Ccopps Webinar Slides PDF

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology
Fatigue of Welded Pressure Vessels

CCOPPS Webinar
Wednesday 21st May 2008
15:00 16:00 BST
Steve Maddox
g Institute ((TWI))
The Welding
Jim Wood
y of Strathclyde
y
University
Agenda
Introduction and Relevant CCOPPS Activity
Jim Wood

Steve Maddox
Q&A Session
Steve Maddox & Jim Wood
Closing Remarks
Jim Wood
Industry Needs Survey

Findings relevant to this webinar:
FEA use is increasing as is complexity of models
Interfacing with codes of practice seen as issue
Happy with facilities in commercial codes in general
(exception is weld modelling and assessment + automation
of the analysis process)
Non-European Codes are used often by most respondents.
P
Preliminary
li i
reportt available
il bl for
f download
d
l d from
f
http://www.ccopps.eu/
Agenda
Jim Wood

Steve Maddox
Q&A Session
Closing Remarks
Jim Wood
Fatigue design of welded pressure vessels

BS PD 5500 Annex C,
EN 13445-3 and
ASME VIII, Division 2
(new structural
stress approach)
Fatigue failure in
pressure vessels
Fatigue design data

Stresses used in
fatigue design
Detailed fatigue assessment

- use of design curves
- classification of weld details
- stress concentrations
- fatigue life improvement
Simplified assessment methods
Fatigue assessment of welding
imperfections
Future needs
Effect of welding on fatigue resistance

400
Stress
range,
MPa
300
200
100
50
R=0
Grade 50
structural steel
10
105
106
107
Cycles
108
Fatigue cracking in a welded joint

Fatigue
F
ti
cracking
ki
from weld root
X
Fatigue failure in plate at toe
((from p
pre-existing
g sharp
p flaw at X))
Key features of welds and welded joints

Sharp
p section changes
g
- High
g SCF
Local discontinuities
- Crack initiation sites
High tensile residual stresses - Maximum mean stress
effect, compressive
stresses damaging
Consequences:
Relatively low fatigue strength,

strength
dominated by fatigue crack growth
and controlled by full applied stress range
range.
Fatigue life not increased by use of higher strength
material
Fatigue failure in pressure vessels

Fatigue loading
Pressure fluctuations
Temperature changes
Temperature
differentials
External mechanical
loading
Vibration
Sources of stress
concentration and hence
fatigue cracking
Joints (welds, bolts)
Geometric discontinuities
(
(openings,
i
nozzles,
l
ends,
d
supports)
Temporary attachments
Fatigue failure from weld details

Fatigue cracking from inside of
butt weld between a cylindrical
shell and a flat end
Fatigue cracking from nozzle

weld toe
Fatigue design process

Compare number of repetitions (ni ) of stress range Sri
which vessel or part of vessel must withstand in its service
life with the number (Ni ) withstood by representative
specimens at same stress in fatigue
f
tests, such that:
n1 n2 n3
ni
+
+
+ etc
t =
1 .0
N1 N2 N3
Ni
N values obtained from relevant design S-N curves
Basis of fatigue design data and

assessment method for welded joints
BS PD 5500 and EN 13445 adapted from nominal stress-based fatigue

rules for welded structures (bridges, offshore structures, etc)
Thus, grid of S-N curves each applicable to one or more particular weld
detail, chosen on the basis of a classification system
In g
general,, curves related to structural stress range
g
For potential fatigue failure from weld toe, structural stress range at toe
(hot-spot structural stress range) may be used
New ASME VIII uses only hot-spot structural stress calculated in a
specific way and converted to a fracture mechanicsbased parameter
called the Equivalent structural stress range parameter
Fatigue design curves for weld details in

BS PD 5500 and other UK Standards
5
E = 2.09 x 10 N/mm
Stress
range
Sr
N/mm
Class
D
E
F
F2
G
W
Sr N = constant
7
for N > 10 cycles
Sr N = constant
7
for N < 10 cycles
10
Endurance N, cycles
y
Applicable
to any
of metals covered
b PD 5500
by
5500, on
basis of relative E
values
For thickness
e > eref, where eref
=22mm allowable
=22mm,
stress
0.25
e
= Sr . ref
e
Weld detail classification in BS PD 5500
Classification depends on:

welded joint geometry
direction of loading
crack initiation site
methods of manufacture and inspection
Stresses used in BS PD 5500

for fatigue design
Structural (primary + secondary) stress range
Principal stress (not stress intensity) used directly
Nominal stress for simple details (e.g. attachments,
seam welds)
Nominal stress x SCF for structural details, or
Hot-spot
spot structural stress at any weld toe (Higher
Hot
design curve than those used with nominal stress)
Net section of load-carrying
load carrying fillet welds
Fatigue design S-N curves for weld

details in EN 13445
Class
100
90
80
71
63
56
50
45
40
Stress
range
Sr
N/mm
Class = fatigue
2
strength in N/mm
6
at 2 x 10 cycles
Sr N = constant
6
for N > 5x10
cycles
32
3
Sr N = constant
6
for N < 5 x 10 cycles
2x10
Endurance N,
N cycles
5x10
Currently
applicable only
to steel
For thickness
e > 25mm
25mm,
allowable stress
25 mm
= Sr .
0.25
Stresses used in EN 13445 for

fatigue design
Structural (primary + secondary) stress range
Option
O
to use principal or equivalent stress range
Nominal stress for simple details (e.g. attachments,
seam welds)
ld )
Structural stress at any weld toe (Hot-spot stress)
Net section of load-carrying fillet welds
Weld detail classification in EN 13445

Ring stiffener
80
s
as
Cl
Vessel shell
Hoop stress
Longitudinal
stress
Class 71
EN 13445 offers choice

of using equivalent
stress or principal stress.
Since equivalent stress
has no direction, a
consequence is that the
lowest detail Class must
be assumed.
j
shown
Thus,, the joint
would be designed as
Class 71.
Fatigue design curves from ASME VIII

Applicable
pp
to any
y of
1500
Sess
ASME 'Master' fatigue design curves
1000
-0.222
MPa/mm
Mean - 2 SD
500
400
300
200
Mean - 3SD
M
(normal design curve)
100
50
10
10
10
10
Endurance, cycles
10
10
metals covered by
ASME on basis of
relative E values
Stress parameter
depends on plate
thickness,
membrane/bending
stress ratio and
applied stress ratio
(Not units of stress)
No other thickness
correction required
Basis of fatigue design curves

Regression analysis of S
S-N
N data obtained from tests
on actual welded joints
2.5%
2 5% probability of failure (mean 2 standard
deviations of log N [SD]):BS PD 5500 design curves; included in ASME
ASME.
0.1% probability curves (mean - 3SD):BS PD 5500 simplified design methods; all EN 13445
design curves for weld details; generally required for
ASME
S
Application of design curves for

weld details
No effect of applied mean stress in PD 5500 and
EN 13445; mean stress correction in ASME
No effect of material tensile strength
No effect of welding process
May need to be reduced to allow for corrosive
environment; no specific guidance in BS PD
5500 or EN 13445 but penalty factors specified
in ASME
Stresses used in ASME VIII Div. 2 for

fatigue design of welded joints
Structural (primary + secondary) stress range based on
through-thickness stress distribution obtained by numerical
analysis
y
Structural equivalent stress range parameter (a function of
materials fatigue crack propagation properties (m=3.6),
applied structural stress range ()
(), material thickness (t),
(t)
membrane to bending stress ratio and applied stress ratio):
Sess =
2 m
2m
1
m
t ess .I .fM
Generalized stress parameter (Maddox, 1974)

da / dN = C( K ) m , K = Y a , Y = f ( a / t & crack front shape a / 2 c )
af

ai
d ( at )
(Y
= I = C
a ) m
m ( m2 1 )
( m2 1 )
t
i .e
I

. N = 1 = cons tan t
C
or
( )
where
t
' Generalize d stress parameter
p
' =
I
* m
.N = a cons tan t ,
m
or
* =
2 m
2m
.I
1
m
( cf M ASME Sess )
2 1
1
m
ASME Equivalent structural

g parameter
p
Sess
stress range
Based on:
Structural stress (presumably assumed to allow for
SCF factor Mk normally applied to stress intensity
factor))
Fatigue life mainly growth of a pre-existing crack
p
assumptions
p
made about initial flaw size
Implicit
and shape
p
fatigue
g crack g
growth rate relationship
p
Specific
Hot-spot structural stress approach
Fatigue
Hot
Hot-spot
spot
crack
k
Hot-spot stress = structural stress
at weld toe.
It includes all stress concentrating
effects except the local notch effect
of the weld toe
toe.
Hot-spot structural stress from

through-thickness stress distribution
Actual stress
Structural stress
hot-spot
(y)
x(y)
m
m b
Methods for calculating the hot-spot

structural stress
Using surface stresses (e.g. measured):
Surface stress extrapolation (SSE)
Using through-thickness stress distribution
(e.g. from numerical analysis):
- Through-thickness integration (TTI)
- Nodal forces (NF) method
Hot-spot stress developments in British Standards
Current TWI joint-industry project aims to produce guidance on hot-spot

str ct ral stress approach for incl
structural
inclusion
sion in British Standard fatig
fatigue
e
design rules (initially BS 7608)
Comparison of the three methods of calculating hot-spot stress (SSE,
TTI and NF) from FEA
Solid and shell elements, examination of sensitivity to mesh size
Case studies on range of structural components
All methods mesh sensitive but mesh sensitivity least for simple welded
joints in plates under unidirectional loading
Findings so far indicate that nodal force method most mesh sensitive of
the three when applied to structural component
Mesh insensitivity of the ASME method may be for a restricted set of
possible mesh types and weld meshing options.
Fatigue data expressed in terms of hotspot stress range (SSE method)

500
400
300
Hot-spot
stress range
at weld toe
200
N/mm
Cl
Class
E
Pressure vessels - nozzles
Plate welded components
100
90
95% confidence
fid
i t
intervals
l
enclosing data
60
4
10
10
10
Endurance, cycles
10
3x10
Comparison with mean 2SD S-N

curves derived from ASME VIII
500
Hot-spot
stress
range
at
weld toe
2
N/mm
Pressure vessel data

Structural specimen
or component data
400
300
Mean 2SD
200
BS PD 5500
Cl
Class
E
ASME VIII, Div.2
R 0, t 16mm
lower: all membrane
upper: all bending
100
90
60
4
10
10
10
Endurance cycles
Endurance,
10
3x10
Comparison with mean 3SD S-N curves

derived from ASME VIII
500
Hot-spot
stress
range
at
weld toe
2
N/mm
Pressure vessel data

Structural specimen
or component data
400
300
Mean 3SD
200
EN 13445
Class 71
Class 63
ASME VIII, Div.2
R 0, t 16mm
lower: all membrane
upper: all bending
100
90
60
4
10
10
10
Endurance cycles
Endurance,
10
3x10
Misalignment as a source of stress concentration
Bending stresses due

to misalignment
Same guidance on calculation of SCF is given in
PD5500 and EN 13445
Treatment of weld details subject to

g
combined or multi-axial loading
L = Maximum change in L
L
H
45
H = Maximum change in H
45 = Maximum change in H45

Principal stresses then calculated
from L, H, and 45
Same approach in PD5500 and EN 13445. Current research

should provide better method for out-of-phase loading.
ASME ttreatment
t
t off weld
ld details
d t il subject
bj t
to multi-axial loading
Sess
=
2 m
F ( ) t 2 m .I m1 .f
M
ess

+ 3
22mm m1
t ess .I
0 .5
Where:
F in-phase
For
i h
lloading
di ((principal
i i l stress
t
di
directions
ti
remain
i constant
t t
throughout loading cycle), F() = 1
while
For out-of-phase loading (principal stress directions change during
loading cycle), F() = function of applied normal and shear stresses and
out-of-phase angle, or conservative value of 1/2
Elastic-plastic (E-P) conditions

BS PD 5500 & EN 13445:
Stress
range
For stress ranges > twice yield:

E-P strain obtained directly from analysis and
converted to stress
or
Stresses from design S-N curves reduced by
factor that depends on load source
(mechanical or thermal) and stress range
/ yield.
Design S-N curve
Corrected
for
plasticity
10
10
10
10
10
10
Endurance N, cycles
ASME VIII, Div. 2:

For every case:
E-P strain obtained directly from analysis (Neubers rule & materials
cyclic stress-strain
stress strain properties) and converted to stress range
Fatigue life improvement methods

BS PD 5500 and EN 13445 allow weld toe
grinding
i di and
d corresponding
di iincrease iin d
design
i
classification
ASME VIII accepts weld toe grinding, TIG
dressing or hammer peening. Equivalent
structural stress parameter design curves
increased accordingly
accordingly, with greatest benefit in
high-cycle regime
Assessment of welding flaws

Guidance given in BS PD 5500 and EN
13445 on flaw assessment based on
fitness-for-purpose:
Reference to BS 7910
Specific recommendations on:
1. Planar flaws not acceptable
2. Buried flaws - inclusions,, porosity;
p
y;
3. Deviations from design shape misalignment, peaking, ovality.
ASME seems to accept planar flaws since
equivalent structural stress parameter
can be calculated for cracks up to 10% of
section thickness
Fatigue design of pressure vessels future needs

Parametric hot-spot SCFs for pressure vessel
details
Elastic-plastic fatigue
Effect of environment (corrosive, elevated
temperature, hydrogen)
Closer link between design and fabrication quality
Experimental methods for design (draft for EN
13445 now available)
Thank you for your attention
Agenda
Jim Wood

Steve Maddox
Q&A Session
Closing Remarks
Jim Wood
Agenda
Jim Wood

Steve Maddox
Q&A Session
Closing Remarks
Jim Wood

Ccopps Webinar Slides PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Ccopps Webinar Slides PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Fatigue of Welded Pressure Vessels

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Fatigue of Welded Pressure Vessels

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Industry Needs Survey

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Fatigue of Welded Pressure Vessels

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Fatigue design of welded pressure vessels

Fatigue design data

Detailed fatigue assessment

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Effect of welding on fatigue resistance

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Fatigue cracking in a welded joint

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Key features of welds and welded joints

Relatively low fatigue strength,

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Fatigue failure in pressure vessels

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Fatigue failure from weld details

Fatigue cracking from nozzle

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Fatigue design process

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Basis of fatigue design data and

BS PD 5500 and EN 13445 adapted from nominal stress-based fatigue

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Fatigue design curves for weld details in

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Weld detail classification in BS PD 5500

Classification depends on:

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Stresses used in BS PD 5500

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Fatigue design S-N curves for weld

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Stresses used in EN 13445 for

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Weld detail classification in EN 13445

EN 13445 offers choice

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Fatigue design curves from ASME VIII

ASME 'Master' fatigue design curves

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Basis of fatigue design curves

World Centre for Materials Joining Technology

Application of design curves for