19 views

Uploaded by Mohinuddin Ahmed

Pipe

- 10 Chapter 5
- 12952-3-sadrzaj
- 286_1.pdf
- Crushing and Fracture of Lightweight_jesper_20031
- Prediction of Necking in Tubular Hydroforming Using an Extended Stress-Based Forming Limit Curve
- 22 Settlement of a Circular Silo Foundation
- [Rosa; Nagode e Fajdiga] - Strain-Life Approach in Thermo-Mechanical Fatigue Evaluation of Complex Structures
- Failure Criterias Vol1
- Traditional vs FEA Based Analysis Design
- ch21.pdf
- Fatigue of Flexible Riser in Bend Stiffener Area
- Fatigue Design Based on S-N Data
- Engineering Material 2000 Jan
- Для просмотра статьи разгадайте капчу_219.pdf
- AFEM.Ch15
- Shear Strength and Deformation Capacity of Interior
- Advances in Short Steel Span Bridges
- Nonlinear Structural Mechanics in Association With Limit States and Risk-Based Approaches - On-Going Research Projects by Prof. Jeom Kee Paik
- 01.STATIK-5_EN
- Finite Element Methods in Linear Structural Mechanics_Rak-54_2110_l_5_extra

You are on page 1of 10

PVP2016

July 17-21, 2016, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

PVP2016-63353

RESPONSES OF ELBOWS

North Carolina State University North Carolina State University

Raleigh, NC, USA Raleigh, NC, USA

Email: nislam3@ncsu.edu Email: thassan@ncsu.edu

A rate-independent constitutive model is developed E Youngs modulus

incorporating various uniaxial and multiaxial modeling features f Von-Mises yield function

for improving the simulations of elbow low-cycle fatigue and I Identity tensor

ratcheting responses. The model development is motivated by , Nonproportionality parameters

the fact that the Chaboche model in ANSYS is unable to N Number of loading cycles

simulate the strain ratcheting responses of elbows subjected to dp Magnitude of plastic strain increment

internal pressure and opening-closing displacement-controlled J 2nd invariant of deviatoric stress tensor

cycles. This drawback of the existing model is traced to the n Normal to yield surface

isotropic and kinematic hardening modeling features. The

n* Normal to strain memory surface

Number of kinematic hardening rules

isotropic hardening in the Chaboche model can reasonably q, Y Strain memory surface dimensions

simulate the material test stress peaks but fails to simulate the P Force response of elbows

hysteresis loop shapes. Incorporation of a strain range Pa Force amplitude

dependent modeling feature in evolving the isotropic and p Prescribed internal pressure

kinematic hardening rule parameters improved the simulation s Deviatoric stress tensor

of the hysteresis loops both at the material and component t Time

levels. The axial and circumferential strain ratcheting T Temperature

simulation of elbow is improved by incorporating a biaxial Total back stress tensor

ratcheting parameter. A modeling feature for nonproportional , , ,

Multiaxial ratcheting parameters

loading developed by Tanaka is also incorporated in order to , ,

simulate the additional cyclic hardening under multiaxial Prescribed displacement

loading. The performance of modified model developed is a Displacement amplitude

Dx Flank to flank diameter change

validated against simulating a broad set of cyclic responses both

at the material and component levels. Finally, a numerical Dmx Mean values of Dx response

technique is developed to simulate the initial and welding x Axial strain

ax Amplitude of axial strain

residual stresses in elbows, and thereby analytically

mx Mean of axial strain

demonstrate the influence of initial residual stresses on elbow

Circumferential strain

responses. m Mean of circumferential strain

Strain tensor

Keywords: Low Cycle Fatigue, Multiaxial Ratcheting, Strain d Strain increment

Range Dependence, -hardening, Nonproportionality, Elbow e Elastic strain tensor

Components. p Plastic strain tensor

Poissons ratio

NOMENCLATURE Stress tensor

ai Back stress tensor o Yield stress

, , Strain range parameters x Axial stress

Ci, i Kinematic hardening parameters Circumferential stress

INTRODUCTION x x

Elbows are considered as critical components for structural a a

integrity of piping systems. In the event of extreme loading

t m

conditions, piping systems are subjected to inelastic loading

reversals which may lead to low cycle fatigue and ratcheting t

failure in elbows. Understanding ratcheting damage induced

UF1 UR1

failure mechanism of these components still remains a x

challenging task. Design rules in ASME Boiler and Pressure ax /3

Vessel Code (BPVC), Section III [1] that provides stress limits

intended for ratcheting to shakedown in nuclear components are

conservative. As demonstrated in [2], the shakedown criteria

cannot always be achieved because the stress limits do not

guarantee shakedown at the event of peak cyclic stress causing

plasticity. Because of this limitation, constitutive model needs MR1 MOP

to be developed for accurate simulations of fatigue and

ratcheting deformations in piping systems. Fig. 1: Loading histories UF1, MSR, UR1, MR1 and MOP

Fatigue-ratcheting behavior of pressurized elbows is conducted by [9-12].

studied by many researchers experimentally and analytically [3-

8]. Advanced constitutive models are developed for evaluating evaluated in simulating the whole set of ratcheting responses of

experimentally observed responses [4, 8]. Drawbacks of elbow components. Model improvements and further

constitutive models are traced as the main reason of inaccurate challenges in predicting the elbow component responses are

ratcheting simulations. Hence, this study made an effort to presented and discussed in the sections below. In addition, a

further develop and validate the Chaboche constitutive model numerical technique for simulating residual stresses in elbows

against a broader set of experimental responses. SS304 is implemented in order to study if incorporation of residual

experimental data developed under uniaxial and multiaxial stress may improve elbow response simulation.

loading (see Fig. 1) are collected from [9-12]. These room

temperature experiments prescribed uniaxial fatigue loading CONSTITUTIVE MODEL

(UF1 in Fig. 1) with strain amplitude, =0.6%, multi strain Chaboche plasticity model [14] in ANSYS is studied first

amplitude loading (history not shown) =0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and in evaluating the elbow fatigue and ratcheting responses.

0.8%, uniaxial ratcheting (UR1 in Fig. 1) prescribing = 78 Multiaxial ratcheting modeling feature in the modified

MPa and = 234 MPa, biaxial ratcheting (MR1 in Fig. 1) Chaboche model proposed by Bari and Hassan [15] is also

prescribing =74 MPa and = 0.4% and multiaxial out of studied. The modified Chaboche model is implemented in

phase (MOP in Fig. 1) loading with equivalent strain range ANSYS USERMAT using strain driven radial return algorithm

=0.2%. for shell elements. Yield criteria, flow rule and hardening rule

Elbow response data of long and short radius 90-degree of these models are shown in (1)-(8).

schedule 10 elbows (average D/t = 20) developed by [12, 13]

are used for further model validation at the component level. Von-Mises Yield Criteria:

(See [12, 13] for the details of experimental program).

3

Displacement controlled in-plane opening-closing cycles are f s a : s a o (1)

prescribed with steady internal pressure of 0, 11.0 and 20.8 MPa 2

(yield pressure = 15.4 MPa). Force (P), displacement (),

Additive Strain Decomposition: d de d p (2)

diameter change ( ), and axial ( ) and circumferential ( )

strains at flank, intrados and extrados were recorded. 1

Simulations for these long radius elbow responses have been Hookes Law: e tr ()I (3)

also demonstrated by [4]. The authors of this article also

E E

simulated these elbow responses and demonstrated the 3

drawbacks of the Chaboche model in ANSYS [8]. Given the Flow Rule: d p = dpn (4)

fact that mechanical response of elbow is influenced by the 2

biaxial state of stress, a multiaxial ratcheting modeling feature

was incorporated in the Chaboche model, however, simulation where, n=

3 sa (5)

improvement was not observed. 2 J

For further model improvement, various advanced

modeling features for cyclic hardening, strain range ni

nonproportionality have been incorporated in the Chaboche i 1

model. User customized version of this model in ANSYS is then

Chaboche model:

1 1

STNEMELE NOITULOS LADON

2 A End Cap

dai Ci d p i ai dp (7)

6102 6 BEF 61026 (Solid

BEF 5)

3 83:61:91 65:11:91 60-E115.

773700.

Long Radius

131220.

Elbow

dai Ci d p i ai 1 ai : n ndp

2

(8) Closing 705920.

(Shell 181)

=11.8 mm 162440.

In the above equations, and are the deviators of stress p=11.0 MPa 736150.

tensor () and back stress tensor (), respectively. 0 is the size Stable 410950.

193660.

of the yield surface, and E, , and I indicate Youngs 169=PETS

modulus, Poissons ratio, stress tensor and second rank unity 3= BUS

52.063=EMIT

tensor, respectively; p is the magnitude of plastic strain B

)GVA( VQEOTPE

1425.21= XMD

increment. in Eq. 8 is the multiaxial ratcheting parameter.

Model parameters for Chaboche plasticity model are

determined by simulating SS304 uniaxial stress-strain

responses from [9, 11] following parameter determination

(a) (b)

procedure [16]. Biaxial ratcheting parameter is calibrated with

the biaxial ratcheting responses [4]. Fig. 2: (a) Finite element mesh, and (b) von-Mises strain contour

from simulation at the end of 120th Cycle.

FINITE ELEMENT MODELING

Long and short radius elbow geometry discussed in [12, SIMULATION RESULTS USING CHABOCHE AND

13] is used for generating FE mesh. Four noded structural shell MODIFIED CHABOCHE MODEL WITH STABLE

elements are used for elbow and pipe, and eight noded brick MATERIAL ASSUMPTION

elements are used for the rigid lug or end cap modeling. Mesh Experimental and simulated responses using Chaboche

convergence study is conducted and converged mesh used in (Stable) and modified Chaboche model (Stable/ ) are shown

this study is shown in Fig 2. As reported in [12, 13], elbow in Fig. 3 and 4. Simulated responses are shown for long radius

thickness is not unifrom along the longitudinal axis and across elbows with displacement controlled loading with amplitude,

the cross section. Nonuniform thickness has an effect on local =11.8 mm and steady internal pressure, p = 0, 11 and 20.8

response simulation hence measured thickness variation for MPa. Performance of the material model are evaluated for

both elbow and pipe are considered in generating FE mesh. Pin global load-displacement (P-) response (Fig. 3a and 3b), and

support at the top lug is modeled as observed in the experiment local responses of circumferential strain ratcheting ( ) at

by assigning boundary conditions Ux=Uy=Uz=0 at A (Fig. 2). extrados (Fig. 4a), axial strain ratcheting ( ) at intrados (Fig.

Displacement controlled saw-toothed signal is prescribed at 4b), circumferential strain ratcheting ( ) at flank (Fig. 4c)

bottom lug by assigning cyclic displacements along the line and flank to flank ovalization ( ) (Fig. 4d).

passing through point B (Fig. 2). For the pressurized elbows, Load-displacement (P-) hysteresis loop using Chaboche

steady internal pressure is assigned in the internal surface of stable model gives good prediction of the experimental

elbow and surface of the end cap attached to the elbow. Large responses as shown in Fig 3a. Amplitude and mean of the load

deflection feature is incorporated in the elasto-plastic analysis. response simulation as a function of the number of cycle is

End cap and pipe is assumed to be rigidly connected. Increased plotted in Fig. 3b which is in good agreement with experimental

thickness due to welding between the elbow and pipe is responses.

included in the analysis based on the measnured dimensions. From the extrados ratcheting responses (Fig. 4a), it can be

Simulation results of von-Mises strain contour for a long radius seen that Chaboche model predicts negative strain ratcheting

elbow with steady internal pressure p = 11.0 MPa and =11.8 ( ) for internal pressure, p = 11.0 MPa whether

mm at the end of 120th cycle is plotted in Fig. 2b. With the stable experimentally observed ratcheting is positive. For p = 20.8

material assumption (o = constant), the von-Mises strain is MPa, positive ratcheting simulation is observed but

obseved to be concentrated at flank location, where cracks have underpredicted initially. Simulation for the unpressurized

been observed in the experiments. specimen is in well agreement with the experimental response.

It is interesting to note that simulated strain ratcheting rate

response fluctuates with increasing internal pressure (at p = 0

rate when compared to the stable model simulations but

overprediction is observed.

Circumferential strain ratcheting ( ) at flank using

Chaboche model is reasonably predicted as shown in Fig. 4c.

Modified Chaboche model improves ratcheting rate prediction

for the pressurized elbows (p = 11.0, 20.8 MPa) but deteriorates

for the unpressurized elbow.

Flank to flank ovalization (diameter change) ratcheting rate

( ) is overpredicted for the pressurized elbows when

(a)

(a)

(b)

(a) Hysteresis loop at N = 1, and (b) Load amplitude and mean

with number of cycle (P-N).

MPa is positive) considering the fact that elbows average yield

pressure is 15.4 MPa and thickness variation in each elbow are

considered in FE simulations. Similar circumferential (b)

ratcheting response fluctuation at extrados is also observed

even with advanced modeling features. When modified

Chaboche model is used with constant multiaxial ratcheting

parameter ( = 0.005), simulation is improved for the

pressurized elbows (negative ratcheting rate become positive)

but unpressurized simulation rate increases to overpredict the

experimental rate.

Chaboche stable material model predicts negative strain

ratcheting ( ) at the intrados of the pressurized elbows as

shown in Fig. 4b. Negative ratcheting rate using stable model

increases with the increase of internal pressure which is

opposite to the experimentally observed responses.

Unpressurized elbow response simulation is reasonable. On the

other hand, modified Chaboche model reversed the ratcheting

(c)

(d)

Fig. 5: Experimental stress-plastic strain ( - ) upgoing

Fig. 4: Mean of experimental and simulated responses using curve shifted at =0.8% strain amplitude

Chaboche and modified Chaboche model, (a) Circumferential

strain ratcheting, at extrados, (b) Axial strain ratcheting, In the above equations, evolves towards strain range

at intrados, (c) Circumferential strain ratcheting, at dependent saturated value 0 (q) with a saturation rate . ,

flank, (d) Flank to flank diameter ratcheting, and are the strain range dependent parameters. Strain

memory surface from [14] as shown in Eqs. (11)-(14) are

Chaboche model is used (Fig. 4d). Unpressurized elbow implemented to incorporate this strain range dependence [17].

response simulation is in well agreement with experimentally In these equations, q and Y are the radius and center of strain

observed diameter change. Modified Chaboche model memory surface, is a constant, n* is the normal to strain

significantly improves the diameter ratcheting rate for the memory surface and H() is Heaviside step function.

pressurized elbows but highly overpredicts for the

unpressurized elbows.

Chaboche model with stable material response cannot g

3

2 p

Y : p Y q 0 (11)

predict ratcheting rates properly for combined cyclic loading

and steady internal pressure except load-displacement and flank

ratcheting responses. Stable material model performs well for dq H g n : n* dp (12)

the elbow components when only cyclic loading

(unpressurized) is present. Modified Chaboche model improves 3

ratcheting responses for the pressurized elbows overall but dY [1 H g n : n* n* ]dp (13)

simulation deteriorates for the unpressurized elbow. However, 2

Chaboche model simulation can be improved if additional

responses of SS304 are considered in model improvement as 2 in Y

n*

3 g in Y

(14)

presented below.

SS304 shows cyclic hardening mainly due to curve shape simulate the elbow ratcheting response as shown above, hence

change while linear elastic yield region remains constant as a postulation is made that ratcheting of material depends on the

shown in the Fig. 5. Cyclic hardening through yield surface current state of strain. Center location of the strain memory

evolution (isotropic hardening rule) can simulate stress surface that describes current state of strain is included in the

amplitudes well but hysteresis loop shape cannot be accurately definition of multiaxial ratcheting parameter as shown in Eqs.

simulated (not shown). Hence, -hardening rule (Eqs. 9-10) (15)-(17). In these equations, , , and are modified

following [17] is incorporated in the model for improvement of multiaxial ratcheting parameters.

both loop and stress amplitude simulation (not shown).

d b ' ( ' s ' )dp

d i D i q i dp

0

(15)

i (9)

c ' Yeq

' s a b exp

q a i b i e c i q (16)

0 ' '

i (10)

a ' b ' 1 (17)

To demonstrate nonproportional loading effect on cyclic elbow with p = 11.0 MPa and =11.8 mm is plotted for N =

hardening and ratcheting responses on elbow, Tanaka 120 in Fig. 6 using both stable and improved model. Strain

nonproportionality [18] modeling features are incorporated in distributions are different from the two constitutive models as

the model. Tanaka nonproportional model equations are given shown in these figures. Strain concentration zone at flank with

in (18)-(19). In these equations, is a material constant that the improved model is thinner, whereas with the stable model

gives cross hardening stabilization rate, represents growth the strain concentration is wider in the flank.

1 1

rate of internal dislocation structure induced by the inelastic

NODAL SOLUTION NODAL SOLUTION

Stable Improved

deformation process and associated nonproportionality FEB 6 2016 FEB 6 2016

18:51:15 18:51:57

.015556 .015556

dC cc n n C dp .023333

(18) .023333

LR

.031111

.031111

=11.8 mm

.038889

.038889

tr C C nC Cn p=11.0 MPa

T T

.046667

A .046667

N=120

T

(19) .054444

.054444

tr C C .062222

.062222

.07

.07 STEP=1919

SUB =3

STEP=961 TIME=360.25

The parameter A is incorporated in the model through SUB the

=3 EPTOEQV (AVG)

TIME=360.25

-evolution rule as shown in Eqs. (20)-(23) in order to account

EPTOEQV (AVG)

(a) DMX =12.5129

SMN =.533E-06 (b)

for increasing cyclic hardening as a result of loadingDMX non-=12.5241

0

proportionality. In these equations and are the maximum Fig. 6: von-Mises strain distribution at N=120 using (a) Stable

values at 90o out-of-phase and axial strain controlled model, and (b) Modified model.

responses respectively for the current plastic strain surface size

The crown section ovalization corresponding to Fig. 6 is

q, and is the ratio of and 0 .

compared in Fig. 7. Ovalization shape especially at the intrados

of elbow is protruded outward when improved model is used

d i D i iAS q i dp (20) (Fig. 7b), whereas it is protruded inward when stable model is

used (Fig. 7a). Based on the fact that experimental ratcheting

iAS q A i (q) i0 (q) i0 q (21) responses is positive, deformation modes in the improved

model is more acceptable.

i0 q a i b i e

c i q

(22)

Stable Model Improved Model

1

NODAL SOLUTION

STEP=3183

q k i (q)

SUB =3

N=120 F N=120 F

TIME=597.25 FEB 4 2016

0 UX

RSYS=0

(AVG) 18:31:23

(23) LR

DMX =8.97966

i i LR

SMN =-6.74654

SMX =-5.35713

E I E I

Uniaxial and biaxial model parameters are determined by

simulating uniaxial stress-strain hysteresis loops and ratcheting

responses from [4, 11] following procedure in [16]. Strain range F F

dependent and cyclic hardening parameters are determined -6.74654

-6.59216

-6.43778

-6.2834

-6.12902

-5.97464

-5.82027

-5.66589

-5.51151

-5.35713

using responses from multi strain range test from [9]. (a) Elbow Pipe Model :: NAZRUL ISLAM & TASNIM HASSAN

(b)

Nonproportionality parameters are calibrated with multiaxial Fig. 7: Crown section diameter change (deformation 5X

out-of-phase (MOP) test [10]. The model has been implemented magnified) at the closing of N=120 (a) Using stable material

in ANSYS USERMAT for evaluating elbow responses model (b) Using improved model

simulations.

Axial strain ratcheting response ( -N) at intrados of long

IMPROVED SIMULATION RESULTS radius elbow under p = 20.8 MPa and =11.8 mm is plotted in

Modeling features like cyclic hardening, strain range Fig. 8. As shown in the figure, experimentally observed positive

dependence, nonproportionality and evolving multiaxial ratcheting rate is predicted by the improved model with some

ratcheting phenomenon are included in Chaboche model overprediction whereas stable model ratchets in the negative

framework to investigate simulation drawbacks observed in the direction. The improved modeling feature with and without

stable material model. FE simulation responses using this nonproportionality predicts similar positive ratcheting rate,

improved model are discussed herein for both long and short hence it can be concluded that the nonproportionality modeling

radius elbows. Von-Mises strain contour for the long radius feature does not influence elbow response simulation. The

observation can be rationalized by the fact that biaxial stress Circumferential strain ratcheting response ( -N) at

state condition at the intrados as plotted in Fig. 9 is almost extrados of short radius elbow with p = 11.0 MPa and = 11.8

proportional, i.e. loading nonproportionality is insignificant. mm is plotted in Fig. 10. As shown in the figure, experimentally

Therefore, only the influence of strain range dependent - observed positive ratcheting rate is predicted well by the

hardening and evolving multiaxial ratcheting parameter (- improved (-hard./ ) model whereas ratcheting rate

hard./ ) in the modified Chaboche model are further studied simulation is negative when stable model is used.

against the remaining elbow responses. Circumferential strain ratcheting response ( -N) at flank

of long radius elbow with p = 11.0 MPa and =11.8 mm is

plotted in Fig 11. As shown in the figure, both stable and

improved model can predict accumulated strain quite well

however ratcheting rate by the improved model is closely

predicted to the experimental rate.

responses ( -N) at intrados of long radius elbow

ratcheting responses ( -N) at flank of long radius elbow

LCF and varying degree of internal pressure (p = 0, 11.0 and

20.8 MPa) for long radius elbow is shown in Fig. 12. The

improved model (-hard./ ) prediction is in well agreement

with the experimentally observed responses for both

pressurized and unpressurized elbows. Modified Chaboche

Fig. 9: Biaxial state of stress ( ) at intrados of long radius

elbow

Fig. 10: Experimental and simulated circumferential strain

ratcheting responses ( -N) at flank with p=0, 11.0 and 20.8

ratcheting responses ( -N) at extrados of short radius elbow

MPa for long radius elbow

1

with constant multiaxial ratcheting parameter fails to simulateELEMENTS

unpressurized elbow responses whereas Chaboche (stable)

1 OCT 26 2015

14:15:03

model gives erroneous results in intrados and extrados 2

ratcheting of pressurized elbows. Improved simulations are 3

obtained due to the proposed evolving multiaxial ratcheting and

strain range dependent -hardeing rule. In fact, deformation 4

mechanism is simulated properly using improved model. Schedule 10-90 Elbow

Long Radius

Similar simulation improvements are observed for ovalization 5

and strain ratchetings (at extrados and intrados) for all

pressurized and unpressurized elbows but not shown here. (b)

At some locations of elbow like intrados, axial ratcheting

rate is overpredicted by the improved model though Schedule 10-90 Elbow

deformation mode is predicted properly. Hence to understand Long Radius

Welding

the fact, further studies are required like influence of residual Single Bead

4 Sequence

stress on elbow deformation. As elbows go through

manufacturing processes of hot or cold bending, followed by

welding to piping systems, residual stresses may develop.

Hence, a numerical technique for simulating elbow residualElbow Model :: WELDING THERMAL ANALYSIS :: NAZRUL ISLAM & TASNIM HASSAN

developed.

Elbow manufacturing process is simulated by heating the

elbow uniformly to a temperature of 800C, hold the

temperature for five minutes and then air cool it till it reaches

the ambient temperature. Residual stresses developed in an

elbow through this process is shown in Fig. 13a. In the second1

step, welding between pipe and elbow is simulated using four NODAL SOLUTION (c)

pass and single bead weld with arc current 110A, arc voltage Schedule 10-90 Elbow

8V and arc efficiency =30%. Based on the thermo-material -108.85 Long Radius APR 3 2016

02:31:56

data (thermal conductivity, specific heat, film coefficient and

density) collected from [19], thermal history of the elbow-pipe -41.3001

is first simulated by FE thermal analysis. This temperature

distribution history is then applied to elbow for thermo- 26.2493

mechanical stress analysis using temperature dependent 93.7988

bilinear material property and thermal coefficient of SS304

collected from [20]. FE mesh generated for preliminary residual 161.348

DAL SOLUTION

228.898

Schedule 10-90 Elbow APR 2 2016

Long Radius 23:41:35

-17.3183 296.447

-12.1371 363.997

STEP=129

-6.95598 SUB =175

TIME=8200

-1.77482 SX (AVG) MPa

Elbow Model :: RESIDUAL STRESS :: NAZRUL ISLAM & TASNIM HASSAN

3.40635 (d)

8.58751

Fig. 13: Residual stresses in elbow, (a) Simulated

13.7687 circumferential residual stresses in elbow after manufacturing

18.9498

processes, (b) FE mesh of elbow-pipe segment in welding RS

simulation, (c) Simulated temperature distribution during a pass

24.131 of 4-sequence welding, (c) Thermal history at five locations of

EP=64

B =8 the elbow during a weld pass (see Fig. 13b for locations), (d)

ME=90000

(AVG) MPa Simulated residual circumferential stress in elbow-pipe after

P

(a) welding.

bow Model :: RESIDUAL STRESS :: NAZRUL ISLAM & TASNIM HASSAN

stress calculation is shown in Fig 13b and temperature history [2] Indermohan, H., and Reinhardt, W., 2011, "Ratcheting

at five locations of the elbow during welding in shown in Fig. Responses of Strain Hardening Plasticity Models," ASME 2011

13c. Based on the welding thermal history of the elbow, Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, pp. 607-616

simulated residual hoop stress distribution is shown in Fig 13d. (PVP2011-57205).

Currently, we are measuring the initial residual stresses in

[3] DeGrassi, G., Hofmayer, C., Murphy, A., Suzuki, K., and

elbow specimens using the x-ray diffraction. Once the residual

Namita, Y., 2003, "BNL Nonlinear Pre-Test Seismic Analysis

stress simulation technique is validated, influence of initial

for the NUPEC Ultimate Strength Piping Test Program,"

residual stress on ratcheting responses of elbow will be

Transaction of SMiRT 17 Conference (BNL-NUREG-71119-

investigated.

2003-SP), Prague, Czech Republic.

CONCLUSION [4] Hassan, T., and Rahman, M., 2015, "Constitutive Models in

This study demonstrates performance of advanced Simulating Low-Cycle Fatigue and Ratcheting Responses of

constitutive models in simulating long and short radius elbow Elbow," Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, 137(3),

responses subjected to displacement controlled cycle and 031002.

internal pressure. Performance of Chaboche model with stable

[5] Varelis, G. E., and Karamanos, S. A., 2015, "Low-Cycle

material assumption and modified Chaboche model considering

biaxial ratcheting modeling feature are studied first. Success Fatigue of Pressurized Steel Elbows Under in-Plane Bending,"

and failure of these models are discussed. Improved modeling Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology (PVT-13-1116), 137(1).

features for strain range dependent cyclic hardening, [6] Chen, X., Chen, X., Yu, D., and Gao., B, 2013, "Recent

nonproportional hardening and multiaxial ratcheting are Progresses in Experimental Investigation and Finite Element

included in the Chaboche model framework and performance Analysis of Ratcheting in Pressurized Piping," International

of elbow component responses are evaluated. Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 101(0) pp. 113-142.

Chaboche model using stable material responses can

predict load-displacement and flank ratcheting responses for [7] Karamanos, S. A., 2015, "Mechanical Behavior of Steel

pressurized and unpressurized elbows quite reasonably. Pipe Bends; An Overview," Journal of Pressure Vessel

Overprediction is observed for diameter ratcheting responses Technology, doi: 10.1115/1.4031940.

with a saturation, while experimentally observed responses do [8] Islam, N., Fenton, M., and Hassan, T., 2015, "Long and

not saturate for the pressurized specimens. Strain ratcheting Short Radius Elbow Experiments and Evaluation of Advanced

rates at the intrados axial direction and extrados circumferential Constitutive Models to Simulate the Responses," ASME 2015

direction are simulated in the compression directions while Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, Anaheim, California,

those in the experiments are in the tensile direction. Modified PVP2015-45688.

Chaboche model with modified multiaxial ratcheting parameter

improves the strain ratcheting rate simulation trend at extrados. [9] Kang, G., Gao, Q., Cai, L., and Sun, Y., 2002, "Experimental

Compressive strain ratcheting at intrados axial direction using Study on Uniaxial and Nonproportionally Multiaxial

Chaboche model is also changed to tensile direction when Ratcheting of SS304 Stainless Steel at Room and High

modified Chaboche model is used. However, overprediction of Temperatures," Nuclear Engineering and Design, 216(1) pp.

experimental ratcheting rate is predicted by the modified model. 13-26.

The modified model improves diameter ratcheting and flank [10] Kang, G., Gao, Q., and Yang, X., 2004, "Uniaxial and Non-

strain ratcheting responses for the pressurized elbows but Proportionally Multiaxial Ratcheting of SS304 Stainless Steel

deteriorates the prediction for the unpressurized elbow. at Room Temperature: Experiments and Simulations,"

Incorporation of -hardening rule and evolving multiaxial International Journal of Non-Linear Mechanics, 39(5) pp. 843-

ratcheting parameter as a function of current state of strain 857.

improves strain ratcheting response simulations at flank,

intrados and extrados for both short and long radius elbows. [11] Kang, G., Kan, Q., Zhang, J., and Sun, Y., 2006, "Time-

Crown cross-section deformation using the improved model is Dependent Ratchetting Experiments of SS304 Stainless Steel,"

found more reasonable than that with Chaboche stable model. International Journal of Plasticity, 22(5) pp. 858-894.

Loading nonproportionality effect on ratcheting is insignificant [12] Hassan, T., Rahman, M., and Bari, S., 2015, "Low-Cycle

because biaxial state of stress is almost proportional. Initial Fatigue and Ratcheting Responses of Elbow Piping

residual stress due to manufacturing and welding are simulated Components," Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, 137(3),

and the effect of residual stress on elbow ratcheting response is 031010.

currently under investigation.

[13] Fenton, M. A., 2014, "Low-Cycle Fatigue Failure and

REFERENCE Ratcheting Responses of Short and Long Radius Elbows at

[1] American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2010, "ASME Room and High Temperatures." MSc Thesis, NC State

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code: Section III Division 1," University.

ASME, New York.

[14] Chaboche, J. L., 1986, "Time-Independent Constitutive

Theories for Cyclic Plasticity," International Journal of

Plasticity, 2(2) pp. 149-188.

[15] Bari, S., and Hassan, T., 2002, "An Advancement in Cyclic

Plasticity Modeling for Multiaxial Ratcheting Simulation,"

International Journal of Plasticity, 18(7) pp. 873-894.

[16] Bari, S., and Hassan, T., 2000, "Anatomy of Coupled

Constitutive Models for Ratcheting Simulation," International

Journal of Plasticity, 16(34) pp. 381-409.

[17] Krishna, S., Hassan, T., Naceur, I. B., Sai, K., and

Cailletaud, G., 2009, "Macro Versus Micro-Scale Constitutive

Models in Simulating Proportional and Nonproportional Cyclic

and Ratcheting Responses of Stainless Steel 304," International

Journal of Plasticity, 25(10) pp. 1910-1949.

[18] Tanaka, E., and Okuchi, H., 1988, "Constitutive Modelling

of Viscoplasticity Incorporating Non-Proportional Hardening

Effects," Transactions of the Japan Society of Mechanical

Engineers Series A, 54(504) pp. 1588-1596.

[19] Li, M., 1995, "An Experimental and Finite Element

Analysis of Temperature and Stress Fields in Girth Welded

304L Stainless Steel Pipes," PhD Thesis, Oregon Graduate

Institute of Science and Technology.

[20] Cheng, P., 2009, "Influence of Residual Stress and Heat

Affected Zone on Fatigue Failure of Welded Piping Joints,"

PhD Thesis, NC State University.

- 10 Chapter 5Uploaded bySandesh Pawar
- 12952-3-sadrzajUploaded bySnezana Vulovic
- 286_1.pdfUploaded byJithendra Kumar
- Crushing and Fracture of Lightweight_jesper_20031Uploaded byJorge Luis
- Prediction of Necking in Tubular Hydroforming Using an Extended Stress-Based Forming Limit CurveUploaded byChandra Clark
- 22 Settlement of a Circular Silo FoundationUploaded byBza ZaBug
- [Rosa; Nagode e Fajdiga] - Strain-Life Approach in Thermo-Mechanical Fatigue Evaluation of Complex StructuresUploaded byNeimar Soares Silva
- Failure Criterias Vol1Uploaded bySanal Havacılık Müzesi
- Traditional vs FEA Based Analysis DesignUploaded byanup waghmare
- ch21.pdfUploaded byTom
- Fatigue of Flexible Riser in Bend Stiffener AreaUploaded bynafartity
- Fatigue Design Based on S-N DataUploaded byhiyeon
- Engineering Material 2000 JanUploaded byankeshkatoch
- Для просмотра статьи разгадайте капчу_219.pdfUploaded bysajawal
- AFEM.Ch15Uploaded byroscilla
- Shear Strength and Deformation Capacity of InteriorUploaded bysokamanty
- Advances in Short Steel Span BridgesUploaded bysom_bs79
- Nonlinear Structural Mechanics in Association With Limit States and Risk-Based Approaches - On-Going Research Projects by Prof. Jeom Kee PaikUploaded byamin_corporation
- 01.STATIK-5_ENUploaded byGonzalo Navarro
- Finite Element Methods in Linear Structural Mechanics_Rak-54_2110_l_5_extraUploaded byapmapm
- torsion pptUploaded byVedasheershBoorla
- 105108070Uploaded byRon Jacob
- 1-s2.0-S0167663604000055-main.pdfUploaded byhasib_07
- Ce Ker Evac 2004Uploaded byshrek2015
- Ensayo Root OpeningUploaded byCesar Hernandez
- Solid Stress Interpretation - RAM _ STAAD Wiki - RAM _ STAAD - Bentley CommunitiesUploaded byvijaykumarz
- AFEM.Ch02Uploaded byJamshid Pishdadi
- HOOKE'S LAWUploaded byIznifaiznur Faiznur
- Lee Wagoner IJP 2008Uploaded byChandra Clark
- torsion test(experiment 2).docxUploaded byNirmal Chandra

- Burland-RankineLectureUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- Instruction to Link Abaqus With vs and IFCUploaded bykhayat
- Adapting The Modified Cam Clay Constitutive Model To The Computat.pdfUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- Fatigue Analysis of Frame Models - Framework - DNV GLUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- State of the ArtDesignGuidelinesforUnlinedPressureTunnels PanthiandBasnet ARMS10Uploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- Sesam-Bladed-flier_tcm8-77530.pdfUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- 8 Presentazione Caratteristiche Dinamiche 2019Uploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- Sesam [IMT Software Wiki]Uploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- Hydrostatic and Hydrodynamic Analysis - Wajac - DNV GLUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- Material_Modelling.pdfUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- ICOVP Hussein 2013Uploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- mUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- Consolidation 1Uploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- Linear Structural Analysis - Sestra - DNV GLUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- PUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- 1991useofstraightbeam28asce290733-9445281991291173A728196329Uploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- 3340-Lectures-7-to-12-S1-2015Uploaded byUtsav Koshti
- solthe95Uploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- 1603.09227Uploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- MC2_AGANUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- fatigue.pdfUploaded byiaft
- Probab i List c Failure AnalysisUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- Modeling Overhead Gantry CraneUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- Niiranen Etal MMS 2017 REVISEDUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- SMiRT-23_Paper_326Uploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- Matlab_EinfuehrungUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- 24P1-6Uploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- 42 Spec.fat.AndStressBasedRel.assessmentofOffshoreSteelStrucUploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- 14787126Uploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- Chapter_9 - Fatigue From Variable Amplitude LoadingUploaded byOdjak Maryono

- 0185_WeB1-1Uploaded byChamil Mahagamage
- Rebar Testing and Design VTT ReportUploaded byKuldeep Singh
- caleferata geosintetice conclucrareUploaded bySorin Soso Soso
- Ramadan 2014 Smart Mater. Struct. 23 033001Uploaded byankur bansal
- SP6_6.pdfUploaded bysumankanthnelluri7
- pap2.pptUploaded byAziz Syahrizal
- Design of Elastomeric BearingUploaded bySuman Nakarmi
- RSM_formula - Copy.docxUploaded byNavtalukdar
- Elastic StructuresUploaded bynitschemistry
- Ultimate Tensile StrengthUploaded bykumarmkishore
- Report Torsion TestUploaded byCherif Chokeir
- Advanced Geotecnical AnalysisUploaded byAlessandro Lugli Nascimento
- Elementary Finite Element MethodUploaded byeng_1787
- ATENA TroubleshootingUploaded byAlvaro Hernandez Lopez
- Vein ArrayUploaded byfahma tafwidla
- Composite BeamsUploaded bychithirai10
- The noninvasive analysis of painted surfaceUploaded byErathiasky
- Deformation (Engineering)Uploaded byphutd09
- Characterization of Polymer FoamsUploaded byssm_majeed
- theories of failureUploaded byLook-n De Sousa
- Soil Mechanics in Pavement EngineeringUploaded byalexgomezs
- [Rosa; Nagode e Fajdiga] - Strain-Life Approach in Thermo-Mechanical Fatigue Evaluation of Complex StructuresUploaded byNeimar Soares Silva
- Rock Mechanics BasicsUploaded byEthan Eastwood
- MoehleSmrfUploaded byEDison YAnez
- VSN & SNIPS Wall Thickness10-Inch Gas Reinjection 95CUploaded byDave M Michael
- Me2303 Dme Notes_1Uploaded byAnonymous utfuIcn
- Overview of the Use of Fracture Mechanics for Binders and MasticsUploaded byJorge Mauricio de Souza
- Zdeněk Bittnar_ Jiří Šejnoha-Numerical methods in structural mechanics-Amer Society of Civil Engineers (1996)Uploaded byErickSimon
- VPE-A10988-00-B0714Uploaded bynome
- chapter 6 mechanical propertiesUploaded byapi-269630671