Limit Load Solution and Crack Driving Force Estimation Scheme for Embedded Flaws in Pipeline Girth Welds

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aurélien Pépin ◽  
Tomasz Tkaczyk ◽  
Noel O’Dowd ◽  
Kamran Nikbin
Keyword(s):  
Driving Force ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Embedment Depth ◽  
Material Behaviour ◽  
Force Estimation ◽  
Crack Driving Force ◽  
Estimation Scheme ◽  
Girth Welds ◽  
Subsea Pipelines

The acceptability of flaws in a subsea rigid pipeline is usually sanctioned based on the results of an engineering criticality assessment (ECA), carried out considering all loads seen by the pipeline from fabrication to the end of service life. Reel-lay is an efficient installation method, frequently used for installing subsea pipelines. Unlike surface breaking flaws, embedded flaws are not directly assessed in a reeling ECA because the available assessment solutions are too conservative. A work around approach is often used, whereby acceptable surface breaking flaw sizes are deemed acceptable beneath the surface, provided that the embedment depth is equal to or greater than half of the flaw height. However, the results of more recent research work suggest that this approach could be non-conservative in some cases. In this work, a parametric finite-element (FE) study was carried out to assess the effect of the embedment depth, the crack length and the crack height on the load required to cause collapse of the shorter ligament of an embedded flaw. Subsequently, a closed form limit load solution was developed, and compared against available solutions for pipes subjected to tension. A J-based crack driving force (CDF) estimation scheme was developed for a selected material behaviour. Finally, recommendations were made for the direct reeling ECA of subsea pipelines with embedded flaws.

Application of Limit Load Solutions for Engineering Critical Assessment of Embedded Flaws in Evenmatch Pipeline Girth Welds

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aurélien Pépin ◽  
Tomasz Tkaczyk ◽  
Noel O’Dowd ◽  
Kamran Nikbin ◽  
Suresh V. Chettiar
Keyword(s):  
High Strain ◽  
Closed Form Solution ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Form Solution ◽  
Embedment Depth ◽  
Plastic Collapse ◽  
J Integral ◽  
Crack Driving Force ◽  
Fracture Assessment ◽  
Girth Welds

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.

Engineering Treatment Model (ETM) for Crack Driving Force Estimation of Structures With Stress Concentration

1993 ◽  
Vol 115 (2) ◽  
pp. 164-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Su ◽  
A. Cornec ◽  
K.-H. Schwalbe
Keyword(s):  
Stress Concentration ◽  
Driving Force ◽  
High Stress ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Simple Relationship ◽  
Treatment Model ◽  
Force Estimation ◽  
Crack Driving Force ◽  
Corner Cracks

A simple relationship for estimating the limit load of a structure with a crack located in a zone with high stress-strain concentration has been suggested using Neuber’s relation. Then, based on the engineering treatment model (ETM), a method for calculating the crack driving force in the structure with a stress concentration was developed. It has also been proved that under deformation plasticity theory and monotonic loading, the ETM can be justified theoretically. Relationships between ETM and other engineering methods have also been established. The predictions by ETM agree well with the test results of full-scale pressure vessels with corner cracks at the joint between cylinder and nozzle.

Fitness-for-Service Fracture Assessments of Dissimilar Pipe Girth Welds Incorporating New Crack Driving Force Solutions

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodolfo F. de Souza ◽  
Claudio Ruggieri
Keyword(s):  
Driving Force ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Numerical Solutions ◽  
Driving Forces ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Assessment Procedure ◽  
Crack Driving Force ◽  
Alloy 625 ◽  
Girth Welds

The increasing demand for energy and natural resources has spurred a flurry of exploration and production activities of oil and natural gas in more hostile environments, including very deep water offshore production. Currently, structural integrity of submarine risers and flowlines conducting corrosive and aggressive hydrocarbons represents a key factor in operational safety of subsea pipelines. Advances in existing technologies favor the use of CMn steel pipelines (for example, API X65 grade steel) clad or mechanically lined with a corrosion resistant alloy (CRA), such as Alloy 625, for the transport of corrosive fluids. This work focuses on a fitness-for-service defect assessment procedure for strength mismatched welded components incorporating new crack driving force and limit load solutions. The study broadens the applicability of current evaluation procedures for J and CTOD which enter directly into structural integrity analyses and flaw tolerance criteria to provide a fairly comprehensive body of numerical solutions for crack driving forces in mismatched girth welds with circumferential surface cracks. This investigation also provides mismatch yield load solutions which are central to accurately predict failure load in strength mismatched structures subjected to large scale plasticity and ductile behavior. An approach is utilized to analyze the potential effects of the undermatching girth weld on critical flaw sizes for a typical lined pipe employed in subsea flowlines having a girth weld made of Alloy 625.

Effects of Weld Strength Heterogeneity on Crack Driving Force in Stress and Strain Based Design Scenarios

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stijn Hertelé ◽  
Noel O’Dowd ◽  
Matthias Verstraete ◽  
Koen Van Minnebruggen ◽  
Wim De Waele
Keyword(s):  
Driving Force ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Limit State ◽  
Weld Strength ◽  
Force Response ◽  
Crack Driving Force ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Weld Properties ◽  
Girth Welds ◽  
Strain Hardening Behavior

Weld strength mismatch is a key factor with respect to the assessment of a flawed girth weld. However, it is challenging to assign a single strength mismatch value to girth welds, which are generally heterogeneous in terms of constitutive behavior. The authors have recently developed a method (‘homogenization’) to account for weld strength property variations in the estimation of crack driving force response and the corresponding tensile limit state. This paper separately validates the approach for stress based and strain based assessments. Whereas homogenization is reliably applicable for stress based assessments, the strain based crack driving force response is highly sensitive to effects of actual heterogeneous weld properties. The sensitivity increases with increased weld width and decreased strain hardening behavior. For strain based design, a more accurate methodology is desirable, and large scale testing and/or advanced numerical modeling remain essential.

The Effects of Classification of Misalignment-Induced Stresses in Engineering Critical Assessments of Welded Joints With Some Misalignment

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liwu Wei
Keyword(s):  
Welded Joints ◽  
Driving Force ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Surface Cracks ◽  
Plastic Limit ◽  
Secondary Stress ◽  
Butt Weld ◽  
Crack Driving Force ◽  
Plastic Limit Load

In the ECA of a structure or component such as a pipeline girth weld, the bending stress component arising from misalignment across the weld is often classified as primary, partly because standards such as BS 7910 and API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 do not give definitive guidance on this subject. This approach may be over-conservative as the σmis is localised. In order to obtain a more realistic assessment of the structural integrity of structures containing misalignment, it is necessary to understand the conservatism or non-conservatism in an ECA associated with the classification of σmis. To address the above concerns, systematic investigations were carried out of surface cracks in a plate butt-weld including some misalignment, external circumferential surface cracks and external fully circumferential cracks in a misaligned pipe connection. FEA of these cracked welded joints with some misalignment (typically from 1mm to 2mm) was performed to calculate crack driving force and plastic limit load. The results from FEA were compared with the existing solutions of KI and σref in BS 7910 generated by assuming three options of treating the σmis. The three options were: (1) classification of σmis wholly as primary stress; (2) 15% of σmis as primary and 85% of σmis as secondary stress; and (3) classification of σmis wholly as secondary stress. Variations in parameters (eg misalignment, crack size, loading, weld overmatch and base material properties) were taken into account in order to determine the effects of these parameters on plastic limit load and crack driving force. The implication of different classifications of σmis in terms of ECAs of misaligned welded joints was revealed by conducting BS 7910 Level 2B assessments with the use of a FAD. It was found in this work that for the cases examined, use of the σmis as entirely primary bending in an ECA was over-conservative, and even treatment of σmis as entirely secondary bending was generally shown to be still conservative, when compared with the assessments based on FEA solutions. Furthermore, caution should be exercised in using the solutions of KI and σref given in the existing BS 7910 for crack-containing structures subjected to a bi-axial or tri-axial stress state. A non-conservative estimate may result from the use of these solutions which have been derived based on a uniaxial stress condition.

ECAs, FE and Bi-Axial Loading: A Critique of DNV-OS-F101, Appendix A

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Cosham ◽  
Kenneth A. Macdonald
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Driving Force ◽  
Longitudinal Strain ◽  
Axial Loading ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Fe Analysis ◽  
Plastic Limit ◽  
Crack Driving Force ◽  
Failure Assessment ◽  
Plastic Limit Load

Controlled lateral buckling in offshore pipelines typically gives rise to the combination of internal over-pressure and high longitudinal strains (possibly exceeding 0.4 percent). Engineering critical assessments (ECAs) are commonly conducted during design to determine tolerable sizes for girth weld flaws. ECAs are primarily conducted in accordance with BS 7910, often supplemented by guidance given in DNV-OS-F101 and DNV-FP-F108. DNV-OS-F101 requires that finite element (FE) analysis is conducted when, in the presence of internal over-pressure, the nominal longitudinal strain exceeds 0.4 percent. It recommends a crack driving force assessment, rather than one based on the failure assessment diagram. FE analysis is complicated, time consuming and costly. ECAs are, necessarily, conducted towards the end of the design process, at which point the design loads have been defined, the welding procedures qualified and the material properties quantified. In this context, ECAs and FE are not an ideal combination for the pipeline operator, the designer or the installation contractor. A pipeline subject to internal over-pressure is in a state of bi-axial loading. The combination of internal over-pressure and longitudinal strain appears to become more complicated as the longitudinal strain increases, because of the effect of bi-axial loading on the stress-strain response. An analysis of a relatively simple case, a fully-circumferential, external crack in a cylinder subject to internal over-pressure and longitudinal strain, is presented in order to illustrate the issues with the assessment. Finite element analysis, with and without internal over-pressure, are used to determine the plastic limit load, the crack driving force, and the Option 3 failure assessment curve. The results of the assessment are then compared with an assessment using the Option 2 curve. It is shown that an assessment based Option 2, which does not require FE analysis, can potentially give comparable results to the more detailed assessments, when more accurate stress intensity factor and reference stress (plastic limit load) solutions are used. Finally, the results of the illustrative analysis are used to present an outline of suggested revisions to the guidance in DNV-OS-F101, to reduce the need for FE analysis.

An improved crack driving force estimation approach for stress-based engineering critical assessment of reeled pipes

2019 ◽  
Vol 103 ◽  
pp. 102312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yizhe Li ◽  
Baoming Gong ◽  
Giuseppe Lacidogna ◽  
Alberto Carpinteri ◽  
Dongpo Wang
Keyword(s):  
Driving Force ◽  
Critical Assessment ◽  
Force Estimation ◽  
Crack Driving Force

Weld Strength Mismatch in Strain Based Flaw Assessment: Which Definition to Use?

2013 ◽  
Vol 135 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stijn Hertelé ◽  
Wim De Waele ◽  
Rudi Denys ◽  
Matthias Verstraete ◽  
Koen Van Minnebruggen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tensile Strength ◽  
Ultimate Tensile Strength ◽  
Driving Force ◽  
Experimental Validation ◽  
Weld Strength ◽  
Crack Driving Force ◽  
Strain Capacity ◽  
Strength Based ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Girth Welds

Weld strength mismatch is a key factor in the strain based assessment of flawed girth welds under tension. A strength overmatching weld shields potential flaws within the weld itself from remotely applied deformations and consequently reduces crack driving force. Although this effect has been recognized for decades, different weld strength overmatch definitions exist, and it is not yet fully established which of those is most relevant to a strain based flaw assessment. In an effort to clarify this unsolved question, the authors have performed a large series of parametric finite element analyses of curved wide plate tests. This paper provides an experimental validation of the model and subsequently discusses representative results. It is found that crack driving force is influenced by the shape of the pipe metals' stress–strain curves, which influences the representativeness of two common mismatch definitions (based on yield strength and on ultimate tensile strength). Effects of strength mismatch on strain capacity of a flawed girth weld are best described on the basis of a flow stress, defined as the average of yield and ultimate tensile strength. Based on the observations, a framework for a new strain capacity equation is proposed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document