, Institute of Materials Engineering, Locked Bag 1, Kirrawee DC, 2232 NSW, Australia EDF Energy Nuclear Generation Ltd., Structural Integrity Services Branch, Barnett Way, Barnwood, Gloucester GL4 3RS, UK

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
A simulation of the residual stress and distortion produced during the fabrication of a dissimilar metal weld (DMW) in a safety relief valve (SRV) was performed using an axi-symmetric nite element model. Traditionally, the ends of the axi-symmetric model are allowed to move freely in the axial direction, producing satisfactory predictions of residual stress; this capability has been demonstrated in previous studies [1]. However, the main limitation of the accepted axi-symmetric restraint approximation lies in the assumption of a weld bead being deposited at innite speed, thus neglecting the constraint provided by previously deposited and already solidied weld metal. The axial constraint method presented in the current work provides a means to overcome this limitation, leading to more accurate predictions of distortion and residual stress without resorting to a computationally expensive 3D analysis. Crown Copyright 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 9 March 2012 Received in revised form 7 May 2012 Accepted 15 May 2012 Available online 12 June 2012 Keywords: Weld modelling Residual stress Restraint Dissimilar metal weld

1. Introduction Axi-symmetric multi-pass welding simulations are a convenient method for simplifying what is otherwise a numerically expensive 3D problem. The limitation of the axi-symmetric approach lies in the assumption of a block dump innite speed weld deposition. In a typical unrestrained girth weld simulation [1], the ends of the two components being joined are allowed to move freely in the axial direction, i.e. expanding and contracting according to the temperature cycle. However, in reality not even the root pass can behave truly in this fashion, as it becomes gradually restrained from expansion by solidied weld metal that has been previously deposited and cooled in the wake of the welding torch. Moreover, light clamping of the two halves of the component during the root pass provides substantial constraint as the expansion of the molten weld metal has little ability to force the two sides apart. Subsequent welding passes will be further restrained from expansion due to solidied weld metal from previous weld passes, both ahead and behind the welding torch. In the current work, we describe a new restraint method developed to allow only contraction upon cooling across the weld while restricting expansion upon heating; both sides of the component are xed in the axial direction during the heating stage of the welding cycle and allowed to

contract freely during the cooling stage of the welding cycle. At the end of each weld pass, the sides are once again xed in the updated (i.e. contracted) state and the cycle is repeated for any subsequent weld passes. The resultant analysis ratchets between each weld pass that follows the root pass, predicting axial distortions and residual stresses with greater accuracy relative to previous numerical analyses. 2. Finite element modelling In the current work, a previously analysed weld in a safety relief valve (SRV) nozzle mock-up [1] was reanalysed with the new restraint method. Since full details of the original analysis are presented in [1], only details pertaining to the new restraint method are provided here. The new constraint method was implemented in ABAQUS 6.11 [2] using a combination of: i. A sensor routine to monitor the predicted contractive displacement across the weld; ii. a kinematic coupling in the axial direction between a reference point and a surface dened adjacent to the weld within the safe-end. An upper bound axial displacement stop point is applied to the reference point, and consequently the internal surface, using an appropriate connector section. The upper bound stop point is set to zero the initial location allowing motion in the negative direction; therefore, only contraction is permitted across the weld; and

Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 (0) 2 9717 3084; fax: +61 (0) 2 9717 9225.
E-mail address: pbx@ansto.gov.au (P.J. Bendeich).

0927-0256/$ - see front matter Crown Copyright 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2012.05.042

286

P.J. Bendeich et al. / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 285288

iii. an axial displacement applied to the base of the model that is dened by a user-controlled amplitude linked to the sensor routine. The displacement location is updated at the end of each step with information gained from the sensor routine. The process of implementation is shown in Fig. 1 and described as follows: (a) During heat-up of any weld bead, axial expansion is restricted by the displacement control at the base and the stop point on the other side of the weld. (b) After the peak thermal expansion force has passed; unrestricted contraction across the weld occurs as the weld cools. This contraction is conned to movement on the safe-end side of the weld away from the stop point, noting that axial movement in the nozzle is restricted by the displacement boundary applied to the base of the nozzle. (c) After the weld has cooled to the interpass temperature; the displacement boundary is updated by the amount of contraction measured by the sensor routine. This offset effectively pushes the model up against the stop point on the safe-end side. The model is now ready for the next weld bead to be applied and the process repeated. 3. Results and discussion Predictions of the contraction across the weld are shown in Fig. 2 while predicted residual stresses are shown in Figs. 3 and 4. Numerical analysis of an unrestrained weld resulted in very little

overall shrinkage and even limited expansion during the early passes, due to the ability of the weld to expand upon heating. Solutions obtained using the new constraint method provided realistic predictions of the average axial contraction. It is worth noting that the measured contractions vary at differing locations on the circumference due to the variation in stopstart locations [3]. From the present results, it is clear that the contraction during cooling is the key factor inuencing axial distortion of the safe-end. As a result, the weld metal, when cooled, will be either in a state of localised axial tension (constrained by surrounding material) or relaxed by contraction. Each successive pass will apply limited heating to the underlying passes, resulting in localised softening that allows axial contraction to occur in adjacent tensile regions. At no stage can axial expansion occur. This situation will remain until a sufcient depth of weld metal is built up to prevent some critical mass of the underlying material from softening, thus allowing this material to act as a continuous axial restraint to both expansion and contraction (evidenced by the minimal contraction after pass 20, shown in Fig. 2). Turning now to the prediction of residual stresses, it becomes clear from the comparisons in Fig. 3 that the overall predicted residual stress eld remains relatively unaffected by the newly imposed axial restraint. Nevertheless, a detailed examination along the weld centreline in Fig. 4 shows changes in the absolute magnitude of nal residual stress state. The new constraint method predicts higher tensile and compressive stresses on the outer and inner walls respectively as illustrated by the through-wall stress linearisation presented in Fig. 4 for the iDHD (incremental deep hole drilling) measurements and the predicted stresses.

Fig. 1. Schematic of constraint process used on the dissimilar metal weld. Cycle repeated for each pass.

P.J. Bendeich et al. / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 285288

287

Fig. 2. Measured and predicted contraction across the SRV weld.

Fig. 3. Axial (SS22) and hoop (S33) stress distributions in the unconstrained and constrained axi-symmetric SRV weld simulations.

Fig. 4. Weld centreline through wall axial and hoop stress distributions. Simulations and deep hole (DHD) and incrimental deep hole (iDHD) measurements shown.

Through-wall membrane stresses suggest that incorporation of the axial constraint improves the predictions of both axial (S22) and hoop (S33) stress components when compared to the measurements.

4. Conclusions A new kinematic restraint boundary method has been developed for axi-symmetric girth weld simulations that more accu-

288

P.J. Bendeich et al. / Computational Materials Science 62 (2012) 285288

rately reects the restraint effects present. This approach connes the deformation of the weld metal to an axial contraction upon cooling, while expansion is not permitted due to the implicit restraint of the weld metal lying out-of-plane to the axi-symmetric model. The method results in more accurate predictions of axial shrinkage, as well as through-wall hoop and axial stresses, when compared to analyses that allow free movement of the weld metal.

References
[1] O. Murnsky et al., Computational Materials Science 50 (7) (2011) 22032215. [2] ABAQUA, Analysis Users Manual, Version 6.10, Simula. <www.simula.com>. [3] J. Dike et al., Finite element modeling and validation of residual stresses in 304L girth welds, in: Fifth International Conference on Trends in Welding Research, Pine Mountain, USA, ASM International, 1998.