Theoretical and Numerical Predictions of Burst Pressure of Pipelines

[+] Author and Article Information
Xian-Kui Zhu

 Battelle Memorial Institute, 505 King Avenue, Columbus, OH 43221zhux@battelle.org

Brian N. Leis

 Battelle Memorial Institute, 505 King Avenue, Columbus, OH 43221

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 129(4), 644-652 (Feb 22, 2007) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2767352 History: Received October 06, 2006; Revised February 22, 2007

To accurately characterize plastic yield behavior of metals in multiaxial stress states, a new yield theory, i.e., the average shear stress yield (ASSY) theory, is proposed in reference to the classical Tresca and von Mises yield theories for isotropic hardening materials. Based on the ASSY theory, a theoretical solution for predicting the burst pressure of pipelines is obtained as a function of pipe diameter, wall thickness, material hardening exponent, and ultimate tensile strength. This solution is then validated by experimental data for various pipeline steels. According to the ASSY yield theory, four failure criteria are developed for predicting the burst pressure of pipes by the use of commercial finite element softwares such as ABAQUS and ANSYS , where the von Mises yield theory and the associated flow rule are adopted as the classical metal plasticity model for isotropic hardening materials. These failure criteria include the von Mises equivalent stress criterion, the maximum principal stress criterion, the von Mises equivalent strain criterion, and the maximum tensile strain criterion. Applications demonstrate that the proposed failure criteria in conjunction with the ABAQUS or ANSYS numerical analysis can effectively predict the burst pressure of end-capped line pipes.

Copyright © 2007 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Three yield theoretical loci and initial yielding experimental data of Lode (10), Ros and Eichinger (11), Lessels and MacGregor (12), Davis (13), Marin and Hu (14), and Maxey (15)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Experimental results of biaxial plastic stress-strain relations for five loading cases: (a) maximum shear stress versus maximum shear strain; (b) octahedral shear stress versus octahedral shear strain; (c) equivalent average shear stress versus equivalent average strain

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Comparisons of ASSY-predicted burst pressure and experimental data of Kiefner (18), Amano (19), Maxey (20), and Netto (21) for different pipeline steels

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Variation of internal pressure with dimension ratio at n=0.15 for three yield theories

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Variation of critical von Mises dimension ratio dc with strain hardening exponent n

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Variation of normalized equivalent stress versus normalized load at n=0.15 for three yield theories

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Variation of critical von Mises equivalent stress versus hardening exponent

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Variation of normalized hoop stress versus normalized load at n=0.15 for the three yield criteria

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

True stress versus true plastic strain curve for the X65 pipeline steel

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Variation of normalized von Mises equivalent stress with normalized load for an X65 steel




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In