0
Research Papers: Seismic Engineering

Ultimate Strength of a Thin Wall Elbow for Sodium Cooled Fast Reactors Under Seismic Loads

[+] Author and Article Information
Tomoyoshi Watakabe

Japan Atomic Energy Agency,
4002 Narita,
Oarai, Ibaraki 311-1393, Japan
e-mail: watakabe.tomoyoshi@jaea.go.jp

Kazuyuki Tsukimori

Japan Atomic Energy Agency,
2-1 Shiraki,
Tsuruga, Fukui 919-1279, Japan
e-mail: tsukimori.kazuyuki@jaea.go.jp

Seiji Kitamura

Japan Atomic Energy Agency,
2-1 Shiraki,
Tsuruga, Fukui 919-1279, Japan
e-mail: kitamura.seiji@jaea.go.jp

Masaki Morishita

Japan Atomic Energy Agency,
4002 Narita,
Oarai, Ibaraki 311-1393, Japan
e-mail: morishita.masaki@jaea.go.jp

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received March 30, 2015; final manuscript received September 15, 2015; published online November 19, 2015. Assoc. Editor: David L. Rudland.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 138(2), 021801 (Nov 19, 2015) (10 pages) Paper No: PVT-15-1054; doi: 10.1115/1.4031721 History: Received March 30, 2015; Revised September 15, 2015

With a purpose of identifying the failure mode and associating the ultimate strength of piping components against seismic integrity, many kinds of failure tests have been conducted for thick wall piping for light water reactors (LWRs). However, there are little failure test data on thin wall piping for sodium cooled fast reactors (SFRs). In this paper, a series of failure tests on thin wall elbows for SFRs is presented. Based on the tests, the failure mode of a thin wall piping component under seismic loads was identified to be fatigue. The safety margin included in the current design methodology was clarified quantitatively.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Suzuki, K. , Namita, Y. , Abe, H. , Ichihashi, I. , Suzuki, K. , Ishiwata, M. , Fujiwaka, T. , and Yokota, H. , 2002, “ Seismic Proving Test of Ultimate Piping Strength (Current Status of Preliminary Tests—II),” ASME Paper No. ICONE10-22225.
Suzuki, K. , Namita, Y. , Abe, H. , Ichihashi, I. , Suzuki, K. , Ishiwata, M. , Fujiwaka, T. , and Tai, K. , 2002, “ Seismic Proving Test of Ultimate Piping Strength (Test Results on Piping Component and Simplified Piping System),” ASME Paper No. PVP2002-1403.
Suzuki, K. , Abe, H. , and Suzuki, K. , 2004, “ Seismic Proving Test of Ultimate Piping Strength (Ultimate Strength Test),” ASME Paper No. PVP2004-2954.
Nakamura, I. , Otani, A. , Sato, Y. , Takada, H. , Takahashi, K. , and Shibutani, T. , 2011, “ Investigation of Seismic Safety Capacity of Aged Piping System Shaking Table Test on Piping Systems With Wall Thinning by E-Defense,” ASME Paper No. PVP2011-57560.
Otani, A. , Nakamura, I. , Takada, H. , and Shiratori, M. , 2011, “ Consideration on Seismic Design Margin of Elbow in Piping,” ASME Paper No. PVP2011-57146.
Nuclear Standards Committee of JEA, 2008, “ Technical Code for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants,” Japan Electric Association, Tokyo, Paper No. JEAC4601-2008 (in Japanese).
Sakai, M. , Hagiwara, Y. , and Yamamoto, K. , 1994, “ Ultimate Strength of Thin-Walled Elbow Under Seismic Loadings,” Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, Tokyo, Report No. U94012 (in Japanese).
Watakabe, T. , Kitamura, S. , Tsukimori, K. , and Morishita, M. , 2013, “ Study on Ultimate Strength Thin-Wall Piping Components for Fast Breeder Reactors Under Seismic Loading,” 22nd International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMiRT-22), San Francisco, CA, Aug. 18–23, pp. 1575–1584.
FINAS Ver. 21.0 Manual (in Japanese).
Code for Nuclear Power Generation Facilities, 2012, “ Rules on Design and Construction for Nuclear Power Plants,” Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers, Shinjuku-ku, Japan, Paper No. JSME S NC1-2012 (in Japanese).
Kanasaki, H. , Nomura, Y. , Asada, S. , Nakamura, T. , and Tanaka, M. , 2010, “ Study on Design Fatigue Curve for Austenitic Stainless Steels in Air,” M&M Conference of JSME, Pasadena, CA, Mar. 1–3, pp. 717–719.
Nuclear Safety Bureau, 1984, “Seismic Design Standard in Nuclear Facilities for Sodium Cooling Type Fast Breeder Reactor Plants,” Nuclear Safety Bureau, Science and Technology Agency, Chiyoda, Tokyo, Japan, (in Japanese).
Nuclear Safety Bureau, 2004, “Technical Standard in Nuclear Facilities for Sodium Cooling Type Fast Breeder Reactor Plants,” Nuclear Safety Bureau, Science and Technology Agency, Chiyoda, Tokyo, Japan, (in Japanese).

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Shaking table system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic drawing of the test setup and the measurement point

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Input wave used in the failure test LE1-4: (a) time history wave and (b) response spectra

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Observation of crack at the elbows: (a) LE1, (b) LE2, and (c) LE3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison between hysteresis loop of the failure test and load deformation curve of the static test

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Sectional shape near the center section of the elbow

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of the response acceleration in the test and the linear response acceleration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Frequency and equivalent damping ratio of the test specimen in the test LE1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Analysis model of FEA

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Material property of the analysis model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison between the test and the analysis in LE2-1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Hoop strain distribution at the maximum displacement in FEA

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Procedure to predict fatigue life

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Prediction results of fatigue life: (a) test specimen LE1, (b) test specimen LE2, and (c) test specimen LE3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Geometrical shape of the elbow at the test setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Primary stress evaluation results

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Procedure of design fatigue evaluation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Fatigue evaluation results: (a) test specimen LE1, (b) test specimen LE2, and (c) test specimen LE3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Factor of design margin

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