You are on page 1of 10

Proceedings of the ASME 2016 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference

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




Nazrul Islam Tasnim Hassan

North Carolina State University North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC, USA Raleigh, NC, USA
Email: Email:

ABSTRACT saturation rate

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

1 Copyright 2016 by ASME

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
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).
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
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

dependence, multiaxial ratcheting and loading Kinematic Hardening Rule: a ai , ni 4 (6)

nonproportionality have been incorporated in the Chaboche i 1
model. User customized version of this model in ANSYS is then

2 Copyright 2016 by ASME

Chaboche model:
1 1
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.


Modified Chaboche Model: 457410.

Long Radius
dai Ci d p i ai 1 ai : n ndp
(8) Closing 705920.

3 Pipe & Elbow N=120 488630.

(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.

of the yield surface, and E, , and I indicate Youngs 169=PETS
modulus, Poissons ratio, stress tensor and second rank unity 3= BUS
tensor, respectively; p is the magnitude of plastic strain B
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.
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

3 Copyright 2016 by ASME

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




Fig. 3: Experiemntal and simulated load-displacement response

(a) Hysteresis loop at N = 1, and (b) Load amplitude and mean
with number of cycle (P-N).

MPa is positive, at p = 11.0 MPa is negative and p = 20.8

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

4 Copyright 2016 by ASME

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

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
3 g in Y
presented below.

MODEL IMPROVEMENT Constant multiaxial ratcheting parameter ( ) cannot

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
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)

5 Copyright 2016 by ASME

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
Stable Improved
deformation process and associated nonproportionality FEB 6 2016 FEB 6 2016

parameter is the measure of degree of nonproportionality .129E-06 .129E-06

18:51:15 18:51:57

defined by Tanaka. .007778 .007778

.015556 .015556

dC cc n n C dp .023333
(18) .023333

=11.8 mm

tr C C nC Cn p=11.0 MPa

A .046667

(19) .054444
tr C C .062222
.07 STEP=1919
SUB =3
STEP=961 TIME=360.25
The parameter A is incorporated in the model through SUB the
-evolution rule as shown in Eqs. (20)-(23) in order to account
(a) DMX =12.5129
SMN =.533E-06 (b)
for increasing cyclic hardening as a result of loadingDMX non-=12.5241

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
Stable Model Improved Model

q k i (q)
SUB =3

N=120 F N=120 F

TIME=597.25 FEB 4 2016

0 UX
(AVG) 18:31:23

(23) LR
DMX =8.97966

i i LR
SMN =-6.74654
SMX =-5.35713

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

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

6 Copyright 2016 by ASME

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.

Fig. 8: Experimental and simulated axial strain ratcheting

responses ( -N) at intrados of long radius elbow

Fig. 11: Experimental and simulated circumferential strain

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

Circumferential strain ratcheting response ( -N) with

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

Fig. 12: Experimental and simulated circumferential strain

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

7 Copyright 2016 by ASME

with constant multiaxial ratcheting parameter fails to simulateELEMENTS
unpressurized elbow responses whereas Chaboche (stable)
1 OCT 26 2015
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
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

stresses induced by manufacturing and welding processes is



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
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

Schedule 10-90 Elbow APR 2 2016
Long Radius 23:41:35
-17.3183 296.447

-12.1371 363.997
-6.95598 SUB =175
-1.77482 SX (AVG) MPa
3.40635 (d)
Fig. 13: Residual stresses in elbow, (a) Simulated
13.7687 circumferential residual stresses in elbow after manufacturing
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
B =8 the elbow during a weld pass (see Fig. 13b for locations), (d)
(AVG) MPa Simulated residual circumferential stress in elbow-pipe after
(a) welding.

8 Copyright 2016 by ASME

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-
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.

9 Copyright 2016 by ASME

[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 Copyright 2016 by ASME