J.

' '

... .

h'T

"'

APPLICATIONS OF AMERICAN DESIGN CODES

FOR ELEVATED TEMPERATURE ENVIRONMENT

L. K. Severud
March 1980

. . . - - - - - - - - - D ISC LAIMER

--------1

k
nsored by an agency of the United States Government.
This boOk was prepa;ed as an accoul'll 0 ':::an spo11gencv thereof, nor any of their employees, makes anv
Neither the United .... 10111s C":'vernment mes vanv leycil liobilitV nr rewonsibilitV for t~ acoJracv.
warranty, express or lmphed, Of assu. f rmation apparatus. product. or process d1sclv:.!d .. ~r
comple1eness. ~ uselulness of a~:fri in o privatel~ owned righu.. Aelerence herein to anv_spec1f1c
represen1s 1hat 1U. use y,()\Jld not . ":; 1rade name. trademark, manufacturer, .Of otherWise, ~
commercial product, ~ocess, o; serv1~ V d rsement, recommendation, or favoring by th.e United
not necessarily constitute Of imp:~~! e;h: views and opinions ot authors expressed herein do not

~:~::;::::' ,: 1 ;;~h!:: the. Uni;ed States GovernrT'llill ur onv flYN"V thereof.

To be presented at th~ Intern ational

Con f erence, "Engineer i n g Asp ec ts o f
Creep" at the University o f
Sheffield , U. K. in Sept. 15-19 , 1980.

HANFORD ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT LABORATORY

Operated by Westinghouse Hanford Company, a subsid iary of
Westingho11c;p Electric Corporation. under the Department of
Energy Contract No. DE-AC14 - /6r f 02 1 70
COPYRIGHT LICENSE NOTICF

By i<Upl1 nco ol th is 1rt1cl t . lh t Publish er 1nd t o1 1tc 1pie nl 1cknowlr d&" lht U.S
Ga.trnmtnf s 111h1 lo nl11n 1 nonu cl umt . 1oy1il1h tt hc tnst 1n i nd lo 1ny copy111hl
U1Ttinc lh11 p1p<1.

DISTRIBUTION OF THIS GOCUME:ir IS UHL~

DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an
agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States
Government nor any agency Thereof, nor any of their employees,
makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal
liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or
usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process
disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately
owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product,
process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or
otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement,
recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any
agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein
do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States
Government or any agency thereof.

DISCLAIMER
Portions of this document may be illegible in
electronic image products. Images are produced
from the best available original document.

L. K. Severud, BSc, MSc, PE

Manager Of Plant Analysis, FFTF Project
W.:stinghouse Hanford Co. Richland, WA . U. S. A.

Applications of Ame r ican Design Codes For Elevated Temperature Environment

SYNOPSIS
This paper first provides a brief summary of the ASME Code rules of Case N-47. Then an overview of
the typical procedure and analysis ingredients used to demonstrate Code compliance is provided.
Application experience and some examples of detailed inelastic analysis and simplified-approximate
methods a r e given. Recent developments and fu ture trends in design criteria and ASME Code rules a re
also presented.

INTRODUCTION
1.
Many of the Liquid-Metal Fast Breeder
(LMFBR) componenu, upt:.i:atc at rPmpPr11tu;r;e~ and
durations where metal behavior is time dependent .
Although design and operation of components in
the creep ran ge is not new to aircraft and rocket engint:.s, steam turbinP.s, etc ., past American
nuclear power plant designs have all been for
operation in the subcreep regime . Moreover,
components that have been developed for operating
in the creep regimes have usually evolved
gradually over many years of testing and operating experience. In other cases, they had
characteristics such as short lifetime requirements, small size, easy inspection and maintenance, etc. , so that they could be developed
economically am! in a reasonahly short time using
mainly trial and error testing. Since the LMFBR
nuclears plants and their component s must operate safely and r eliably for 20 to 40 years , inservice inspection is much more difficult; and as
the stress analysis methods for 1eJicting inelosLlc time depend en t rP .sponse have grea tly
advanced in the past half-decade, more emphasis
is being plar.ed upon analytical design techniques .
Assurance of structural integrity for
2.
systems subjected to sustained operation in the
creep range and significant thermal transients
requires well-qualified analytical techniques to
predict the time-dependent structural behavior.
uf ..:.omplci~ aomponP nr r.onfiii;1,1rations. Detailed
inelastic analysis procedures, although time consuming and expensive, are required to accurately
predlcL structural response. Simplified methods
are needed for use in design, both in the early
stages for scoping and in the final stages under
conditions where design margins are inherently
larg9
nngning coorginated test programs are
needed to support both the development dnd
verificatiun cf analysis procedures.
3.
The American industry and the U. S.
Dep~rtment of Energy has had a long program of
LMFBR development. Structural desigu cx iterin
have bee n rleveloped and published through ASME
committee activities. This included participation from the U. S. ind ustry, U. S. DOE owned
laboratories (i .e., Oak Ridge Na tional Laboratory, Argo nne National Laboratory, Hanford

Engineering Development Laboratory, Energy Technology Engineering Center) and the U. S. Nuclear
l<egulaLuLy Commisoion
nPsign m~thods and base
technology data have been developed pr imarily
through the the conduct of the major LMFBR projects and the U. S. DOE base technology programs.
The first major U. s. LMFBR project was the Fast
Flux Test Facility (FFTF) built six miles (lO
kilometers) north of Richland, Washington . The
Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) is a primary test
facility for the U. S. LMFBR program. Although
it does not have electrical power generation
components, it has many LMFBR characteristics and
its design and construction has provided a valuable foundation for the U. S. LMFBR program. The
second major U. S. LMFBR project is the Clinch
River Breeder Reactor (CRRR) project. Detailed
technical data, information and reports on project component designs, analysis methods, tests
and experiences from the projects and the base
technology programs are available through the
U. S. DOE Exchange Program.
4.
In dcsignj,ng r.omponents for LMFBR nuclear
power plants, the design analyst is faced with
the task of predicting the component strengths
considering effects of creep and elevated-temperature environments. Both time-independent and
time-dependent failure modes are considered by
performing stress analyses to satisfy the rules
of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,
Section III, Nuclear Power Plant Components. At
thi:i 'n-iting, C:ode Cg.se N- 47 (1592) sets forth
the applicable ASME rul es and limits tor SecLluu
III Class 1 components in elevated-temperature
~ervicc (ref . 1).
The structural failure modes
considered in Case N- 47 (1592) are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

ductile rupture from short-term loading,

creep rupture from long-term loadings,
creep~faLlgu~ foiluro ,
gross distortion due to incremental
collapse and ratcheting,
loss of function due to excessive
deformation,
buckling due to short- term loadings,
creep buckling Jue to long-term loadings.

5.
Rules and analysis methods with application
experience for design to guard against ' failure

L.,

,K. Se'.verud
2

modes 3, creep-fatigue, and 4, ratcheting are

addressed by this paper.

which is Eq. (6) from Code Case N- 47 .

ASME CODE RULES

6.
The ASME Code rules and limits for creepfatigue and cumulative inelastic strain set
forth in Case N-47 (159 2) are of major significance to design as they of ten require detailed
and costly inelastic analy ses for compliance
demonstrations.. Much effort has and continues to
be given to develop simplified and more accurate
methods, with appropriate rules and limits that
maintain the conservatism needed to assure design
inte~rity, plant and public safety.

4. Different evaluation procedures are employed, depending on whether elastic or inelastic

analysis was used. The creep-fatigue calculation
procedures for Code Case N-47 are presen t ed bv
Campbell (ref. 2), and the background for the
present creep-fatigue code rules is discussed in
detail in the ASME criteria background publica
tion (ref. 3). Recent modificat i ons to the
elastic analysis rules were described by Severud
(ref. 4).

7.
The present Code rules are specified in the
framework depicted by the flow diagram of Figure
1. Limits are placed on load-controlled stress,
and strain and deformation. The strain and deformation limits, in the non-mandatory Appendix
T of Case N-47, have been used in the U. S. LMFBR
projects and most design-analysis difficulties
have been associated with the creep-fatigue,
strain limits, and buckling requirements.

OE SIGN

LIMITS

llVELC
SH,VK:I

Creep-fatigue rules and procedures

7.1
The Code rules have the following ingredients:
1. Stress and strain, the number of cycles, and time durations are the primary parameters tha t are used to predict and control creepfatigue damage.
.
2. A semilinear cumulative creep and
fatigue damage assessment is used, with cycle
and time fractions employed for damage counters.
The allowable cumulative damage limit D is a
function of the cycle or t ime-fraction sum. The
equation, . Eq. (5) of (ref. 1), is

f (~) t (_.:)

j=l

Nd

Ta

k=i

~-======--i f

r---r.--:;:.O
MITS

: ~

,...-.._,

IJ~~).r)

LEVEL 0
SfRVICI

ltOLtYITSUMl..USl"Kl"fO
IPfTIOfCCSMONSH.CIFICAJIOfol

illl!!P
r ) COO.fllOU.. lOou.&11 n h
'--"'

~~;;f~ ' \..J

IN llt-MAN ATOll!Y

Fig. 1.

- h.AJo ToC 4'0"-TJlS

=~~~:::~,~
COioH'UflDOUA,.fl h

Flow diagram for elevated temperature

analysis (ref. 1). Reproduced by
permission of the ASME.

(1)

D,

where
D

total creep-fatigue damage (see Fig. Z,

which is T-1420-2 of CC 1592),
n
number of applied cycles of loading
condition j,
number of design-allowable cycles of
loading condition j from the fatigue
curves corresponding to the maximum
metal temperature during the cycles for
the equivalent strain range,
'
time duration load condition k,
= allowabl~ time at ~ given ~rress intensity (for elastic analysis) or at a
given effective stress (for inelastic
analysis) from load k; Td values are
obtained by entering the stress-torupture curve at a stress value equal to
the calculated stress (from load k)
dlvl<le<l Uf the factor Kl= 0 .9.
3. An equivalenr strain range approach to
multiaxial stress-strain effects is used. Rules
for determining the equivalent strain range are
intended to be applicable whether rluLipal
stra:f,ns change directions during the C) :le or not.
The equivalent ct:rf in range i.s
6E

_Vz

equiv -3
(6E

(6E

- 6E ) 2

x-

6E ) 2

6 (6E

xy

(6E
6E

yyz

6E ) 2

flE

zx

(2)
2)

l/2

- I~

o.6

0. 4
0.2

0:-~-:-...,...:--:1-:-~'---""'
0

0.2

0. 4 0.6

l:,ij
Fig. 2.

Code Case N-47 creep-fatigue damage

~uvelopc (ref. 1).

Ratcheting and cumulative inelastic

strain limits
7.2
T~~ r.nrlP places the following limits on the
maximum accumulated inelastic strain for patent
material (see T-1310 of Case N-47):
Strain averaged through the thickness, 17.
Strain al Ll1~ surfaces, du2 ttJ "n equivalent
linear distribution of strain through the
th i.ckness, 27.
Maximum local strain, 5%
Inelastic str ains accumulated in we ld regions are
computed using parent material properties and

L. K. Severud

these calculated strains are limited to one-half

the strain values permitted for the parent
material.
Buckling and instability rules
7.3
The Code has both time- independent and
time-depend ent rules. The limits and desi gn
(actors are placed on load- controlled and stra incontrolled buckling as shown in Table 1.
Ta ble 1
Buckl ing limits and factors
Table T- 1521- 1 ( Case N- 4 7)
rime- 1.ude pcndent Buckling Limits
Load
~

Str ain
Factor

3. 0
3.0
3.0
3 .0
2.5
1.5
2.25

Des i gn Conditions
Operati ng Conditions
Normal
Upset
Emergency

Fault ed
Testing

1.67
1.67
1.4
1.1
1.67

Tabl e T- 1522- 1

Operating <.:orH11 1..luu.J

1. 5
1. 5
1.5
1.25

The load or strain factor is equal to the loatl

(strain) which would cause instant ins tability
divided by the expected load (strain). To protect against load-controlled time-dependent creep
buckling instability , the design has to be demonstrated capable of withstanding during the
specified lifetime a load history obtained by
multiplying the specified Operating condition
loads by the factors given in Table T-1522-1.
The background to these values is given by
Berman, Gangadharan, and Gupta (ref. 5).
CHARACTERISTICS OF LMFBR COMPONENT DESIGNS
8.
The temperatur~~ f or the CRRR and recent
American LMFBR systems are ab ou t 50F lower th an
for FFTF.
Typical design and environment conditions
and their bounds for LMFBR components that are
designed to satisfy the ASME Code are described
in Table 2.
Table 2
---Typical bounds on LMFBR design and
environment conditions
Mater i al s of interest
El'"dr.nnm.-nt,a

Temperatures

304 and 316 stainless steels;

Hi - Fe-Cr alloy 800 . grade 2 ~
2 1/4 Cr-1 Mo
Air, sodi um , gaseous nit rog:eo,
l"IUulll.Ji ..,.,, , .!-!~!.."II. rll\K , Ar, He
Moa t 1y 1000:' - l 050F o r belov
(but some vi t h 1200F &nd a. !'ew

15oon

Design life
Thenna.l. transient events

20 to 30 years
About 1000 tot&l cycles; usuall y
about 20 to 50 cycles vith - 10F/
sec and a 6'1' or ~00.,F , the rec t nf
the transients usually have rates
-4r/ see
less a.nd 6T >300F .
Usually about 0.2 to 0.3S or less ;
ra.rely greater than 0 . '%
High t o lov, Crom 1 cps to 1 cycle
per f tve y.:ars
neutron i rradiation nuence b less
t han 10 20 neutrona/cm2 ( E >O.l MeV}
over th e component. lifeti!lle.

.,r

St rain ra.n!P=
Freque ocy ot st r ains
!rradiation

'IYPICAL PROCEDURES AND ANALYSIS I NGREDIENTS

1.67

Time - Dependent Load- Controlled Buckling

Factor s

No rmal
Upset
Emer gency
FH.ultcd

9.
Pressure stresses are usually low, but
some systems have sizable average stresses on a
section due to gross thermal expansion (i . e.,
piping systems) and mechanical loads (i.e.,
nozzle loads induced on ves sels ) . The critical
stress or strain locations include those wh ere
geometrical discontinuities exi st, l oc a t i ons
where thermal environment discontinuit i es exi st
(i.e., a half- full tank), and locations of t h i ckened wall sections (i.e . , tube- to-tubesheet
connections in heat exchangers) . The stress or
strain field often is characterized as a linear
variation (bending type) through the section .
Of course, nonlinear variations of stress and
strain through the section fr equently occur als o
due to local structural disc ontinuities and non1 i.near thermal gradients.

10.
The designs and stress analyses of LMFBR
elevated- temperature components are initiated
using common elastic analysis methods, and ofte n
finite-element computer techniques are employed.
Due to the high cost and large number of manhours and computer time required f or de tailed
inelastic analyses, extra e ff orts are made to
allow demonstration of compliance with t h e Cod e
design rules using only the less informativ e
elaStlt.: a .. .ilyoii;: finning:;;. These efforts i nvolve
(1) optimizing component configuratiohs Lu t~Juco
discontinuity and peak stress es, (2) removing
weld locations from high stress regions, (3)
selecting or changing material t ype for improve d
streneth properties, (4) improving t hermalhy draulic analyses of sys tem characteris tics t o
remove undue conservatisms in magnitudes of predicted thermal shocks and operating temperatures,
and (5) using simplified and usually conservativ e
ine lastic response approximate methods (ref's .
6, 7, 8). Nonetheless, some components wit h
envelope restrictions and/or with the more severe
operating conditions have to be evaluated using
deta i led inelastic analyses.
11 .
Elastic analysis met hods have advancetl
tremendously in the last de cade, largely due to
computer solutions utiliz i ng finite-element
formulations . Inelastic methods have also
advanced in the last ten years tn the extent
thaL elaatic ~p lastic-cr ee p in cr emental-load
solutions to one- , two- , and s ome threedimensional structures are now procedurally
possible. Reasonable interim guidelines for
inelastic analysis material and constitutive
equations have been developed Pugh (ref. 9).
However, inelastic anal ysis still has shortcomings and analy tical limi t a tions. The mat e r ial
characterization equations and the required
con:Jtitut i ve equations are still in an early
stage of development. Although the computer
large-core requirements, h i gh computing cost,
vast a111ounto of rnmputer printout data, and
overall lengthy stress a nalysis schedules dr e
being reduced, they still impose a significant
deterrent to inelastic analyses.
12.
Fnr FFrf components subjected to significant creep and cyclic load con<llL l u11:i, in <;1 l:>">t ic
structural anal yses were nec e ssary in order to
predict the time- and cycl e-depe ndent stre ss
~nd strain data necessa r y fo r the creep-fa ti gue
and ratchet strain anal ysls.
13.
Normal design analysis practice was to
combine the less severe transients ( such as
normal startup and shutdown) with the two most
seve re transie nts and analy ze the r e sulting

L. K. Severud
4

combination. To account for the total strain

histo r y, an appropriately increased number of
combined transients was used in the creepf atigue and r a t cheting analyses.
14 .
In order to perform the component ele va tedtemperature fatigue (often referred to as a
creep- fatigue interaction) and cumulative strain
analy ses , the incremental and cumulative stresses
and strains (six stress and six strain elastic,
plastic, and creep components) must be computed
for each load step throughout thermal and mechanical load duty specified as the basis for
component design.

adjacent massive members. Loadings conside r ed

in evaluating design adequacy were associated
with the Ul and U2 temperature transients shown
schematically with the pressure h istogram in
Fi g. 4 .
20.
Finite-element methods were us ed in the
analysis of the seal ; the f in i te - element
idealization is shown in Fig . 5 .

DETAILED I NELASTIC ANALYSES

CENTIEA LINE OF I HX

HAN GI NG SU ' l'O" T I HS1

SHE AR KEY FO RC ED Jlll NCi CSKJ I

SHEA R ILOCK

I
I
I
I

15.
Mos t designs are based on elastic analysis,
screening r ules and simplified inelastic ev aluations. Als o , about fo r t y maj or FFTF component
detailed inelastic analyses have been accompl i shed, ,primarily for final design confirmation.
Some of these inelastic analyses and findings
were report ed by Bigelow (ref. 10) in 1975 .
References to a number of the pape rs on these
anal yses are given (ref's 11- 18). Since 1975,
papers on additional FFTF analyses used to
demonstrate elevated temperature Code compliance
were published (ref . 19- 27) . The number of t hese
ine last i c an a l ys e s pe r t ype of compone nt a r c
given in Ta ble 3 .

IUN Ol E SU'f'OIU
FLANGE IY FI

I
Fig. 3.

Table 3

Primary cl osure sea l ( C- s eal)

support struc tuce.

Ma j or de tai led inelas ti c analys e s f or FFTF

Type Component
Pi pelines vith approx. elbov elements
Pipe components ( elbovs, fl ue d he ad
anchors 7 e t c. )
Heat exchanger
Pump
Valves
Tanks
Reactor internals
Misce llaneo us

Number of Ana lyses

f-1s6 HOURs - j

- 7

JOso<'F

HU
HEAT UP

8
9
4
2
4

4
5
4

Costs usually were . $30 , 000 t o $75, 000 with s ome

cos t s up to $100,000 for a total cost of about
$2,000,000. The time rP rptired to carry out an
inelastic anal ysis usually was in the 3 to 6
months range. Clearly, inelastic analys is is
too costly for use in preliminary design and
should be used mostly for final design conf i r mation and technolo gy development.
16 .
To provide an overview of inelastic cy cl e
and ti~e-dependent ana lysis, some of the analysis ingredients and stress- strain response
for the FFTF Intermediate Heat Exchanger ( IHX)
primary closure seal (re t . 12) will be discuss ed .
Then additional examples that show a variety of
stress-$train reoponse are provided.
17 .
The IHX is a count e rflow she ll and tube
type exchanger that transfers heat from the
radioactive primary sodium flowing on the shell
oide to the secondary sodium flowing inside the
tubes . The s truc tural material used in Lite nm
is type 304 stainless st e el.
18 .
The details of t he support reg i on are
hnwn in Fig. 3, wher e the C- shape d cross section
of the toroidal shell segment, us ed as ~losur c
seal member, can be s een .
The seal , in addition to res i sting the
19 .
sodium pressure, must be capable of accommodating differenLla l Lhermal mov em<m t <> h<>. t we en t he

CREEP

f-156 HOURS-j

~ COOL.

~
Ul

HU
U2 D WN
UPS ET
D HEAT UP

UPSET j CO

. .:,;:1-t-1------------l1 (~
I

I I

ONE CYCLE

TI ME-

Fig . 4.

Load hi s tor y o f primary C- s eal for

finite- el emen t an a l ysis .

r"""' ""'

o '"'

.. _

.. , .+011 11 0 ..il.c, L

'
11

O t Sl.AC [M l~ T
Vllll fl CA l
OIS .. LAC (lrjl l NT

,o o

OUTSIO( SUlllF AC E

Uf"ll f O iltM Sl-l (L L

TM ICKNUS OF

~~~~'~F2:~V

Fig. 5 .

Fin i te- eleme nt idealiza tion o f

C- s eal.

L. K. Seyerud
5

21.
for most of the elements, the circumferential strain range was the largest and was the
major contributor to the computed fatigue damage.
However, strains in the meridional direction were
not small and were shown to be influenced
significantly by yield stress and thickness
changes. The stress-strain results for the
meridional direction at the inside surface of
element 1 (Fig . 5) are shown in Fig. 6 . In this
case, the loading histogram consisted of a U2
cycle followed by three combined U2 and Ul
cycles (Fig. 6) and, finally, three Ul cycles.
The results in Fig. 6 indicate some of the complexities of stress-strain responses that can be
encountered in practical applications.
22.
The stresses and strains for the circumferential direction, although not included in
this description, must be included in any Code
evaluation. The solution gives the principal
stresses and principal strains, and, the elastic,
plastic, and creep components are calculated for
each point in time.
23.
Some additional examples of stress-strain
response have been sel ected from the FFTF design
to indicate the range of responses observed.
However, it should be remembered that the results
depicted are usually for one direction only, and
rDsvlrs for other directions are needed to define
thP. states of stress or at Stralu.
24.
The first additional example is thP. stressstrain response of a structure (Wu, ref. 14)
installed in the upper plenum of the FFTF
reactor vessel to preven t cu r e effluent from
breaking the surface of the so<lium pool . This
structure is required to withstand 120 cycles
of normal reactor startup and shutdown, 705
cycles of thermal transients of one magnitude
(x transients), and 20 cycles of a second type of
thermal transient (y transient) . Thli! y transient
produces more stringent loading conditions than
the x transient. The temperature gradient
through the thickness of the plate is very small
during normal startup and shutdown, and the
strain range for the associated cycle is very
small. Thus, two repetitions of cyclic behavior
due to a y transient followed immediately by a
less severe x transiPnt were selected for
Pxamiqation. The stress-strain results for one
of the principal dir e ctium, (y) of an Pl P.ment in
the plate are shown in Fig. 7.
25.
One FFTF pipeline inelastic analysis by
Huang (ref. 22) , shown in Figures 8 and 9,
resulted in the stress-strain response of
Figures 10 and 11. Anot her FFTF pipeljne
analysis by Pan (ref. 16) revealed t ypical timedependent stress rel axation shown in Figure 12.
26.
Examples of complex geometry and large
finite element models l hat havP been used on a
few very expensive inelastic analyses are shown
in Figur es 13 a nd 14 .

"
"
20

12 ~~-~---'---L---'---'---.L...._..J
MUU 0t0NAL STlllA/ N l "'I SIO ( SU" fil1Ct C' I

Fig. 6.

Typical time-dependent stress-strain

response curve for a C-seal.

l' l lllST CYCU OF

! flllANSIENt

l' l llST CYCLE 01'

, Till.ANSl (Nf

SECOND CYC LE
tlllANS lNT

O~

8 , ......,~,........_............,_~.-..-,.,
~

c~" ST lll AIN COMl"O"I ENJ !.,.Jin I

. ,,
(N O 0' 1"'1 C'f'ClE
OF T,_ANSIENT

e SECONO CYCLE OF
y TlllANSIENr

Fig . 7.

Typical time-dependent str~~~-str a in

response curves for a structure
inside the reac tor vessel.

Fi g . 8.

PHL-CLS inelastic analysis finite

element model.

SIMPLIFIED AND APPROXIMATE METHODS

27.
Many simplified and approximate methods
were used in tne FFTF design . ~arh has its
own limitations and advantages. In general,
limitations of approximate methods are due to
simplifications in materials or structure
models. Thus, the analysi.c; output is approximate and often incomplete and sometimes grossly
conservative results occur. Justification for
final reliance on the simplified modeling can
Le difficulr rn develop. However, the advantages
of the approximate methods are that they dre l ow
in cost, quick and easy to apply, the methods

L. K. Seve'rud
6

TIM,llAJUIH

U MPE IATURI
Q,4 Hc:11.1r

Ill Ct up Hold

121S
34.JS

1200

104.JOS

71

156 -Hour
Cr oop
Hold

IS6-Ho11r
Cr P
Hold

o90. I

156 . 157

200

6-tl,9

65 700 Hout
Cr P
Hold

1000

2000

3000 lhl

17

..

...

UI Tu1n1ionl

r--_

10

14 7
oro

lh o loacl H p1

Uiil l o rm

o.

N<.,mb o ra

H oo rup

b.

Con 1tanl prenwr o 91 p 1 1(0 .0 27M Po ) h

10

\11 od fo r on t l r lood in9

70

"- tN~IO(

Ii.--

21 ,1

17

Fig. 9.

69

176.7
9S

"

MP1

,..- OllTSI D

Uniform
Hool u p

.._tup

lSO

UllA Tro n1 i nl

Uniform

AB

PHL-CLS inelastic analysis

load histograms .

OlSll

69

CD
1000

2000

uoo
TlMElhl

FROM A B IS TMPERATUR CHANGES:

lllXl'F -

3""' -

1l!XJOF

FROM C- 0 IS TIMPERATURE CHANGES:

uoo" -

1l!Xl'F

1l7.9

"

1o<> -

Fig . 12 .

Ty~1~~1

Fig. 13.

Re duced three dimensional mod el

28- inch hot leg isolation valve.

Ctrooc

r elrtx~ tioq

in piping.

l4,S
u

;;

- 34.S

1
.!

U.9 ~

-10.J.4

""Mb... " ' "

load 1lop1

_,,

'------~--~---'---'---~--~-172.4

S11m of

10

IS

'lO

25

JO

llo1t ic PIHl i c ond Croop Stro int , I0- 4 in /i n

Meridional stress vs total strain

at the inside sur face of el ement 13
of the PHL-CLS .

Fig . 10 .

,.

111.4

. '""

....

137.f

-:;

...

-137.9

....

11lUT

I<.

10

><.

..

.,
1-10
~

:!

"'-?

a-u

Nvmb w I

,.,.. ..

load ll p

H .9

-KJ:I.

.~
v

ll 7. t

-u_L,-----'.'----'_ _ _ _. __ __ , , : - - - - : - ,: -112.
0

St.1m o f

llolfic , Ploo i c a nd C reep S t. .. i ;u , 10 4 i r11 in

Uf-1 010 fM.(0

Fig. 11.

Cirr11mferential s tres s vs total

strain at the inside surface of
element 13 of the PHL- CLS.

Fig. 14.

THlAMA.l OUOlMATION

The r mal deformation from inelastic

analysb u f FFTF <rnrlium va l.ve body .

L. K. Severud
7

usually are easy to follow and understand and

they usually provide conservative results and
guidance. Accordingly, simplified and approximate methods were used on FFTF for three types
of application. First, in preliminary design of
components, they were used for; (a) screening
and sensitivity studies, (b) estimating design
margins, (c) assessing risks for fabrication
releases and, (d) for guidance to design changes.
Secondly, in final design stress analyses, they
were used for screening to identify most critical
areas for detailed inelastic analysis and in some
cases were used for final Code assessments providing justifications for conservatism of method
arid/or application could be developed. Finally,
simplified methods were used for high temperature
design education, as they of ten gave insight as
to how, and to what extent, various parameters
control inelastic analysis results. Some o~ the
simplified methods used on the FFTF are as
follows:
Temperature-time limits
27.1 Many components in an LMFBR, such as fill
and drain piping, operate only short times in
the creep range. Recognizing that creep is
stress, temperature, and time related; rules for
simplified creep-fatigue and ratchet evaluation
given in fig\lrl! 15 and 16 m1ri;i dP.velooed. Subsequently, they were made part of ASME Code
Case N-47, paragraph T-1325 Test No. 4.

ALTERNATE RULES FOR CREEP-FATIGUE AND STRAIN LIMITS

WHEN TIME OF EXCURSIONS INTO CREEP RANGE IS SHORT

1F

I(r:)

AND

2_(E:) !>

0.1

Primary plus secondary stress P + Q limits

for elastic analysis
27. 6 The ASME Code for design of nuclear
components operating at temperatures below the
creep range has a limit on P + Q of 3 Sm (or 2
Sy). This is based on a simplified shake-down
concept. A similar simplified shakedown concept
for operation in the creep range is shown in
Figure. 17. Using this creep shake-down concept
and other considerations, the preliminary design
P + Q limits for pipelines was developed by
Severud (ref. 8), see Fig. 18. Subsequent detailed inelastic analyses of the pipeline designed
using the simple limits showed the limits served
very well, (ref. 24).
Other approximate methods
27.7 To estimate creep buckling, the formulas
for elastic buckling of structures were sometimes used with Young's modulus replaced by the
tangent modulus of the isochronous stress-strain
curve for the sustained stress and time values.
27.8 For creep-fatigue evaluations using the
eiastlcally caleu.l:>.t:ed stre!O!? and strain ranges,
simplified methods have also been used by
Campbell and Severud (ref's. 27 and 4).
27.9 For estimates of creep damage during hold
times, uni3xial and biaxial relaxation curves
of the creep cumulative damage have been found
very useful by Severud (ref. 8).

FoR s i.5 sy
FOR 5 1.5 Sy

0.002 FOR s 1.25 Sy

AND (pl+ PB+ Q)R~ 3Sm AND 3Sm

THEN, THE LOW TEMP. RULES OF SEC. 111 CAN BE USED
WITH
\..(-N") _.$. 0.9 AND ONLY ELASTIC ANALYSIS
L'.:\' d 1
IS REQUIRED

Fig. 15.

27.5 Two very useful one-dimensional inelastic

computer programs were developed by Chern (ref.32
and 33). These programs allow detailed materials
models to be used with a thick cylinder structural model.

Temperature - time limits for

simplified high temperature
analysis.

One-dimensional inelastic analyses using twobar and thick cylinder models

27,2 Bree (ref. 6) and many others (ref. 28-31)
have developed simple raLchet und creep ratchet:
solutions for simple structure. The ASME Code
CasP N-47 has incorporated the O'DonnellPorowski (ref. 7) method based on lhe cylinder
model.

FOR 5 1.25 Sy

1050

...
.:
w

...."

...

sso

'

'

..

'
TIME ABOVE

soop,

t. (HOURS)

Fig. 16.

Time temperature limits 316 ss.

Fig. 17.

Elevated temperature shakedown.

27.3 The Code case points out in T-1324 that

the 0-P method is tor axlsy111111ctr;l.c etr11rt11res
object to axisymmetric loading away from local
structural discontinuities.
27. 4 Two-bar and ..:ylinder model solutions are
\tseful in studying the effects on ratcheting of
(a) str.ess states, levels and their distribution, (b) material,properties, yield strength,
creep nd T.P.laxation and strain hardening, (c)
type and geometry of stru'cture and, (d) loatl
order and time sequences.

482

4Zl

TEMPERATURE (
533

c)
I'll

649

704

~...--.--....~...,....~r'---.-~..-....,.~....-~~..;..,;..~~......;,

300

ELASTIC
ANALYSIS
PRELIMINARY
DESIGN LIMIT, ~

13Sm1

2ll

100

--1--

ID

LOW !!,f:l~I ~~~!!_TEMP.

CRITrRIA CRITrRIA
; LINl:S Wlllt DE7All0 INl:lASTIC ANALYSES
ANO PASSED CODE LIMITS
o.___._~..._--'~-'---''---'-~...__,_~_._--'~-'----'o

soo

100

om

1000

1100

1200

l.300

TEMPERATURE lF1

Fig. 18.

et:

ti
<(

Preliminary design primary plus

secondary stress limits for 316
stainless steel pipelines.

l!Y

u..

t3 lrl=>
Q
UJ

et:
UJ

!::

...J
UJ

101

=>
<:>

....
<(

u..

10

0
10-l

1
10120.3 ksil 10 ! 17. 9)
TENSILE HOLD TIME (h l

Fig. 19.

Variation of calculated fatiguelife reduction factors with tensile

hold time for 0.5% strain-range
tests of Type 304 stainless steel
at 1100F (593C).

RECENT CODE DEVEl.OPMENTS AND FUTURE TRENDS

28.
ASME code conunittees are evaluating the
various other approaches for creep-f atiguQ
evaluation, but they desire more test data. A
consensus does not yet exist that any of the prediction methods has shown itself as being

superior. The Code method uses the linear

damage method, (Fig. 19). Accordingly, the.Code
conunittee members are reluctant to change prediction methods at present. Long-time tests
underway may show in a couple of years that a
different method is better.
29. Elastic creep-fatigue rules were modified
to improve elastic analysis prediction of strain
ranges (Severud, ref 4) Further improvements
are desired in the d5sign fatigue curves by extending them from 10 cycles to lOllcycles.
30.
Other areas being addressed by the Code
committees include; (a) simplifications to the
buckling rules, (b) clarification of limits on
third-stage creep, (c) improvements to the strain
limits and rules, (d) considerations of actual
versus assumed material behavior as effected by
weldments, environmental effects and prior cold
work, (e) guidance on intended margins of safety,
and (f) inclusion of additional materials, such
as 2 1/4 Cr-1.0 Mo, Inconel 718, and cast 304
stainless steel, into Case N-47.
31.
The present Code rules sum creep and fatigue
damage fractions as a measure of the total damage.
Other approaches have been proposed in the literature; for example, Manson et al. (ref. 34) have
proposed a "strain range partitioning" method.
Coffin (ref. 35) has offered the "frequency
modified" method and others (ref's. 36, 37, 38)
have described methods such as the "characteristic
slopes," "hysteresis energy," and "damage rate."
Some have tried applying "fracture mechanics" type
crack-growth methods to high-temperature cyclic
life predictions (ref's: 39-42).
32.
Design analysts recognize that it is not
uncommon for different methods to yield better
predictions in different types of applications
and that the best method for one application may
not be the best for another. For example, cyclic
life predictions of a structure that has a known
fabrication flaw, crack, or inclusion may be more
accurately assessed using fracture mechanics
crack-growth techniques than using the present
stress-strain range Code methods.
33.
The Code Case N-47 rules include strain
limit rules that arc held by some design analysts
to be necessary to validate the creep-fatigue
procedures. Others feel that the limits on cumulative positive inelastic strain help guard
against creep-rupture failure and thus should
be a direct part of the creep-fatigue evaluation
procodura~.
Whatever the method, or methods,
deemed best and recommended for design use, it
is important to recognize the need of very
clearly delineating the mechanics and procedures
of the method.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
34.
The most difficult aspects of applying
the American design codes for elevated temperature environment relate to satisfying Appendix T
of ASME Code Case N-47, rules for strain, deformation, and fatigue liini.t.s. Appr<;>aches to
satisfying Appendix T limits range from very
simple screening methods to detailed inelastic
analyses. The U. S. industry has developed
oon~iQQ~~ble skill in performin~ these analyses.
35. 'The rules and timits of the Code assuma
that the design analyst can analytically predict
the structural component stresses and strains in
response to an imposed load history. In the
interest of cost, the design analyst wants to do
the minimlllll and simplest analysis that is
necessary to demonstrate design adequacy.

L. K.

~everud

However, since prediction accuracy is often

sacrificed with the application of simplifying
assumptions, the less expensive elastic methods
of ten. have to be supplemented with more expensive
and complex inelastic analyses. Nonetheless,
there is a strong desire to be able to design
using only the elastic methods.
36.
Most applications of inelastic analysis for
FFTF and LMFBR components have consisted of
actually computing inelastic response for only
up to two or three types of events. Then, the
total design events are assessed by extrapolation
of the computed damage factors for two or three
cycles of each event to the hundreds of cycles of
all the design events. Although this may appear
like a grossly oversimplified procedure, this
approach often is very satisfactory, since the
damage per cycle usually decreases with increasing number of cycles and a conservative extrapolation can then be made. A great deal of useful
information has been obtained from inelastic
analyses performed to date. It is expected that
more efficient computer codes will be developed
in the future so that the time and cost for inelastic analyses should be significantly reduced.
37.
Moreover, there appears to be a definite
need for creep-fatigue and cumulative strain
criteria and procedures for use with both elastic
and inelastic analysis. Hopefully, the elastic
analysis methods, which inherently must be more
conservative than the inelastic rules because of
the less informative nature of elastic analysis,
are or can be made conservative enough to be
safe but not so conservative that they are
overly restrictive, unrealistic, or impractical.
REFERENCES
1.
Class 1 Components in Elevated Temperature
Service, Class III, ASME Boilers and Pressure
Vessel Code, Case Interpretations, Code Case
N-47 (1592), American Society of Mechanical
Engineers, New York.
2.
CAMPBELL, R. D., "Creep-Fatigue Calculation Procedures for Code Case 1592 "presented at
the Second National Congress on Pressure Vessels
and Piping, San Francisco, CA., June 23-27, 1975;
published in Advances in Design for Elevated
Temperature Environment, ASME, New York.
:.L
Criteria .tor Uesign o.t Elevated Temperature
Class 1 Components in Section III of ASME Boiler
and Pressure Vessel Code, published by the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers,
New York.
4.
SEVERUD, L. K., "Background to the Elastic
Creep-Fatigue Rules of the ASME Code Case 1592,"
Nuclear Engineering and Design 45 (1978) 449-455.
5.
BERMAN, I., GANGADHARAN, A. C. and
'
GUPTA, G. D., "Buckling and Instability at
Elevated Temperature," presented at the Second
National Congress on Pressure Vessels and Piping,
San francisco, CA., June 23-27, 1975; published
in Advances in Design for Elevated Temperature
Environment, ASME, New York.
6.
BREE, J., "Incremental Growth Due to Creep
and Plastic Yielding of Thin Tubes Subjected to
Internal Pressure and Cyclic Thermal Stresses,"
J. Strain Analysis, 1968, 3, No. 2, 122-127.
7.
O'DONNELL, W. J., and POROWSKI, J.,
"UppGir Bounds for Accumu~:ited Straina Due to
Creep Ratcheting," Welding Research Council
Bulletin No, 195, June 1974, also Trans ASME,
Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol. 96,
p. 126, 1974.

8.
SEVERUD, L. K., "Simplified Methods and
Applications to th~ Preliminary Design of Piping
for Elevated Temperature Service," presented at
the Second National Congress on Pressure Vessels
and Piping, San Francisco, CA., June 23-27, 1975;
published in Advanced in Design for Elevated
Temperature Environment, ASME, New York.
9.
PUGH, C. E., "Constitutive Equations for
Creep Analysis of LMFBR Components," presented
at the Second National Congress on Pressure
Vessels and Piping, San Francisco, CA., June
23-27, 1975, published in Advances in Design
for Elevated Temperature Environment, ASME,
New York.
10.
BIGELOW, C. C. , "Experience in the Implementation of Current High Temperature Structural Design Technology, presented at the Third
International Conference on Structural Mechanics
in Reactor Technology, London, U.K., Sept. 1-5,
1975.
11.
GANGADHARAN, A. C., PAI, D. H., "Non-Linear
Creep Fatigue Analysis of a Sodium Heat Exchanger
Component for the Fast Flux Test Facility," paper
C215/73, presented at the International Confer~
ence on Creep and Fatigue in Elevated Temperature
Applications, Philadelphia, PA., Sept. 1973.
12.
DHALLA, A. K., "Effect of Yield Strength
Variation on the Inelastic Response of a C-Ring"
ASME paper 75-PVP-31, presented at the Second
National Congress on Pressure Vessels and
Piping Technology, San Francisco, CA., June 2327, 1975.
13.
DHALLA, A. K. and ROCHE, R. V., "Inelastic
Analysis and Satisfaction of Design Criteria
of a High Temperature Comppnent," presented at
the Second. National Congress on Pressure Vessels
and Piping, San Francisco, CA., June 23-27, 1975;
published in Advanced in Design for Elevated
Temperature Environment, ASME, New York.
14.
WU, c. G., "Inelastic Analysis in LMFBR
Reactor Vessel Design," paper Gl-5, presented at
the Second International Conference on Structural
Mechanics in Reactor Technology, Berlin, Germany,
Sept. 10-15, 1973.
15.
HIBBITT, H. D., SORENSON, E. P., and
MARCAL, P. v., "The Elastic-Plast.ic and Creep
Analysis of Pipelines by Finite Elements," Proceedings of the Second International Conference
on Pressure Vessel Technology (Part 1. Design
and Analysis), October lY/], pp. l]Y-~l, ASME,
New York.
16.
PAN, Y. S. and JETTER, R. I, "Inelastic
Analysis of Pipelines in FFTF CLS Module,"
Pressure Vessel and Piping Conference,
Miami Beach, FL., June 24-28, 1974, published
in Pressure Vessels and Piping; Analysis and
Computers, ASME, New York, N. Y.
.
17.
MINAMI, H. M., "Application of Section III
Class 1 Design Rules to an Elevated Temperature
Component," presented at the Second National
Congress on Pressure Vessels and Piping,
San Francisco, CA., June 23-27, 1975p published
in Advances in Design for Elevated Temperature
Environment, ASME, New York, N. Y.
18.
WEINER, E. O., "A Three-Dimensional
Inelastic Finite Element Analysis of a Solid
Y-Type Cylinder Interaction," presented at the
Fourth International Conference on Structural
Mechanics in Reactor Technology, San Francisco,
CA., Aug. 15-19, 1977.
11
19.
SAMPSON, R. C. and JAGELS, R. E., Stress
Analysis for the Design of Liquid Metal Piping in
the Fast Flux Test Facility," presented at the
Joint ASME/CSME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conf.
Montreal, Canada, June 25-30, 1978, ASME papers
78-PVP-21.

L. K. Severud

- .. .

10

20.
CHEN, W. L. and WEINER, E. O., "Inelastic
Analysis of Pipeline in FFTF Heat Transport
System," presented at the Joint ASME/CSME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, Montreal,
Canada, June 25-30, 1978, ASME special publication PVP-PB-028.
21.
HUANG, S. N., "Inelastic Analysis of Two
Pipelines in the Fast Flux Test Facility,"
presented at the Third U. S. National Congress
on Pressure Vessels and Piping, San Francisco,
CA., June 25-29, 1979, published in ASME special
publication PVP-36.
SAMPSON, R. C. , "Stress Analysis of Conical
22.
Flued Heads for FFTF Liquid Metal Piping Anchors,"
presented at the Joint ASME/CSME Pressure Vessels
and Piping Conference, Montreal, CAnada, June
25-30, 1978, ASME special publication PVP-f>B-028.
23.
WINKEL, B. V., "Experience with Simplified
Inelastic Analysis of FFTF Test Assemblies," presented at the Joint ASME/CSME Pressure Vessels
and Piping Conference, Montreal, Canada, June
25-30, 1978, ASME special publication PVP-PB-028.
24.
SEVERUD, L. K., "Experience with Simplified
Inelastic Analysis of Piping," presented at the
Nucelear Engineering Division ASME Century 2
Conference, San Francisco, CA., August 18, 1980.
25.
ANDERSON, M. J., HYDE, L. L., WAGNER, S. E.,
and SEVERUD, L. K., "Insulated Pipe Clamp Design,"
presented at the ASME P&PV Conf., San Francisco,
CA., Aug. 1980.
.
26.
LINDQUIST, M. R., and ANDERSON, M. J.,
"Pipe Clamp Effects on Thin-Walled Pipe Desigt),"
presented at the ASME B&PV Conference,
San Francisco, CA., Aug., 1980.
27.
CAMPBELL, IL D., "Creep-Fatigue Calculation
Procedures for Code Case 1592," presented at the
Second National Congress on Pressure Vessels and
Piping, San Francisco, CA., June 23-27, 1975;
published in Advances in Design for Elevated
Temperature Environment, ASME, New York.
28.
MILLER, D. R., 'Thermal-Stress Ratchet
Mechanism in Pressure Vessels; Trans. ASME,
Journal of Basic Engineering, Vol. 8, June 1959.
BURGREEN, D., "Structural Growth Produced
29.
by Thermal Cycling," ASME Journal of Basic
Engineering, Dec., 1968.
30.
EDMONDS, H. G., and BEER, F. J., "Notes on
Incremental Collapse in Pressure Vesc:cls,"
Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, Vol.
3., No. 3, 1961.
.
31.
MULCAHY, T. M., "Thermal Ratcheting of a
Beam Element Having an Idealized Bauschinger '
Effect," ASME paper 75-WA-Mat-4, presented at
the 1975 ASME WAM, Houston, TX, Nov. 30-Dec. 4,
1975.
32.
CHERN, J.M., and PAI, D. H., "A Simplified
Tool for the Elevated Temperature Cyclic Analysis
of Pressure Components," Second International
Conference on Pressure Vessel Technology, Part I:
Design and Analysis, San Antonio, 1973, pp .
.263-275.
33.
CHERN, J. M. and PAI, D. H., "Inelastic
Analysis of a Straight Tube under Combined Bending, Pressure and Thermal Loads; ASME paper
75-PVP-19, presented at the Second National
Congress on Pressure Vessels and Piping,
San Francisco, CA., June 23-27, 1975.
34.
MANSON, S. S., "The Challenge to Unify
Treatment of High Temperature Fatigue - A
Partisan Proposal Based on Strainrailge Pa<titfoning," Fatigue at Elevated Temperatures, STP520, pp. 744-82, ASTM, 1973.

35.
COFFIN, L. F., "Fatigue at High Temperature - Prediction and Interpretation," James
Clayton Lecture, presented at 1973-1974
International Conference on Creep and Fatigue,
Sheffield, England; published in Proc. Inst.
Mechanical Engineering 188 9/74, 109-27 (1974).
36.
CONWAY, J. B., STENTZ, R. H. and
BERLING, J. T., "Fatigue Tensile, and Relaxation
Behavior of Stainless Steels," TID-26135, pp. 92101.
37.
FONG, J. T., "Energy Approach for Creep and
Fatigue Interactions of Metals at High Temperature," ASME paper 75-PVP-30, presented at the
Second National Congress on Pressure Vessels and
Piping Technology, San Francisco, CA., June
23-27, 1975.
38.
MAJUMDAR, S. , and MAIYA, P. S. , "A Damage
Equation for Creep-Fatigue Interaction," presented at ASME WAM, Dec., 1976, published in 1976
ASME-MPC Symposium on Creep-Fatigue Interaction,
MPC-3, ASME, New York.
39.
SHAHINIAN, P., SMITH, H. H. and
WATSON, H. E., "Fatigue Crack Growth in Type 316
Stainless Steel at High Temperature," ASME Paper
71, PVP 25, 1971.
40.
JAMES, L. A., and SCHWENK, E. B., "FatigueCrack Propagation on Type 304 Stainless Steel at
Elevated Temperatures," Met. Trans. 2, 491 (1971).
41.
CARDEN, A. E., "Parametric Analysis of
Fatigue Crack Growth," Int. Con. on Creep and
Fatigue at Elevated Temperature Applications,
Philadelphia, PA, Sept. ,1973.
42.
SPEIDEL, M. O., "Fatigue Crack Growth at
High Temperature," in High Temperature Materials
in Gas Turbines, e.d. by R. Ji'. Sahim and
M.. 0. Speidel, Elsevier Scientific Publishing
Company, 1974.