0
Research Papers: Design and Analysis

Fully-Plastic Strain-Based J Estimation Scheme for Circumferential Surface Cracks in Pipes Subjected to Reeling

[+] Author and Article Information
Luís F. S. Parise

Department of Naval Architecture and
Ocean Engineering,
University of São Paulo,
São Paulo, SP 05508-900, Brazil
e-mail: luis.parise@usp.br

Claudio Ruggieri

Department of Naval Architecture and
Ocean Engineering,
University of São Paulo,
São Paulo, SP 05508-900, Brazil
e-mail: claudio.ruggieri@usp.br

Noel P. O'Dowd

Department of Mechanical,
Aeronautical and Biomedical Engineering,
Materials and Surface Science Institute,
University of Limerick,
Castletroy, Co.,
Limerick, Ireland
e-mail: Noel.ODowd@ul.ie

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received June 24, 2013; final manuscript received July 26, 2014; published online February 23, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Allen C. Smith.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 137(4), 041204 (Aug 01, 2015) (8 pages) Paper No: PVT-13-1102; doi: 10.1115/1.4028111 History: Received June 24, 2013; Revised July 26, 2014; Online February 23, 2015

Modern installation techniques for marine pipelines and subsea risers are often based on the reel-lay method, which introduces significant (plastic) strains on the pipe during reeling and unreeling. The safe assessment of cracklike flaws under such conditions requires accurate estimations of the elastic–plastic crack driving forces, ideally expressed in a strain-based formulation to better account for the displacement controlled nature of the reeling method. This paper aims to facilitate such assessments by presenting a strain-based expression of the well-known Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) estimation scheme for the J integral, which is directly based upon fully plastic descriptions of fracture behavior under significant plasticity. Parametric finite element simulations of bending of circumferentially cracked pipes have been conducted for a set of crack geometries, pipe dimensions, and material hardening properties representative of current applications. These provide the numerical assessment of the crack driving force upon which the nondimensional factors of the EPRI methodology, which scale J with applied strain, are derived. Finally, these factors are presented in convenient graphical and tabular forms, thus allowing the direct and accurate assessment of the J integral for circumferentially cracked pipes subjected to reeling. Further results show that crack driving force values estimated using the proposed methodology and the given g1 factors are in very close agreement to those obtained directly from the finite element simulations.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Kyriakides, S., and Corona, E., 2007, Mechanics of Offshore Pipelines, Vol. 1: Buckling and Collapse, Elsevier. Available at: http://store.elsevier.com/Mechanics-of-Offshore-Pipelines/Stelios-Kyriakides/isbn-9780080551401/
British Standard Institution, 2005, Guide on Methods for Assessing the Acceptability of Flaws in Metallic Structures, Paper No. BS 7910.
American Petroleum Institute, 2007, Fitness-for-Service, No. API 579/ASME FFS-1.
Budden, P. J., 2006, “Failure Assessment Diagram Methods for Strain-Based Fracture,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 73(5), pp. 537–552. [CrossRef]
Nourpanah, N., and Taheri, F., 2010, “Development of a Reference Strain Approach for Assessment of Fracture Response of Reeled Pipelines,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 77(12), pp. 2337–2353. [CrossRef]
Ainsworth, R. A., 1984, “The Assessment of Defects in Structures of Strain Hardening Materials,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 19(4), pp. 633–642. [CrossRef]
Linkens, D., Formby, C. L., and Ainsworth, R. A., 2000, “A Strain-Based Approach to Fracture Assessments: Example Applications,” 5th International Conference on Engineering Structural Integrity Management, pp. 45–52. Available at: https://getinfo.de/app/A-Strain-Based-Approach-to-Fracture-Assessment/id/BLCP%3ACN039352631
Tkaczyk, T., O'Dowd, N. P., and Nikbin, K., 2009, “Fracture Assessment Procedures for Steel Pipelines Using a Modified Reference Stress Solution,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 131(3), p. 031409. [CrossRef]
Budden, P. J., and Ainsworth, R. A., 2012, “The Shape of a Strain-Based Failure Assessment Diagram,” Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip., 89, pp. 59–66. [CrossRef]
Jayadevan, K. R., Østby, E., and Thaulow, C., 2004, “Fracture Response of Pipelines Subject to Large Plastic Deformation Under Tension,” Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip., 81, pp. 771–783. [CrossRef]
Østby, E., Jayadevan, K. R., and Thaulow, C., 2005, “Fracture Response of Pipelines Subject to Large Plastic Deformation Under Bending,” Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip., 82(9), pp. 201–215. [CrossRef]
Østby, E., and Hellesvik, A. O., 2008, “Large-Scale Experimental Investigation of the Effect of Biaxial Loading on the Deformation Capacity of Pipes With Defects,” Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip., 85(11), pp. 814–824. [CrossRef]
Kumar, K., German, M. D., and Shih, C. F., 1981, “An Engineering Approach to Elastic-Plastic Fracture Analysis,” Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, EPRI Report No. NP-1931.
Chiodo, M. S. G., and Ruggieri, C., 2010, “J and CTOD Estimation Procedure for Circumferential Surface Cracks in Pipes Under Bending,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 77(3), pp. 415–436. [CrossRef]
Tada, H., Paris, P. C., and Irwin, G. R., 1985, The Stress Analysis of Cracks Handbook, 2 ed., Paris Productions, St. Louis, MO.
Marie, S., Chapuliot, S., Kayser, Y., Lacire, M. H., Drubay, B., and Barthelet, B., 2007, “French RSE-M and RCC-MR Code Appendixes for Flaw Analysis: Presentation of the Fracture Parameter Calculation—Part I: General Overview,” Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip., 84(10–11), pp. 590–600. [CrossRef]
Zahoor, A., 1989, “Ductile Fracture Handbook,” Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, EPRI Report No. NP-6301-D.
Ilyushin, A. A., 1946, “The Theory of Small Elastic Plastic Deformations,” Prikadnaia Matematicai Mekhanika, 10, pp. 347–356 (in Russian).
Det Norske Veritas, 2006, Offshore Standard–Fracture Control for Pipeline Installation Methods Introducing Cyclic Plastic Strain. Paper No. DNV-RP-F108.
Mostaghel, N., and Byrd, R. A., 2002, “Inversion of Ramberg-Osgood Equation and Description of Hysteresis Loops,” Int. J. Non Linear Mech., 37(8), pp. 1319–1335. [CrossRef]
Parise, L. F. S., and Ruggieri, C., 2011, “J and CTOD Estimation Procedure for Circumferentially Cracked Pipes Under Combined Bending and Internal Pressure,” ASME 2011 Pressure Vessels and Piping Division Conference, No. ASME PVP 2011.
American Petroleum Institute, 2000, API Specification for Line Pipe. API 5L. Washington, DC. Available at: https://law.resource.org/pub/us/cfr/ibr/002/api.5l.2004.pdf
Simulia-Dassault Systèmes, 2011, Abaqus Analysis User's Manual, Vol. II: Analysis.
Healy, B., Gullerud, A., Koppenhoefer, K., Roy, A., RoyChowdhury, S., Walters, M., Bichon, B., Cochran, K., Carlyle, A., Sobo, J., Messner, M., and Dodds, R., 2012, “WARP3D - Release 17.2: 3-D Dynamic Nonlinear Fracture Analysis of Solids Using Parallel Computers,” Technical Report, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, Civil Engineering Studies, Structural Research Series No. 607.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Pipeline reeling procedure. (a) Schematic view [1]. (b) Corresponding strain history.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Evolution of normalized J against applied bending moment (normalized by moment corresponding to the tensile strength, M0uts), and applied axial strain for a typical circumferentially cracked pipe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic illustration of the pipe configuration, crack geometry, and pure bending loading considered in the numerical analyses

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Typical finite element model employed in the computational simulations: (a) Pipe mesh and rigid link at the remote end; (b) detail of the crack region; and (c) crack tip mesh.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Stress–strain curves for the different materials analyzed in the finite element models (shown up to 4% strain only)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Variation of g1 with normalized crack depth and length for D/t = 10: (a) n = 5; (b) n = 10; and (c) n = 20

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Variation of g1 with normalized crack depth and length for D/t = 20: (a) n = 5; (b) n = 10; and (c) n = 20

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Illustration of g1 factor calculation procedure based on linear regression over numerical data. D/t = 10, a/t = 0.3, θ/π = 0.12, n = 5

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparative evolution of J with applied strain as calculated from finite element analyses and as estimated using g1 factors. D/t = 20, a/t = 0.3, θ/π = 0.12, n = 10

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