0
Pipeline Systems

Probabilistic Transgranular Stress Corrosion Cracking Analysis for Oil and Gas Pipelines

[+] Author and Article Information
Sikder M. Hasan1

Process Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science,  Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL, A1B 3X5, Canadamsh678@mun.ca

Faisal Khan

Process Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science,  Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL, A1B 3X5, Canadafikhan@mun.ca

Shawn Kenny

Wood Group Chair in Arctic and Harsh Environments Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science,  Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL, A1B 3X5, Canadaspkenny@mun.ca

1

Corresponding author.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 134(5), 051701 (Sep 10, 2012) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4006125 History: Received October 14, 2011; Revised November 19, 2011; Published September 10, 2012; Online September 10, 2012

The crack morphology of transgranular stress corrosion cracking (TGSCC) suggests that the mechanism of growth and the condition at which TGSCC occur is different than that of intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC). Several attempts have been made to characterize IGSCC probabilistically; however, limited effort has been noticed for TGSCC. This paper attempts to analyze TGSCC probabilistically. The study includes assessment of probability of failure for low pH, TGSCC by R6 approach/BS 7910 approach/API 579 approach, which considers plastic yielding and linear elastic fracture mechanics, CSA Z 662-07 burst model approach and author’s proposed strain-based approach. The paper observes that failure assessment diagram (FAD) based approaches (R6, BS 7910, and API 579) calculate least failure probability compared to CSA Z 662-07 burst model approach. The authors also noticed that their proposed hoop strain-based approach calculates closely to CSA Z 662-07 burst model approach. Finally, the authors justified the rationality of the results obtained by their approach.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Cracks and stresses in pipeline

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Typical sustained load (stress corrosion) cracking response in terms of steady state crack growth rate (left) and time (right) [7]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Fatigue crack growth phenomenon indicating three regions of crack propagation [7]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Process diagram of the predictive model

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

FAD according to R6 approach [21] or API 579 [19]/BS 7910 [20]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Burst-pressure/failure-strain capacity of defected pipe depending on extent of corrosion (a) burst-pressure ratio, Pb /Pi and (b) failure strain ratio, ɛ2/ɛ1 as function of normalized corrosion length

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Limiting acceptance curve for crack-like indications (based on level III FAD) [36]

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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