A Comparison of Fracture Assessment Methods in Several Structural Integrity Assessment Procedures

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiecheng Yang ◽  
Xuedong Chen ◽  
Zhichao Fan
Keyword(s):  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Assessment Method ◽  
Assessment Methods ◽  
Safety Factors ◽  
Specific Calculation ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Fracture Assessment ◽  
Partial Safety Factors ◽  
Assessment Procedures

For the fracture assessment method internationally used in different structural integrity assessment procedures, such as R6, BS 7910, FITNET API 579 and GB/T 19624, this paper gives the results of analytical comparisons in combination with specific calculation examples by comparing different assessment options or levels, the partial safety factors (PSFs), limit load solutions, stress intensity factor solutions, residual stress distribution and treatment methods, secondary stresses and ρ factor solutions etc., which provide a basis for improvement of fracture assessment methods.

The Effect of Bi-Axial Stress on Limit Loads of Structures Containing Surface-Breaking Flaws and its Influence on Structural Integrity Assessments

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liwu Wei ◽  
Isabel Hadley
Keyword(s):  
Surface Crack ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Axial Loading ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Plastic Limit ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Reference Stress ◽  
Fracture Assessment ◽  
Plastic Limit Load ◽  
Assessment Procedures

Fracture assessment diagram (FAD) based fracture assessment procedures are universally adopted by standards/documents including BS7910, R6, API579-1/ASME FFS-1 and FITNET. In the use of a FAD for structural integrity assessment, one important consideration is to determine the load ratio (Lr) which is defined by two equivalent definitions: Lr is either defined as the ratio of reference stress (σref) to yield strength (σY) as in BS7910, or as the ratio of applied load to plastic limit load as in R6. The solutions of reference stress or limit load are given in the assessment procedures for commonly encountered flawed structures such as a plate containing a surface crack and a cylinder containing an external surface crack. Although the solutions given in the various standards are not all the same, they were invariably derived on the basis of analysis of the force and moment equilibrium with regard to a flawed section and none of them has taken into account the effects of bi-axial stressing on a flawed section, thus leading to the likelihood of an overly conservative assessment. In this work, finite element analysis (FEA) of various flawed geometries (plate and cylinder containing surface cracks) was performed to compute plastic limit load, with the focus on understanding the effects of bi-axial stressing on plastic limit load. The geometries assessed include a plate with a surface crack subjected to both uni-axial and bi-axial loading, and a cylinder with circumferentially internal and external surface cracks sustaining a combination of axial loading and internal pressure. The investigation of these cases has demonstrated a significant increase in plastic limit load arising from bi-axial stressing. Comparison of the results of plastic limit load obtained from FEA with those derived from BS 7910 reference stress solutions was carried out to assess the extent of conservatism when the standard solutions are used in the applications containing bi-axial stresses. The implication for structural integrity assessment due to bi-axial stressing was also addressed. A comparison between BS 7910 Level 2B (material-specific FAD) and Level 3C (based on a FAD generated with FEA) procedures was also made and it was shown that whether the Level 3C procedure can reduce the conservatism in an assessment is dependent on individual cases.

Reliability-Based Derivation of Partial Safety Factor for Structural Integrity Assessment

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuo Pan ◽  
Jianping Zhao
Keyword(s):  
Safety Factor ◽  
Fracture Mode ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Random Variables ◽  
Assessment Procedure ◽  
Safety Factors ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Partial Safety Factor ◽  
Partial Safety Factors

When there are uncertainties in the input random variables, or scatter in the material properties, probabilistic assessment is a useful tool for decision making in the field of safety analysis. The partial safety factor (PSF) method was aimed on ensuring that the failure probability did not exceed a target value. In order to be conservative the input value for each random variable during the assessment procedure should be multiplied by the partial safety factors. So it is essentially a deterministic assessment using conservative values of the input random variables and a relatively simple and independent method of assessing failure probabilities using R6 failure assessment diagram. The application of partial safety factors is an important breakthrough of assessment in structures containing defects. In recent years, sets of PSFs for load, defect size, fracture toughness and yield stress had been given in two standards, BS7910 and API579. However, the recommended PSFs in both standards were larger than the original PSFs in PD6493 which was replaced by BS7910. It is therefore a new method of calculating PSFs should be found to prove which is more appropriate and convenient for engineering application. In the case of the partial safety factor method target reliabilities in the range from 0.001 to 0.00001 were considered and new series of PSFs were derived from the results of reliability analysis for the linear elastic fracture mode and elastic-plastic fracture mode. After comparing with the PSFs in BS7910 and API 579, it is concluded that the partial safety factors were generally conservative compared to our research work.

Reliability Analysis of Defect-Containing Structures Using Partial Safety Factors

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liwu Wei
Keyword(s):  
Failure Probability ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
General Trend ◽  
Safety Factors ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Fracture Region ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Elastic Fracture ◽  
Partial Safety Factors ◽  
Collapse Region

Some standards of structural integrity assessment such as BS 7910 and API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 recommend values of partial safety factor (PSF) applied to the deterministic engineering critical assessments of flaw-containing structures to achieve certain reliability levels. However, it is still uncertain as to whether the use of the PSFs can achieve the target reliability level specified in the codes, or excessively exceed the targets (un-conservative) or under-reach the targets (too conservative). This work was undertaken to make investigations into these issues raised from the use of PSFs through case studies involving deterministic fitness-for-service analysis incorporating PSFs and probabilistic fracture mechanics analysis. Two cases, a through-thickness crack and a surface-breaking elliptical crack in a plate subjected to tension, were considered. The results in terms of failure probability from the studied cases have shown a general trend that for each of the four PSFs recommended in BS 7910, the failure probability decreased as the assessments changed from the elastic fracture region to the plastic collapse region in the failure assessment diagram. Some over-conservatism has been found in certain situations from the use of PSFs recommended in BS 7910:2005. Cautions are given for application of the PSFs for integrity assessment of the structures and components containing flaws.

The Numerical Investigation of Plastic Collapse Loads in Cylinders Containing Circumferential Flaws Under a Combined Loading of Internal Pressure, Tension and Bending Moment

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liwu Wei
Keyword(s):  
Surface Crack ◽  
Bending Moment ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Plastic Collapse ◽  
Plastic Limit ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Reference Stress ◽  
Fracture Assessment ◽  
Plastic Limit Load ◽  
Assessment Procedures

Fracture assessment diagram (FAD) based fracture assessment procedures are universally adopted by standards/documents including BS7910, R6, API579-1/ASME FFS-1 and FITNET. In the use of a FAD for structural integrity assessment, one important consideration is to determine the load ratio (Lr) which is defined by two equivalent definitions: Lr is either defined as the ratio of reference stress (σref) to yield strength (σY) as in BS7910, or as the ratio of applied load to plastic limit load as in R6. The solutions of reference stress or limit load are given in the assessment procedures for commonly encountered flawed structures such as a plate containing a surface crack and a cylinder containing an external surface crack. Although the solutions given in the various standards are not all the same, they were invariably derived on the basis of analysis of the force and moment equilibrium with regard to a flawed section and few of them has taken into account the effects of bi-axial stressing on a flawed section, thus remaining a question whether these solutions are still valid in situations involving bi-axial loading such as the presence of pressure in a cylinder in addition to axial tension and bending. In this work, finite element analysis (FEA) of plastic collapse was systematically performed on circumferential internal surface cracks in a cylinder subjected to various combined loads, including combined tension and pressure, combined bending moment and pressure, and combined tension, bending moment and pressure. The focus was on understanding the effects of bi-axial stressing due to pressure on plastic limit load. The investigation of these cases has demonstrated a significant effect in plastic limit load arising from the application of pressure introducing a state of bi-axial stressing. Comparison of the results of plastic limit load obtained from FEA with those derived from BS 7910 reference stress solutions was carried out to assess the applicability when the standard solutions of plastic collapse are used in the applications containing bi-axial stresses.

Structural Integrity for Nuclear Power Plant Against Excessive Load on Design Extension Condition

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daigo Watanabe ◽  
Kiminobu Hojo
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Safety Factors ◽  
Design Code ◽  
Acceptance Criteria ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Current Design ◽  
Factor Design ◽  
Excessive Load ◽  
Load And Resistance Factor

This paper introduces an example of structural integrity evaluation for Light Water Reactor (LWR) against excessive loads on the Design Extension Condition (DEC). In order to assess the design acceptance level of DEC, three acceptance criteria which are the stress basis limit of the current design code, the strain basis limit of the current design code and the strain basis limit by using Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) method were applied. As a result the allowable stress was increased by changing the acceptance criteria from the stress basis limit to the strain basis limit. It is shown that the practical margin of the LWR’s components still keeps even on DEC by introducing an appropriate criterion for integrity assessment and safety factors.

BS 7910: History and Future Developments

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabel Hadley
Keyword(s):  
Assessment Methods ◽  
Weld Strength ◽  
Assessment Procedure ◽  
Metallic Structures ◽  
History Of ◽  
Fracture Assessment ◽  
Offshore Industry ◽  
Crack Tip Constraint ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Assessment Procedures

BS 7910, the UK procedure for the assessment of flaws in metallic structures, was first published almost 30 years ago in the form of a fracture/fatigue assessment procedure, PD6493. It provided the basis for analysing fabrication flaws and the need for repair in a rational fashion, rather than relying on long-established (and essentially arbitrary) workmanship rules. The UK offshore industry in particular embraced this new approach to flaw assessment, which is now widely recognised by safety authorities and specifically referred to in certain design codes, including codes for pressure equipment. Since its first publication in 1980, PD6493/BS 7910 has been regularly maintained and expanded, taking in elements of other publications such as the UK power industry’s fracture assessment procedure R6 (in particular the Failure Assessment Diagram approach), the creep assessment procedure PD6539 and the gas transmission industry’s approach to assessment of locally thinned areas in pipelines. The FITNET European thematic network, run between 2002 and 2006, has further advanced the state of the art, bringing in assessment methods from SINTAP (an earlier European research project), R6, R5 and elsewhere. In particular, the FITNET fracture assessment methods represent considerable advances over the current BS 7910 methods; for example, weld strength mismatch can be explicitly analysed by using FITNET Option 2, and crack tip constraint through Option 5. Corrosion assessment methods in FITNET are also more versatile than those of BS 7910, and now include methods for vessels and elbows as well as for pipelines. In view of these recent advances, the BS 7910 committee has decided to incorporate many elements of the FITNET procedure into the next edition of BS 7910, to be published c2012. This paper summarises the history of the development of BS 7910, its relationship with other flaw assessment procedures (in particular FITNET and R6) and its future.

Integrity Assessment of Pressure Components With Local Hot Spots

2005 ◽  
Vol 127 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Seshadri
Keyword(s):  
Hot Spots ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Refractory Lining ◽  
Assessment Method ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Industrial Processes ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Piping Systems ◽  
Further Development ◽  
Level 2

Local hot spots can occur in some pressure vessels and piping systems used in industrial processes. The hot spots could be a result of, for instance, localized loss of refractory lining on the inside of pressure components or due to a maldistribution of process flow within vessels containing catalysts. The consequences of these hot spots on the structural integrity of pressure components are of considerable importance to plant operators. The paper addresses structural integrity issues in the context of codes and standards design framework. Interaction of hot spots, as is the case when multiple hot spots occur, is addressed. An assessment method, suitable for further development of a Level 2 “Fitness-for-Service” methodology, is discussed and applied to a commonly used pressure component configuration.

Reliability Assessment of Piping With Cracks Using Advanced First-Order Second-Moment Method

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinji Yoshida ◽  
Hideo Machida
Keyword(s):  
Safety Factor ◽  
Reliability Assessment ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Service Level ◽  
Assessment Method ◽  
J Integral ◽  
Reference Stress ◽  
First Order Second Moment ◽  
Fracture Assessment ◽  
Second Moment Method

This paper describes applicability of the 2 parameter assessment method using a reference stress method from the viewpoint of reliability. The applicability of the reference stress method was examined comparing both the GE-EPRI method. As a result, J-integral and limit load at the time of fracture evaluated by the reference stress method is almost equivalent to that by the GE-EPRI method. Furthermore, the partial safety factor (PSF) evaluated by reliability assessment has little difference between two methods, and the required safety factor is enveloped by the safety factor for Service Level-A and B defined in fitness for service (FFS) codes. These results show that of the reference stress method is applicable for J-integral calculation in fracture assessment.

Plastic Limit Loads for Through-Wall Cracked Pipes Using Finite Element Limit Analysis

2006 ◽  
Vol 321-323 ◽  
pp. 724-728
Author(s):  
Nam Su Huh ◽  
Yoon Suk Chang ◽  
Young Jin Kim
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Limit Analysis ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Plastic Behavior ◽  
Plastic Limit ◽  
Integrity Assessment ◽  
Perfectly Plastic ◽  
Elastic Perfectly Plastic

The present paper provides plastic limit load solutions for axial and circumferential through-wall cracked pipes based on detailed three-dimensional (3-D) finite element (FE) limit analysis using elastic-perfectly plastic behavior. As a loading condition, both single and combined loadings are considered. Being based on detailed 3-D FE limit analysis, the present solutions are believed to be valuable information for structural integrity assessment of cracked pipes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document