Differences in the Assessment of Plastic Collapse in BS 7910:2005 and R6/FITNET FFS Procedures

Author(s):  
S¸efika Elvin Eren ◽  
Isabel Hadley ◽  
Kamran Nikbin

At present within the fracture assessment routes of different codes and standards, two different options for the assessment of plastic collapse, Lr, are available, namely reference stress and limit load approaches. Recent comparative studies have shown significant differences in the assessment of plastic collapse depending on whether the reference stress solutions in BS 7910:2005 or the limit load solutions in R6/FITNET are used for the calculation of Lr. In this paper, differences with respect to the choice of solutions and boundary conditions will be illustrated and observations regarding the route that the Codes should take with respect to a unified assessment will be discussed.

Author(s):  
Şefika Elvin Eren ◽  
Tyler London ◽  
Yang Yang ◽  
Isabel Hadley

The British Standard, BS 7910 Guide to Methods for Assessing the Acceptability of Flaws in Metallic Structures is currently under revision [1]. Major changes have been undertaken, especially in the fracture assessment routes, and this paper specifically addresses the assessment of proximity to plastic collapse, usually expressed as the parameter Lr via either a reference stress or limit load approach. In the new edition of BS 7910, the reference stress approach has been retained for the assessment of many geometries, mainly for reasons of continuity. However, new limit load solutions (originating in the R6 procedure) are given for use in the assessments of strength mismatched structures or clad plates. In general, a reference stress solution and a limit load solution for the same geometry should deliver the same value of Lr. However, recent comparative studies have shown differences in the assessment of plastic collapse depending on whether the reference stress solutions in BS 7910:2013 or the limit load solutions in R6 are used for the calculation of Lr. In this paper, the extent of the difference in the assessment results with respect to the choice of solutions and boundary conditions are discussed. The results of the assessments in accordance with BS 7910 and R6 are compared with the results of numerical assessments obtained via Finite Element Analysis (FEA). The collapse loads observed in various wide plate tests conducted in the last 20 years are also compared with the collapse loads predicted by BS 910:2013, R6 and FEA. Finally, observations regarding the accuracy of different Codes and FEA are discussed.


Author(s):  
Liwu Wei

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.


Author(s):  
Shinji Yoshida ◽  
Hideo Machida

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.


Author(s):  
Stijn Hertele´ ◽  
Wim De Waele ◽  
Rudi Denys ◽  
Jeroen Van Wittenberghe ◽  
Matthias Verstraete

Curved wide plates are a valuable tool in the assessment of defective pipeline girth welds under tension. Throughout the years, Laboratory Soete collected an extensive database of curved wide plate test results. In an effort to investigate these results through FAD analysis, the authors recently developed a reference stress equation for curved plates. The approach followed is similar to the development of the Goodall and Webster equation for flat plates. This paper elaborates finite element analyses of the equation’s capability to predict plastic collapse. It is found that, although overestimated, the influence of plate curvature is correctly predicted in a qualitative way. For all simulations, the curved plate reference stress equation produced conservative estimations. This indicates that the proposed equation is suited to safely predict the plastic collapse of defective pipeline girth welds. An experimental validation is underway.


Author(s):  
Yuebao Lei ◽  
Peter Budden

Abstract In R6, the J-based failure assessment diagram (FAD) method is used in the fracture assessment, and is underpinned by the reference stress J scheme. Therefore, an assessment using the R6 FAD method is equivalent to a J prediction using the reference stress method. In this paper, the effect of global and local limit load solutions for defective elbows on the reference stress and hence the J predictions is investigated using published three dimensional elastic-plastic finite element (FE) J results, in order to create guidance for users to follow when performing structural integrity assessments of defective elbows using the R6 procedure. The results show that using the global limit load solutions recommended in this paper can lead to good and reasonably conservative J predictions. However, the availability of global limit load solutions is very limited. The results also show that using the local limit load evaluated from the local limit load model recommended in this paper can lead to conservative J predictions for most of the cases considered.


Author(s):  
Aurélien Pépin ◽  
Tomasz Tkaczyk ◽  
Noel O’Dowd ◽  
Kamran Nikbin ◽  
Suresh V. Chettiar

Abstract Engineering Critical Assessment (ECA) is commonly undertaken to derive the acceptance criteria for girth weld flaws in rigid pipelines deployed subsea by low-strain installation methods, such as S-Lay or J-Lay, or high-strain installation methods, such as Reel-Lay. The ECA generally considers the whole load history seen by the pipeline from fabrication to the end of service, and involves fracture and fatigue assessments. Fracture, which is the main focus of this paper, is deemed to have initiated when either (i) the crack driving force, expressed in terms of the J-integral or the Crack Tip Opening Displacement (CTOD), δ, is greater than the materials resistance, or (ii) the applied load exceeds the bearing capacity of the ligament of a cracked structure, also referred to as the plastic collapse or limit load. The robustness of the ECA procedure relies on the accuracy of the assessment solutions. Most flaws in pipeline girth welds are embedded. Unlike surface breaking flaws, embedded flaws are typically not directly assessed in a high-strain fracture ECA because the available assessment solutions are too conservative. A work-around approach is often followed, where the maximum acceptable surface breaking flaw sizes are also considered acceptable below the surface if the embedment depth is equal to or greater than half of the flaw height. Otherwise, an embedded flaw must be reclassified as a surface breaking flaw with a height equal to the sum of the embedded flaw height and embedment depth. To enable the direct fracture assessment of embedded flaws, the authors undertook in a previous work a parametric finite-element (FE) study on the effect of the embedment depth, the crack height and the crack length on the plastic collapse load of the shorter ligament of embedded flaws. Subsequently, a new limit load solution was proposed for the fracture assessment of embedded flaws in evenmatch pipeline girth welds subjected to tension and/or bending. This closed-form solution was shown to be significantly more accurate for estimating the crack driving force and the ligament plastic collapse load than other solutions available in the literature. For some geometries, however, the predicted limit load still needs to be significantly adjusted (increased) to correctly evaluate the J-integral, in a combined tearing and collapse assessment. This suggests that further enhancement of the solution is possible. This paper describes small-scale fracture tests which were undertaken to determine the load required to collapse a smaller ligament of embedded flaws in a modified middle crack tension (MMCT) specimen. A closed-form solution, which can also be used as a flaw reclassification criterion, is fitted to the test results and then compared to the FE-based solution. Finally, recommendations are made for the direct fracture assessment of embedded flaws in evenmatch pipeline girth welds subjected to load or displacement-controlled conditions.


Author(s):  
Afshin K. Motarjemi

Fracture assessment procedures such as BS 7910 and API 579 are formulated based on the Fracture Mechanics concept for assessing integrity of structures such as pipelines, pressure vessels, etc. In the current study those procedures are applied to through-wall and surface cracked pipe geometry under four-point bending. The predicted maximum tolerable applied loads are then compared with pipe full-scale fracture testing results published by Miura et al (2002). Other assessment schemes namely, GE/EPRI, Net-section plastic collapse, LBB.NRC and finally LBB.ENG2, as reported in the same publication are also included in the current paper for sake of comparison. The comparative study showed that BS 7910 and API 579 predict similar maximum tolerable load for through-wall pipes but different value for surface-cracked pipes. Difference in predictions for the latter geometry is owing to the use of different stress intensity factor/reference stress solution by BS 7910 than API 579. However, both procedures provided conservative results compared with the experimental data as well as other engineering routes mentioned in Miura et al (2002).


Author(s):  
Liwu Wei ◽  
Isabel Hadley

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.


1992 ◽  
Vol 114 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Seshadri ◽  
C. P. D. Fernando

A method for determining plastic collapse loads of mechanical components and structures on the basis of two linear elastic finite element analysis is presented in this paper. The r-nodes, which are essentially statically determinate locations, are obtained by GLOSS analysis. The plastic collapse loads are determined for statically determinate and indeterminate components and structures by using the single-bar and the multibar models, respectively. The paper also attempts to unify the concepts of load-control, limit load, reference stress and stress-classification. The GLOSS R-Node method is applied to several component configurations of practical interest.


2011 ◽  
Vol 52-54 ◽  
pp. 43-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Al Emran Ismail ◽  
Ahmad Kamal Ariffin ◽  
Shahrum Abdullah ◽  
Mariyam Jameelah Ghazali ◽  
Ruslizam Daud

This paper presents a non-linear numerical investigation of surface cracks in round bars under bending moment by using ANSYS finite element analysis (FEA). Due to the symmetrical analysis, only quarter finite element (FE) model was constructed and special attention was given at the crack tip of the cracks. The surface cracks were characterized by the dimensionless crack aspect ratio, a/b = 0.6, 0.8, 1.0 and 1.2, while the dimensionless relative crack depth, a/D = 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3. The square-root singularity of stresses and strains was modeled by shifting the mid-point nodes to the quarter-point locations close to the crack tip. The proposed model was validated with the existing model before any further analysis. The elastic-plastic analysis under remotely applied bending moment was assumed to follow the Ramberg-Osgood relation with n = 5 and 10. J values were determined for all positions along the crack front and then, the limit load was predicted using the J values obtained from FEA through the reference stress method.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document