ASM Metals HandBook Vol. 8 - Mechanical Testing and Evaluation

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Fig. 28 Dependence of load-bearing capacity on strain rate for large-diameter pipes at room

temperature

Fig. 29 Dependence of maximum elongation on strain rate for large-diameter pipes at room temperature

Test Results of Piping Systems. Incipient cracks were generated on the inner surface around the bend flanks by

cyclic bending (Ref 59). In various phases of the test characterized by sinoidal and sawtooth modes of loading

and different load frequencies, the cracks were further extended. At the end of the phases of cyclic testing a

macrocrack was embedded in a crack field. In the final load test with monotonously rising bending moment, the

pipe bend failed by leakage (Fig. 30).

Fig. 30 Multiple crack field pipe elbow

For a piping system (see Fig. 17) under real loading conditions and for a real loading history, the calculated

number of load cycles up to failure based on the crack propagation law of ASME XI (wet conditions) was

compared with the experimental values (Fig. 31). The actual number of cycles up to failure of the piping system

was underestimated (estimated on the safe side) by all crack propagation analyses carried out.

Fig. 31 Measured and calculated number of load cycles to failure for a piping system under real loading

conditions. FE, finite element

Test Results of High-Temperature Tests. The material behavior of components in the primary circuit of

pressurized water reactors under conditions beyond design criteria (that is, temperature increases considerably

and system pressure reaches a maximum level) was examined by means of a component test and small-scale

specimen tests (Ref 60). A comparison of the heating test of small-scale specimens (without hold time) with the

component test is shown in Fig. 32 as well as the relationship between temperature to failure and time to

rupture.

Fig. 32 Failure temperature versus time to rupture for components in a pressurized water reactor. t

time to failure of small specimen; t

, time to failure of small specimen without heating time

For the long-term creep tests on elbows (Ref 61), the comparison of calculated and measured local creep

deformation is shown in Fig. 33. It could be demonstrated that realistic stresses and strains can be expected if

the constants of the creep law within the inelastic finite element calculation had been fitted using data from

uniaxial creep specimen of the same material heat as the component under consideration.

Fig. 33 Comparison of calculated and experimental local creep deformation for pipe elbows. FE, finite

element

References cited in this section

14. K. Kussmaul, D. Blind, E. Roos, and D. Sturm, The Leak-Before-Break Behavior of Pipes, VGB

Kraftwerkstech., Vol 70 (No. 7), July 1990, p 465–477

44. K. Kussmaul, D. Sturm, W. Stoppler, and D. Müller-Ecker, “Experimental Investigation on the Crack

Opening Behavior of Cylindrical Vessels under Light Water Reactor Service Conditions,” PVP-Vol 62,

1982, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, p 97–134

45. D. Sturm, W. Stoppler, P. Julisch, K. Hippelein, and J. Muz, Fracture Initiation and Fracture Opening

under Light Water Reactor Conditions, Nucl. Eng. Des., Vol 72, 1982, p 81–95

46. K. Kussmaul, W. Stoppler, D. Sturm, and P. Julisch, “Ruling-Out of Fractures in Pressure Boundary

Pipings; Part 1: Experimental Studies and Their Interpretation,” IAEA-SM-269/7, International Atomic

Energy Agency (IAEA), 1983, p 211–235

47. D. Sturm, W. Stoppler, K. Hippelein, J. Schiedermaier, and H. Zhu, “Experimental Investigation on the

Strength and Fracture Behavior of Circumferentially Cracked Piping under Internal Pressure and Outer

Bending Loading,” PVP-Vol 120, 1987, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, p 73–81

48. P. Julisch, D. Sturm, and J. Wiedemann, Exclusion of Rupture for Welded Piping Systems of Power

Stations by Component Tests and Failure Approaches, Nucl. Eng. Des., Vol 158, 1995, p 191–201

49. K. Kussmaul, H. Diem, D. Uhlmann, and E. Kobes, Pipe Bend Behavior at Load Levels Beyond

Design, Trans. SMiRT-13, Vol II, 1995, p 187–198

50. Th. Schwarz, K.-H. Herter, P. Julisch, and W.Stoppler, Experimental Investigation on the Strength and

Fracture Behavior of Degraded Piping Components, Trans. SMiRT-12, Vol F, 1993, p 87–92

51. X. Schuler, D. Blind, U. Eisele, K.-H. Herter, and W. Stoppler, Fracture Mechanics Evaluation of

Cracked Components with Consideration of Multiaxiality of Stress State, Nucl. Eng. Des., Vol 151,

1994, p 291–305

52. X. Schuler, D. Blind, U. Eisele, and K.-H. Herter, Extension of Fracture Mechanics Evaluation Methods

by Consideration of Multiaxiality of Stress State for Piping Components, Nucl. Eng. Des., Vol 158,

1995, p 227–240

53. P. Julisch, H.-J. Hädrich, W. Stadtmüller, and D. Sturm, “High Speed Tensile Tests with Large Pipes to

Cover Dynamic Loading Transients,” PVP-Vol 187, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1990,

p 87–93

54. P. Julisch, H.-J. Hädrich, W. Stadtmüller, and D. Sturm, Load Bearing and Deformation Behavior of

Dynamically Loaded Wide Plate Specimens, Nucl. Eng. Des., Vol 112, 1993, p 93–103

55. W. Stoppler, D. Sturm, K. Hippelein, and A. de Boer, Crack Initiation, Crack Growth and Fracture

Behavior of Large Diameter Pipes with Circumferential Defects under Internal Pressure and

Superimposed Alternating Bending Load, Nucl. Eng. Des., Vol 160, 1996, p 137–152

56. H. Diem, D. Blind, E. Roos, O. Wachter, and E. Tolksdorf, Failure Behavior of Thick-Walled

Austenitic Pipe Bends under Bending Loading at Constant Internal Pressure, Nucl. Eng. Des., Vol 151,

1994, p 269–289

57. G. Katzenmeier, K. Kussmaul, H. Diem, and E. Roos, “The HDR Project—Validation Tests for

Structural Integrity Assessment of LWR Components,” SMiRT Post Conference Seminar No. 2,

Taiwan, Aug 1991

58. H. Diem, L. Malcher, D. Schrammel, and H. Steinhilber, Load Bearing Capacity of an Intact and a

Degraded Pipe System under Repeated Simulated Earthquake Loading, Nucl. Eng. Des., Vol 130, 1991,

p 435–450

59. K. Kussmaul, H. Diem, D. Uhlmann, and H. Hunger, Fatigue and Failure Behavior of a Mechanically

Loaded Ferritic Pipe Bend in High Temperature Water with Elevated Oxygen Content, Trans. SMiRT-

11, Vol F, 1991, p 213–217

60. K. Maile, A. Klenk, V. Obst, and D. Sturm, Load Carrying Behavior of the Primary System of PWR's

for Loads beyond the Design Limits, Nucl. Eng. Des., Vol 119, 1990, p 131–137

61. K. Kussmaul, and K. Maile, “Large Scale High Temperature Testing of Specimens and Components—

An Essential Tool for Structural Integrity Engineering,” International HIDA Conf., Paris, Commissariat

à l'Energie Atomique (CEA)/INSTN, Saclay/Paris, 15–17 April 1998, p 119–124

Testing of Pressure Vessels, Piping, and Tubing

E. Roos, K.-H. Herter, and F. Otremba, Staatliche Materialpruefungsanstalt (MPA), University of Stuttgart

Summary

The safe and reliable operation of systems including pressure vessels, piping, and tubing with high stored

energies has to be guaranteed under all loading conditions. The basis for this are design rules and material

requirements, given in applicable standards. However, the failure behavior of these components cannot be

assessed on this basis; such assessment is only possible using fracture mechanics concepts. These concepts can

be verified using numerous tests on straight pressurized pipes, elbows, T-branches, and nozzles with different

dimensions and made of different materials. The tests have to be conducted with regard to the loading and

environmental conditions and the measuring devices have to be adjusted to the expected damage mechanism.

It can be demonstrated that the assessment of the failure behavior is in good agreement with the experimental

results if the fracture mechanics procedures on the basis of the fracture toughness K

in the linear-elastic

regime and of the initiation value J

in the elastic-plastic regime are used. The calculational procedures based on

strength values of the material lead also to results to the safe side, if the procedure is fitted to the experiments

that have to cover the boundary conditions under consideration.

Testing of Pressure Vessels, Piping, and Tubing

E. Roos, K.-H. Herter, and F. Otremba, Staatliche Materialpruefungsanstalt (MPA), University of Stuttgart

References

1. “Rules for Construction of Nuclear Power Plant Components,” ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,

Section III, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998

2. “Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels,” ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII,

Divisions 1 and 2, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998

3. ASME Code for Pressure Piping, B31, An American National Standard, The American Society of

Mechanical Engineers, 1989

4. German Technical Rules for Steam Boilers (Technische Regeln für Dampf-kessel, TRD), Carl

Heymanns Verlag KG, Cologne, 1998

5. German Technical Rules for Pressure Vessels (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Druckbehälter, AD-Merkblätter),

Carl Heymanns Verlag KG, Cologne, 1998

6. German Safety Standards of the Nuclear Safety Standards Commission (Sicherheitstechnische Regeln

des Kerntechnischen Ausschusses, KTA), KTA Rule 3201 and KTA Rule 3211, Carl Heymanns Verlag

KG, Cologne, latest edition

7. French Code for the Construction of Pressure Vessels (CODAP), Association Francaise des Ingénieurs

en Appareils à Pression (AFIAP), Paris

8. French Code for the Construction of Industrial Piping Components (CODETI)

9. French Design and Construction Rules for Mechanical Components of PWR Nuclear Islands (RCC-M),

Association Francaise pour la Construction des Ensembles Nucleaires (AFCEN)

10. French Design and Construction Rules for Mechanical Components of Fast Breeder Reactors (RCC-M),

Association Francaise pour la Construction des Ensembles Nucleaires (AFCEN)

11. “Unfired Fusion Weld Pressure Vessels,” BS 5500, British Standard Institution

12. K. Kussmaul, German Basis Safety Concept Rules Out Possibility of Catastrophic Failure, Nucl. Eng.

Int., Vol 12, 1984, p 41–46

13. R. Wellein and G. Preuβer, “State of Engineering of the Leak-Before-Break Procedure in Germany,”

Seventh German-Japanese Joint Seminar, 29–30 Sept 1997, MPA Stuttgart

14. K. Kussmaul, D. Blind, E. Roos, and D. Sturm, The Leak-Before-Break Behavior of Pipes, VGB

Kraftwerkstech., Vol 70 (No. 7), July 1990, p 465–477

15. G.M. Wilkowski, R.J. Olson, and P.M. Scott, “State -of-the-Art Report on Piping Fracture Mechanics,”

Report NUREG/CR-6540, BMI-2196, Jan 1998

16. Y. Asada, K. Takumi, H. Hata, and Y. Yamamoto, Development of Criteria for Protection against Pipe

Breaks in LWR Plants, Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping,, Vol 43, 1990, p 95–111

17. C. Faidy, P. Jamet, and S. Bhandari, “Developments in Leak-Before-Break Approaches in France,”

NUREG/CP-0092, March 1988, p 69–82 (available from U.S. NRC)

18. D. Sturm, W. Stoppler, and J. Schiedermaier, The Behavior of Dynamically Loaded Pipes with

Circumferential Flaws under Internal Pressure and External Bending Loads, Nucl. Eng. Des., Vol 96,

1986, p 99–113

19. E. Roos, K.-H. Herter, P. Julisch, G. Bartholome, and G. Senski, Assessment of Large Scale Pipe Tests

by Fracture Mechanics Approximation Procedures with Regard to Leak-Before-Break, Nucl. Eng. Des.,

Vol 112, 1989, p 183–195

20. Y. Asada, K. Takumi, N. Gotoh, T. Umemoto, and K. Kashima, Leak-Before-Break Verification Test

and Evaluations of Crack Growth and Fracture Criterion for Carbon Steel Piping, Int. J. Pressure

Vessels Piping, Vol 43, 1990, p 379–397

21. K. Kashima, N. Miura, S. Kanno, K. Miyazaki, M. Ishiwata, and N. Gotoh: A Research Program for

Dynamic Fracture Evaluation of Japanese Carbon Steel Pipes, Nucl. Eng. Des., Vol 174, 1997, p 33–39

22. D. Moulin and P. Le Delliou, French Experimental Studies of Circumferential Through Wall Cracked

Austenitic Pipes under Static Loading, Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping, Vol 65, 1996, p 343–352

23. P. Scott et al., “IPIRG-2 Task 1—Pipe System Experiments with Circumferential Cracks in Straight

Pipe Location,” NUREG/CR-6389, Feb 1997 (available from U.S. NRC)

24. K. Shibata, T. Isozaki, S. Ueda, R. Kurihara, K. Onziawa, and A. Kohsaka, “Results of Reliability Test

Program on Light Water Reactor Piping,” Nucl. Eng. Des., Vol 153, 1994, p 71–86

25. G.M. Wilkowski et al., “Degraded Piping Program—Phase II, Summary of Technical Results and Their

Significance to Leak-Before-Break and In-Service Flaw Acceptance Criteria,” March 1984-Jan 1989,

NUREG/CR-4082, Vol 8, March 1989 (available from U.S. NRC)

26. G. Yagawa, Y. Takahashi, N. Kato, M. Saito, K. Hasegawa, and T. Umemoto, Fracture Behavior of

Cracked Type 304 Stainless Steel Pipes under Tensile and Thermal Loadings, Int. J. Pressure Vessels

Piping, Vol 19, 1985, p 247–281

27. G.T. Hahn, M. Sarrate, and A.R. Rosenfield, Criteria for Crack Extension in Cylindrical Pressure

Vessels, Int. J. Fract. Mech., Vol 8, 1969, p 187–210

28. R.J. Eiber et al., “Investigations of the Initiation and Extent of Ductile Pipe Rupture,” Final report, Task

17, BMI-1866, 1966, and BMI-1908, 1971, Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus

29. W.A. Maxey, “Fracture Initiation, Propagation and Arrest,” Fifth Symposium on Line Pipe Research,

1974

30. M.F. Kanninen et al., “Instability Predictions for Circumferentially Cracked Type 304 Stainless Steel

Pipes under Dynamic Loading,” EPRI report NP-2347, Vol 1, 2, Electric Power Research Institute,

April 1982

31. I. Milne, R.A. Ainsworth, A.R. Dowling, and A.T. Stuart, “Background to and Validation of CEGB

Report R/H/R6,” CEGB R/HR6-Rev. 3, Validation, Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB), Jan

1987

32. V. Kumar, M.D. German, and C.F. Shih, “An Engineering Approach for Elastic-Plastic Fracture

Analysis,” EPRI NP-1931, topical report, Electric Power Research Institute, July 1981

33. V. Kumar, M.D. German, W.W. Wilkening, A.R. Andrews, H.G. deLorenzi, and D.F. Mowbray,

“Advances in Elastic-Plastic Fracture Analysis,” EPRI NP-3607, Project 1237-1, final report, Electric

Power Research Institute, Aug 1984

34. A. Zahoor, Circumferential Through Wall Cracks, Ductile Fracture Handbook, Vol 1, EPRI NP-6301-

D, research project 1757–69, Electric Power Research Institute, June 1989

35. P.C. Paris and F. Erdogan, A Critical Analysis of Crack Propagation Laws, J. Basic Eng. (Trans. ASME

D), Vol 85, 1963, p 528–534

36. R.G. Forman, V.E. Kearney, and R.M. Engle, Numerical Analysis of Crack Propagation in Cyclic

Loaded Structures, J. Basic Eng. (Trans. ASME), Vol 89, 1967, p 459

37. “Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fatigue Crack Growth Rates,” E 647-95a, ASTM

38. Research Project 150 0270, “Phenomenological Pipe and Vessel Burst Tests, Phase I und II,” Final

Report 150 0279, MPA Stuttgart, Abschluβberichte 1985 und 1987 (final reports in German)

39. Research Project 150 0304, “Integrity of Components, Phase I und II,” Final Report 150 0304, MPA

Stuttgart, Abschluβberichte 1983 and 1989 (final reports in German)

40. Research Project 150 0618, “Pressure Vessels Subjected to Pressurized Thermal Shock Loading,” Final

Report 150 0618, MPA Stuttgart, Abschluβbericht 1990 (final report in German)

41. “Recommendations for Determining the Fracture Resistance of Ductile Materials,” ESIS P1-92,

European Structural Integrity Society (ESIS), Jan 1992

42. “Procedure for Determining the Fracture Behavior of Materials,” ESIS P2-92, European Structural

Integrity Society (ESIS), Jan 1992

43. H. Clausmeyer, K. Kussmaul, and E. Roos, Influence of Stress State on the Failure Behavior of Cracked

Components Made of Steel, Appl. Mech. Rev., Vol 44 (No. 2), Feb 1991, p 77–92