Research Papers: Materials and Fabrication

Viscoelastic and Damage Model of Polyethylene Pipe Material for Slow Crack Growth Analysis

[+] Author and Article Information
Yue Zhang

Institute of Process Equipment,
College of Energy Engineering,
Zhejiang University,
Hangzhou 310027, China
e-mail: zhangyue@zju.edu.cn

Xiangpeng Luo

Institute of Process Equipment,
College of Energy Engineering,
Zhejiang University,
Hangzhou 310027, China
e-mail: xiangpengluo9@163.com

Jianfeng Shi

Institute of Process Equipment,
College of Energy Engineering,
Zhejiang University,
Yuquan Campus,
Room 101, Teaching Building 4,
Hangzhou 310027, China
e-mail: shijianfeng@zju.edu.cn

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received August 15, 2017; final manuscript received March 9, 2018; published online April 19, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Oreste S. Bursi.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 140(3), 031406 (Apr 19, 2018) (12 pages) Paper No: PVT-17-1155; doi: 10.1115/1.4039699 History: Received August 15, 2017; Revised March 09, 2018

Polyethylene (PE) pipe is widely used for oil and gas transportation. Slow crack growth (SCG) is the main failure mechanism of PE pipes. Current SCG resistance testing methods for PE pipes have significant drawbacks, including high cost, time-consuming, and uncertain reliability. Alternative method is in need to reduce the testing time and cost. In this paper, a numerical model is proposed by taking the viscoelastic and damage effect of PE material into account. The material behavior is described on the basis of linear viscoelastic integral constitutive model, along with the damage effect in effective configuration concept. A three-dimensional (3D) incremental form of a viscoelastic and damage model is derived and implemented by abaqus UMAT. It is found that the curve of tensile displacement versus time, as well as the curve of crack opening displacement (COD) versus time from numerical results fit well with those from the standard Pennsylvania Notch Test (PENT; ASTM 1473). Based on the proposed model, SCG failure process is analyzed, and the effects of damage parameters on SCG process are furtherly studied and discussed.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Brown, N. , and Lu, X. , 1995, “ Fundamental Theory for Slow Crack Growth in Polyethylene,” Polymer, 36(3), pp. 543–548. [CrossRef]
Lu, X. , Zhou, Z. , and Brown, N. , 1997, “ A Sensitive Mechanical Test for Slow Crack Growth in Polyethylene,” Polym. Eng. Sci., 37(11), pp. 1896–1900. [CrossRef]
Brown, N. , and Zhou, Z. , 1995, “ Relationship Between the Structure and Slow Crack Growth in Blends of High-Density Polyethylene and Model Copolymers,” Macromolecules, 28(6), pp. 1807–1807. [CrossRef]
Lu, X. , Qian, R. , and Brown, N. , 1995, “ The Effect of Crystallinity on Fracture and Yielding of Polyethylenes,” Polymer, 36(22), pp. 4239–4244. [CrossRef]
Lu, X. , Brown, N. , and Shaker, M. , 1998, “ Effect of γ-Irradiation on Slow Crack Growth in a Copolymer of Polyethylene,” J. Polym. Sci., Part B: Polym. Phys., 36(13), pp. 2349–2354. [CrossRef]
Brown, N. , 2007, “ Intrinsic Lifetime of Polyethylene Pipelines,” Polym. Eng. Sci., 47(4), pp. 477–480. [CrossRef]
Shim, D. J. , Krishnaswamy, P. , Hioe, Y. , and Kalyanam, S. , 2010, “ Viscoelastic Finite Element Modeling of Bimodal High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) Piping Materials for Nuclear Safety-Related Applications,” ASME Paper No. PVP2010-25715.
Rybicki, E. , and Kanninen, M. , 1977, “ A Finite Element Calculation of Stress Intensity Factors by a Modified Crack Closure Integral,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 9(4), pp. 931–938.
Zheng, J. , Luo, X. , Shi, J. , and Zhong, S. , 2013, “ Study on the Failure Mode of Cracking Through the Fitting of Electrofusion Joint,” ASME Paper No. PVP2013-97172.
Dolbow, J. , and Belytschko, T. , 1999, “ A Finite Element Method for Crack Growth Without Remeshing,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 46(1), pp. 131–150. [CrossRef]
Kachanov, L. M. , 1958, “ On the Time to Failure Under Creep Condition,” Lzv. Akad. Nauk. SSSR Otd. Tekhxl. Nuak., 8, pp. 26–31.
Rabotnov, Y. N. , 1963, “ On the Equation of State of Creep,” Prog. Appl. Mech., 178(1), pp. 2-117–2-122.
Lemaitre, J. , 1984, “ How to Use Damage Mechanics,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 80(2), pp. 233–245. [CrossRef]
Schapery, R. A. , 1997, “ Nonlinear Viscoelastic and Viscoplastic Constitutive Equations Based on Thermodynamics,” Mech. Time-Depend. Mater., 1(2), pp. 209–240.
Darabi, M. K. , Abu Al-Rub, R. K. , Masad, E. A. , Huang, C.-W. , and Little, D. N. , 2011, “ A Thermo-Viscoelastic-Viscoplastic-Viscodamage Constitutive Model for Asphaltic Materials,” Int. J. Solids Struct., 48(1), pp. 191–207. [CrossRef]
Darabi, M. K. , Abu Al-Rub, R. K. , and Masad, E. A. , 2012, “ Thermodynamic-Based Model for Coupling Temperature-Dependent Viscoelastic, Viscoplastic, and Viscodamage Constitutive Behavior of Asphalt Mixtures,” Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods Geomech., 36(7), pp. 817–854. [CrossRef]
Lai, J. , 1995, “ Non-Linear Time Dependent Deformation Behavior of High Density Polyethylene,” Ph.D. thesis, Delft University, Delft, The Netherlands.
Williams, M. L. , Landel, R. F. , and Ferry, J. D. , 1955, “ The Temperature Dependence of Relaxation Mechanisms in Amorphous Polymers and Other Glass-Forming Liquids,” J. Am. Chem. Soc., 77(14), pp. 3701–3707. [CrossRef]
Lu, X. , Wang, X. , and Brown, N. , 1988, “ Slow Fracture in a Homopolymer and Copolymer of Polyethylene,” J. Mater. Sci., 23(2), pp. 643–648. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Diagram of decoupling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Stress relaxation curves

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Master curve of relaxation modulus

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Relaxation modulus curves

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Fitting results of relaxation modulus master curves

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparisons of experimental and predicting results: (a) 14 MPa and (b) 16 MPa

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

PENT standard specimen dimension

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Curve of tensile displacement

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Curve of crack opening displacement

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Morphology after fracture

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Finite element model of PENT specimen

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

PENT specimen clamping diagram

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Difference between loading schemes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Comparison of tensile response between experimental measurements and model prediction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Comparison of COD

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Comparison of COD rate

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Comparison of COD rate

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Damage value along the path

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Effect of parameter Γ0φ: (a) tensile displacement-time and (b) damage value-maximum principal strain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Effect of parameter Y0: (a) tensile displacement-time and (b) damage value-maximum principal strain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Comparison of fracture surface: (a) experimental test and (b) numerical test

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Effect of parameter q: (a) tensile displacement-time and (b) damage value-maximum principal strain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Effect of parameter k: (a) tensile displacement-time and (b) damage value-maximum principal strain



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