Research on the Closure Effect of Circumferential Through-Wall Cracks in Stainless Steel Piping under Residual Stress
-
摘要: 管道环向穿壁裂纹在不同载荷水平作用下的张开位移预测值是破前漏技术应用的关键核心参数。针对具有代表性几何尺寸的奥氏体不锈钢管道，采用数值分析和对比验证相结合的方法，基于工程中实际测得的材料性能曲线研究了典型焊接残余应力作用下穿壁裂纹临界闭合应力的变化规律。分析结果表明，目前的通用电气有限公司/美国电力研究院（GE/RPRI）方法和美国核管会技术报告NUREG/CR-6837修正方法均低估了由美国机械工程师协会（ASME）规范工作小组推荐的简化残余应力场所导致的管道环向穿壁裂纹闭合效应。此外，分析了环向穿壁裂纹闭合状态下管道的失效模式，在此基础上进一步讨论了裂纹闭合效应对破前漏技术应用的影响，为后续工程实践提供了可借鉴的技术观点。Abstract: The predicted value of the opening displacement of the circumferential through-wall crack (CTWC) in piping under different load levels is a critical parameter for the application of the leak-before-break (LBB) technology. In this paper, both numerical analysis and comparative verification are adopted to study the variation law of critical closure stress of CTWC under typical welding residual stress (WRS) based on actual measured material property curve in engineering for austenitic stainless steel piping with representative geometric dimensions. The analysis results reveal that both the current GE/RPRI method and the NUREG/CR-6837 correction method have underestimated the closure effect of CTWC in piping caused by simplified residual stress field recommended by the Task Group on Codes of American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME). In addition, the failure mode of piping under CTWC closure state is explored. On this basis, the influence of crack closure effect on the application of LBB technology is further discussed, which provides technical ideas that can be used as a reference for subsequent engineering practice.
-
Key words:
- Welding residual stress /
- Through-wall crack /
- Closure effect /
- Leak-before-break /
- Stainless steel
-
图 1 分析模型示例
Ri—管道内半径；Ro—管道外半径；L—管道长度的一半；δ—裂纹COD
Figure 1. Example of the Analysis Model
图 2 模型约束条件
U1、U2、U3—x、y、z三个方向的平动自由度（U1在背面无法示出）；UR1、UR2、UR3—绕x、y、z轴的转动自由度
Figure 2. Model Constraints
图 4 薄壁管道数值分析结果对比验证
计算参数为：Ro=51 mm、t=8.9 mm、θ=0.2π、M=8.83 kN·m
Figure 4. Comparison Validation of Numerical Analysis Results of Thin-Walled Pipe
图 5 厚壁管道数值分析结果对比验证
计算参数为：Ro=201 mm、t=26.41 mm、θ=0.12π、M=522.07 kN·m
Figure 5. Comparison Validation of Numerical Analysis Results of Thick-Walled Pipe
图 6 残余应力导致裂纹闭合现象示意图
Figure 6. Schematic Diagram of Crack Closure Induced by Residual Stress
图 7 残余应力导致外壁点位移值
Figure 7. Displacement Value of Outer Wall Point Caused by Residual Stress
图 9 不同半裂纹角度下临界闭合应力
Figure 9. Critical Closure Stress under Different Semi-Crack Angles
图 10 不同壁厚下的临界闭合应力
Figure 10. Critical Closure Stresses under Different Wall Thicknesses
表 1 材料性能
Table 1. Material Properties
参数 数值 拉伸应力强度Su/MPa 585 屈服应力强度Sy/MPa 240 弹性模量/MPa 187777 R-O方程系数α 7.664 R-O方程指数n 3.882 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 有限元分析模型输入参数
Table 2. Input Parameters of Finite Element Analysis Model
参数 取值 t/mm 7.5、15、22.5、30、40 θ 0.0625π、0.125π、0.25π、0.45π R/t 5、10、20 残余应力 有/无
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 裂纹闭合应力与可监测应力对比
Table 3. Comparison of Crack Closure Stress and Monitored Stress
t/mm θ 闭合应力/MPa 可监测应力/MPa 15 0.0625π 104.61 96.53 15 0.45π 9.67 35.16 40 0.0625π 32.52 174.09 40 0.45π 27.25 29.29
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] WICHMAN K, LEE S. Development of USNRC standard review plan 3.6. 3 for leak-before-break applications to nuclear power plants[J]. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 1990, 43(1-3): 57-65. doi: 10.1016/0308-0161(90)90092-V [2] USNRC. Evaluation of potentials for pipe breaks: NUREG-1061[R]. Washington: NRC, 1984. [3] NAMBURU S D, CHEBOLU L R, SUBRAMANIAN A K, et al. Influence of weld residual stresses on ductile crack behavior in AISI type 316LN stainless steel weld joint[C]//ASME 2018 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference. Prague: ASME, 2018. [4] COULES H, SMITH D. Upper bound estimates of the contribution of an unknown residual stress field to stress intensity factor[C]//Proceedings of the ASME 2015 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference. Boston, Massachusetts: ASME, 2015. [5] WEBSTER G A, DAVIES C M, NIKBIN K M. Prediction of creep crack growth in the presence of residual stress[J]. Materials at High Temperatures, 2011, 28(3): 165-171. doi: 10.3184/096034011X13119610349738 [6] GHADIALI N, WILKOWSKI G, RAHMAN S, et al. Deterministic and probabilistic evaluations for uncertainty in pipe fracture parameters in leak-before-break and in-service flaw evaluations: NUREG/CR-6443[R]. Washington, DC, USA: Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1996. [7] NORRIS D. PICEP (pipe crack evaluation computer program): NP-3596-SR[R]. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI, 1987. [8] RAHMAN S, BRUST F W, GHADIALI N, et al. Crack-opening-area analyses for circumferential through-wall cracks in pipes - Part I: analytical models[J]. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 1998, 75(5): 357-373. doi: 10.1016/S0308-0161(97)00081-1 [9] MÅNGÅRD D, HANNES D. Estimates of J-integral and COD for circumferential through wall cracks under global bending including the effect of pipe end restraint: 2020-16[R]. Stockholm: Swedish Radiation Safety Authority, 2020. [10] RAHMAN S, BRUST F, GHADIALI N, et al. Recent evaluations of crack-opening-area in circumferentially cracked pipes: NUREG/CP-0155[R]. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1997. [11] MIRZAEE-SISAN A, WU G. Residual stress in pipeline girth welds-A review of recent data and modelling[J]. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 2019, 169: 142-152. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpvp.2018.12.004 [12] SCOTT P, OLSON R, BOCKBRADER J, et al. The Battelle integrity of nuclear piping (BINP) program final report: appendices: NUREG/CR-6837[R]. Washington, DC, USA: Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2005. [13] RAHMAN S, GHADIALI N, WILKOWSKI G M, et al. Crack-opening-area analyses for circumferential through-wall cracks in pipes—Part III: off-center cracks, restraint of bending, thickness transition and weld residual stresses[J]. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 1998, 75(5): 397-415. doi: 10.1016/S0308-0161(97)00083-5 [14] MACUROVA K, TICHY R, STRNADEL B. Modification of leak before break criterion with focus on the residual stress[C]//Proceedings of the ASME 2010 Pressure Vessels and Piping Division/K-PVP Conference. Bellevue, Washington: ASME, 2010. [15] SHIM D J, KURTH E, BRUST F, et al. Crack-opening displacement and leak-rate calculations for full structural weld overlays[C]//Proceedings of the ASME 2009 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference. Prague: ASME, 2009. [16] HUANG Y F, WANG X, DUAN X J. Evaluation of crack opening displacement of through-wall circumferential-cracked pipe using direct weight function method[J]. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2020, 108: 102595. doi: 10.1016/j.tafmec.2020.102595 [17] SCOTT P, OLSON R J, WILKOWSKI G M. Development of technical basis for leak-before-break evaluation procedures[M]. Columbus: NRC, 2002: 21-36. [18] KICIAK A, GLINKA G, BURNS D J. Calculation of stress intensity factors and crack opening displacements for cracks subjected to complex stress fields[J]. Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, Transactions of the ASME, 2003, 125(3): 260-266. doi: 10.1115/1.1593080 [19] ANDERSON T L, GLINKA G. A closed-form method for integrating weight functions for part-through cracks subject to Mode I loading[J]. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2006, 73(15): 2153-2165. doi: 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2006.04.027 [20] FAN J L, DONG D K, CHEN L, et al. Weight function method for computations of crack face displacements and stress intensity factors of center cracks[J]. Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 2015, 9(33): 463-470. [21] LEWIS T, WANG X. The T-stress solutions for through-wall circumferential cracks in cylinders subjected to general loading conditions[J]. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2008, 75(10): 3206-3225. doi: 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.12.001 [22] EPRI. Evaluation of flaws in austenitic steel piping, Technical basis document for ASME IWB-3640 analysis procedure, prepared by Section XI Task Group for Piping Flaw Evaluation: NP-4690-SR[R]. Palo Alto: Electric Power Research Institute, 1986. [23] HIBBITT K, AND SORENSEN. ABAQUS users guide and theoretical manual [M]. Pawtucket: RI, 2010: 10-60. -
计量
- 文章访问数: 187
- HTML全文浏览量: 47
- PDF下载量: 38
- 被引次数: 0
