/ni. J. p,,,_,._ v�.-.

& /'i¡,ing9(1981) 197 219

CRITICAL CRACK SIZES IN DUCTILE PIPING

w. KAsTNER, E. RoHR1cH,t w. ScHMITTt & R. STE1NaucH

Krajiwerk Union AG. Erlangen, Federal R<'public of Germany

(Received: 12 May, 1980)

ABSTRACT

The list ojformulations for critica/ crack sizes in pipes is extended to cracks in rhe
in1rados and extrados o/ pipe bends and modified for circumferenlial part�through
wa/1 fiaws. The methods to deriee these formu/ae are indicated. Ali results are
experimental/y verijied by comparison with published work or by results o/ tests
conducted specia//yfor this study. lt is concluded that sorne pipe /ine fai/ure conditions
prei:iously postulated can now be excluded.

LIST OF SYMBOLS

Geometry
a,/ crack depth, normalised crack depth a/t
2c, c crack length, half crack length
EL element length in finite element analysis
extension of the plastic zone
ínside, mean and outside radius
bending radius of a pipe bend
wall thickness
2cx, a angle of a crack, half crack
</> angle at the circumference of a pipe

Material
E
<ly, (J '
• (J
u
Young's modulus
yield, flow and ultimate stress (uy � u• � u)

tNow with HILTI, München.

t Now with Institut für Werkstoffmechanik, Freiburg.
197
/nt. J. Pres. Ves. & Piping 0308-0161 /8l/0009-0197/$02· 50 © Applied Science Publishers Ltd, England, 1981
Printed in Great Britain
198 W. KASTNER, E. RÓHRICH, W. SCHMITT, R. STEINBUCH

Load.\·
M¡, M,.• bending moment, intcrnal and external
p interna! pressure
nominal axial stress
nominal hoop stress

1, INTRODUCTION

In this paper work done during the last decade by Eiber et al., li1 Darlaston and
Harrison, 3 Hahn et a/., 4 Folias 5 and KWU 6 on difTerent problems of pipe failures
will be reviewed and extended by sorne new results conceming circumferential part­
through-wall cracks in straight pipes and longitudinal through-wall cracks in pipe
bends. These new results were obtained by analytical calculation as well as by finite
element calculations. This work is compared with the results of á number of
experiments reported either in the literature or performed by KWU in the course of
these investigations. The results of this work are presented in formulae for critica!
stresses or critical crack dimensions. Also, an estímate for the leakage areas will be
given. From the result of this work it is concluded that sorne postulated pipe failure
conditions can be excluded.
2. LONGITUDINAL THROUGH-WALL CRACKS IN PIPES ANO BENDS

2.1. Analytical considerations

Hahn et al. 4 have shown that the instability criterion of a straight pipe having a
longitudinal through-wall crack is given by
a* = MaN (1)

where M = stress magnification factor. This is given by

(2)

The stress magnification factor M has been derived by Folias 5 from the theory of
elasticity.
The intention of the investigation presented here was to extend the instability
criterion to the situation of a longitudinal crack in a pipe bend. Since the theoretical
results could not be used here i t was decided to solve the problem by a series of finite
element calculations with variations of the main parameters.
Though essentially an elastic-plastic problem had to be solved, it was decided to
perform the parameter study elastically. The main reason was the recognition that
the stress magnification factor, M, for straight pipes was derived essentially under
assumption of linear elastic behaviour.
 CRITICAL CRACK SIZES IN DUCTILE PIPING 199

2.2. Finite-e/ement analysis

The 3D-finite element calculations were performed with the MARC-program
using standard 3-node shell elements. Ali meshes were derived from a standard basic
mesh (Fig. l) by simple coordinate transformations (113 nodes, 1017 degrees of
freedom, 183 elements). Neither special crack tip singularity elements were used nor
was an attempt made to qualify fracture parameters (K1, 1 1, etc.) from the results .

Fig. 1. Basic mesh for the pipe bend and straight pipe.

We first tried to evaluate the stress magnification by an integration scheme of the

circumferential stress along the ligament (Fig. 2). The idea was to define a mean
hoop stress ahead of the crack tip by integrating the hoop stress over a certain
distance / and then dividing by/. The problem is how / should be defined . For the
straight pipe good results were obtained by taking / as that distance from the crack
tip where the elastic hoop stress fell below the nominal hoop stress for the first time.
While this method led to reproducible results in the case of the straight pipe, it did
not work out well in the case of the pipe bend. It was not only somewhat doubtful as
to how the nominal hoop stress should be defined in the bend, it also turned out that
in the case of the bend the variation of the stress with distance from the crack tip was
very smooth and the intersection with the nominal stress could be defined only with
great ambiguity. Therefore, in a second approach we attempted to define the ratio of
200 W. KASTNER, E. RÓHRICH, W . SCHMITT, R. STEINBUCH

1
1
1 I
º· 1
----+-- --i-----------
1
1
1
: 1
1

1
1
--
X O( r

... _¡
- -'- 1- - --·· --- -~
- .-
plasf,c za,e
. --,--
I
1
- ·· - · ·-
etastrc
. - - ·····- ..
zone

a, ; t /o. di

Fig. 2. Elastic and idealised elasto-plastic stress distribution ahead of the crack pipe.

the maximum hoop stress, a1 , in the element just in front of the crack tip to the
nominal hoop stress, aN, as the first approximation M I to the stress magnification
factor M:
- O'¡
M1= -·
(TN

lt is clear that this procedure would significantly overestimate the term M in Hahn's
relationship, since the calculations were done elastically and only numerical reasons
lying in the finite element method prohibit the existence of a stress singularity.
Through all the calculations, care was taken that the element dimensions of the near
crack tip elements did not change. So it could be concluded that the systematic error
within this method would remain the same throughout the parameter study and
could, therefore, be cancelled out.
Tables 1 and 2 give the results for different crack lengths in a straight pipe (Fig.
3(a)) for two different finite element meshes with characteristic element lengths of
50mm and 24mm, respectively. Figure 4 shows a plot of Mf versus c 2 / rmt. In this
plot Hahn's M 2 (eqn. (2)) produces a straight line. With sorne scatter, the Mf with
different element sizes also show linear behaviour. With that result a linear
correction function for Mi with c2 /rmt can be found to eliminate the insufficiencies
of the mesh, and the method.
Tables 3 and 4 give the equivalent results for a typical main coolant pipe bend
(Fig. 3(b)).
 TABLE 1
STRESSMAGNIFICATION FACTOR (M,) = /(2c) IN THESTRAIGHTPIPEFOR THEELEMENTLENGTH El= 50mm
c2 -
-
u,
2c
r,..t
11¡.¡ u, M,=- MHalui M, / MH.~.
11¡.¡
(mm) (Nmm - 2
(Nmm- 2)
) (eqn . (2))

300 1·34 148 416 2·81 1·78 1·85

400 2·38 148 535 3·61 2·2 1·64
500 3·71 148 665 4·49 2·64 1·70
600 5·34 148 802 5·42 3·10 1·75
700 7·27 148 943 6·37 3·57 1·78
800 9·50 148 !087 7·34 4·04 1·85

TABLE 2
STRESS MAGNIFICATION FACTOR (M,) = /(2c) IN THESTRAIGHT PIPE FOR THEELEMENT LENGTH El = 24 mm
c2 - ü,
2c G¡.¡ (J 1 M,= - MH.,.,, M, ,'MHah
rml 11¡.¡
(mm) (Nmm - 2) (Nmm - 2)
(eqn . (2))

192 0·55 148 409 2·76 1·37 2·02

240 0·86 148 489 3·30 1·54 2·14
288 1·23 148 574 3·88 l ·73 2·24
384 2·19 148 760 5·13 2·13 2-41
480 3·42 148 966 6·53 2·55 2·56
576 4·92 148 1185 8·01 2·99 2·86
672 6·70 148 1415 9·56 3-43 2·79

,- .. - · -- 1500 .. -··· - - -- --
r· 2c -
=:r.azr.llZ711.~~====--~+=====::tzzzz:z::i:z=e:zzz:z::ij::::::;--,

--------tl.
1"'
-- ---
i
,z.aazrauz==r.tc:zzr.=====zzzi==__l
o

....
6 c1'

500 ___]
\
\R
\
8
"'

b
Fig. 3. (a) Main coolant straight pipe geometry. (b) Main coolant pipe bend geometry with crack in the
extrados (A) and intrados (B) .
,,

202 W. KASTNER, E. ROHRICH, W . SCHMITT, R. STEINBUCH

75,------- r -- - - - --,r---.--- ----.---- - - ~- ~

¡;¡:. 1t,¡.1 2

a, moan hoop strtsS in ttw fi'st

tlenwnt CÍlfQd d the crar:k tip
o• nominal hoop stress

fAJnfllble2

o
o
: ~~
--·
1 2

Fig. 4. Comparison of
3
·-
4

Mf
s 6 1 a

values with analytical curve (straight pipe).

9-L
J
.
r,,¡ t
___J

TABLE 3
STRESS MAvNIFICA TION FACTORS MI ANO M IN THE EXTRADOS OF THE PIPE BEND

rm - O'¡ c2
2c (J !<, 11 ¡ Mlb end= ·- · M~,·nd
R <IN r,..t
(mm) (Nmm - 2) (Nmm - 2)
(eqn . (I))
· -·· -- - - · ·----·-· -·· ------·-- · ----- ····
400 0·36 148 483 3-26 1·99 2-38
500 0-36 148 610 4·12 2-42 3-7 1
600 0·36 148 750 5-06 2-89 .5 ·34
700 0-36 148 900 6-08 3-42 7-27
800 0-36 148 1058 7· 15 3-93 9·50
·- · · - - · ··· ····-·- · - -- ··- --·· · "···- --·-·· - --· ------· - - - ···

TABLE 4
STRESS MAGNIFICATION FACTORS MI ANO M IN THE INTRADOS OF THE PIPE BEND

r .. - ª1
2c a,._ O'¡ Mlbend= ·-- M~ •• d
R <1.,;
(Nmm - (Nmm - 2) 2)
(mm) (eqn. ( 1))
- ·- - - - ·••--w·--•-•, · - - - - - -- ·-- -- - - - ·--- -- ·- - · ------ ··- -·· - ·- ·-
192 0·36 148 sos 3-41 1-70 0-55
240 0-36 148 597 4·03 l ·88 0·86
288 0·36 148 692 4·68 2-09 1-23
384 0·36 148 889 6·01 2-49 2·19
480 0-36 148 1092 7-38 2·88 3·42
.576 0·36 148 1302 8·8 3·28 4·92
672 0·36 148 1522 1 + ·28 3·68 6·70
---·· ---- - ·- - - ·-· ···---- -·- · · ·- -··--·-----· -- --·--·· --
 CRITICAL CRACK SIZES IN DUCTILE PIPING 203

30-.---------- - -- - -- - - - - - - -- - ~
Han c°'*1nt pipo 9fOIIWlry , r. • 1+01 111111 ; t • lt2mm ; R =1125mm

Straight pipe
Pipe btnd - utrados
· anuatr.,n
·, ""Hcm/4/
•, ·· H1 •- 1+161
1
· ·J.:.
: H1 =0,736•1.285 · t f •0,0276 ·(r:T J1
r ·t
1 •
-
_
J
Pipe b@nd - rntrodos
1
: M = 1718 + 213697 · _f_
· ·
•
~ -t
2
-
·
191

O 05685 · 1-'-) 1
2
r. ·t
7/
/

1
1
10 t - -- - - + -- --,?l"""~---:.,.-,,,:::,Y<:::....-- --+- - -- t -- - --l

expermenl5 to, ~ o·~ º•)

f KWU - experimlft, edrados
(dqffl 2 2. lhís paper J
f ~se
intrados. /17/
ei,perftf'i .
\
_J
0+---...---+-----.--~-- ~ - - 1 - - -- -+---~- _¡_ _
O 4 S 6 8 9 e1 1l 11 12
--.. i;'r

Fig. 5. Stress magnification factors for straight pipes and pipe bends.

The variation of the corrected M 2 values for the intrados and extrados of the bend
and the values for the straight pipe are plotted in Fig. 5. By a least square polynomial
fit the following approximations are given :

M 2 = 0·736 + l ·285 -
c2
+ 0·0276 ( -c2 )2 (extrados) (3)
rmi rmt

M 2 = 1·718 + 2·13697- - 0·05685 -

c2 ( c2 )2 (intrados) (4)
r mi r mt

Given the flow stress a* for the material , eqn . ( 1) is used to calcula te the critica! crack
length in the pipe.

2.3. Experimental verification

The experimental check for the straight pipe with longitudinal cracks is given in
BMI 1866, 1 BMI 1908 2 and RS 104. 7 With the assumption by BMI 1866 that,
a*= (ay + <1u)/ 2·4
c2
M 2 = 1 + 1·61 - (5)
rmt
204 W . KASTNER. E. RÓHRICH. W . SCHMITT, R. STEINBUCH

-~
o= 2,1,
experiments O BHI 1866 and 1908 ; / 1, 2/

a K\o/U . RS 101, • test IV ; / 6 /

1
1

1
Q7 o

0,6
o ~ :
o
o
0,5 o

0,4
o

0,3

On+-- ~ - - ~~ - ~ ···- r - - - · - - , . - - ~ --~~ -- ·-·

O 4 5 6 7 2c B
--- -v;:r-
Fig. 6. Compari son of experimental results with analytical predictions on axially flawed pipes.

all available experimental results can be compiled in Fig. 6. From there it can be seen
that

(6)

gives a lower bound estimate for the burst stress of ali experiments .
To prove the analytical results for a pipe bend the behaviour of a longitudinal
crack in a full size main coolant pipe bend was investigated by KWU , where the
primary circuit conditions regarding the pipe material and the operating pressure
were taken into account.
As Fig. 7 shows , the experiment was carried out with a longitudinal welded 90 º
pipe elbow of original main coolant pipe dimensions. The dimensions were :
wall thickness t = 38 mm ,
inner diameter 2r; = 628 mm,
bend radius R = 1067 mm.
The material used was 20 MnMoNi 55.
 CRITICAL CRACK SIZES IN DUCTILE PIPING 205

Ff~·s421 )f~:
r · ·-·~
~-

1 ~
cop

01 ,03 =tic pms¡n

02,04 ~pressin
S1 -S3 di1p~inent lnndua!r
T1 • T4 ltwir~

Fig. 7. Tested pipe bend with instrumentation .

The elbow was prolongated at both ends by straight pipe elements of a length of
1200 mm, which were closed at their ends by welded caps. In each cap a rod heater
(16 kW) was installed, to heat up the pressurised water in the test object. The bend
had a predetermined through-wall flaw of a length of 750 mm in the longitudinal
weldment joint. The width of the predetermined crack was 3 mm. At each crack tip
thewidth wasfabricated with only0·8 mm by a length of2·5mm, as shown in Fig. 7.
In the region of the flaw the wall thickness was determin~d by ultra-sonic
measurements and was , on average, 37 mm .
To perform the test by heating up the pressurised water and pressurising the
water, the through-wall flaw had first to be made test-proof. The test object was
instrumentated with transducers (Fig. 7) to measure:
pressure of the fluid (piezo-electric pressure transducers O 1, 03; strain gauge
pressure transducers 02, 04);
fluid temperature (thermocouples Tl to T4);
distances, which were run by the flaw flanks and the elbow casing (distance
transducers SI to S5);
extensions of the elbow circumference and at the flaw end (20 strain gauges).
In all a total number of 31 transducers with their appropriate control of recording
devices were installed. The measured signals stored on magnetic tapes were recorded
after the test and the errors of the measurement referring to the maximum values
were calculated .
Before start-up of the test the object was photographed and the elbow and the
''

206 W . KASTNER, F. ROHRICH, W . SCHMITT. R. STEINB UCH

predetermined breaking flaw were exactly measured. The test element was then filled
with degassed and demineralised water . The water was heated up to a temperature of
62 ºC by electrical heating. The tempera tu re of the bend wall was about 51 ºC, so
ductile fracture conditions could be anticipated. Pressurising the water was done by
a piston pump causing the through-wall flaw to be extended. Measurements showed
that ata pressure of 162 bar the width of the crack was approximately 35 mm . For
2 h the pressure was then slowly increased up to 165 bar. During this time the flaw-
width grew up to 45 mm. At about 185 bar the anticipated sudden opening of the flaw
occurred . The original 750-mm long through-wall crack increased due to a large
plastic deformation caused by unsteady crack growth up to a length of 854 mm and
then stopped. The maximum of the flaw width at the time of the elbow failure was
67 mm . After total de-pressurisation the maximum flaw width was only 55 mm.
These results can be seen in Fig. 8 where the crack extension is shown as a function or
pressure.
After completion of the test, the test object was photographed again and the
deformations of the pipe bend, the leak area and the vol u me of the test object were
measured. Only in the neighbourhood of the fracture were appreciable
deformations found. In the middle of the bend an increase in the diameter of about
27 mm was recorded.

200 -------------- ---- ·r ------- -------

l ter
/ ~
c. / :
IIIQJ(ÍIIWJffl
/
width
:
1
lllffl!dmtyofter :
CJ'IÓ growtt, :
150 , -· ·--···--·· .. ·-- . -· _J
1
1
! 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

r -,
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
t-
i
1
• 1
flOW widlh afl1!J' lile ~SIi
1
·.
\\ /
/
-woll 1 \ /

flaw wdh bñe lile exptfinenl \ /

- - -- -

'O
' T'

20
--- '

Jl
1
40 50 'e. 60 mm 70
-flawwidlh b

. . 8.
F 1g Maximum width of the longitudinal through-wall flow as a function of pressure.
 CRITICAL CRACK SIZES IN DUCTILE PIPING 207

The fracture consisted of a ductile shear break at 45 º to the surface. The crack
growth first ran transversely, then in the direction of the through-wall flaw .
Taking differen_t assumptions for the flow stress <1*, the experimental result
plotted in Fig. 5 shows good agreement within the expected scatter band.
To conclude from the results obtaíned so far, ít is evident that longitudinal
through cracks in pipe bends do not behave significantly different from
corresponding cracks in straight pipes. A sufficiently accurate estímate of their
instability behaviour is possible.

3. CIRCUMFERENTIAL CRACKS IN PIPES

From the literature 2 •8 · 9 severa! approaches are known to solve the problem of
circumferential cracks either part-through or through-wall. Compared with the
problems concerning axial cracks in pipes the situation for the circumferential
cracks is more complicated. One reason is that circumferential cracks are subject to
moment loading from the piping system whereas longitudinal cracks are mostly
subject to interna) pressure. Therefore, in principie, a more detailed stress analysis is
required if critica! crack sizes in circumferential direction should be evaluated. The
second complication, in contrast to axial cracks, is that circumferential cracks can
be sensitive to mechanical víbrations of the pipe system. Thirdly, the near and far
surrounding of the analysed crack inftuences the stress state and must, therefore, be
taken into account.
In the following, first analytical formulae will be derived whích are similar to those
given in the literature and which will verify conservatively the known experimental
data. This section will conclude by comparing the analytical results with those from
experimen ts.

3.1 . Circumferentia/ through-wa/1 crack

The axial stress is augmented by the missing material to the value
n
CT ¡ =- - (Tax (7)
n - a.
The crack causes an eccentricity e1 of the centre of gravitation and thus a bending
moment of M;

(8)

sm a
M; = rrpr;2 rm - - (9)
n- a
This moment and the moment caused by externa! forces give the actual moment
( 10)
208 W. KASTNER, E. ROHRICH, W. SCHMITT, R. STEINBUCH

This moment causes a bending moment in the ligament:

Me= 2t " <1(q>)r~

f. ~ ( COS e/>+~ dcp
sma .) ( 11)

where

sm 11
costf> + - -
rr - ex
a(cp) = a 2 - - -- - ( 12)
smo:
coso:+ - -
rr - ex
a2 = cr(cc) the maximum tensile stress in the case of a crack-opening moment M.
This yields
2
M = a 2 r~t.
( rr - ::x - 2 -sin- ex - -1 sm
.
2ex
)
( 13)
sm ex rr - ex 2
cosex + - -
rr - ex
and

M(cos ex + sm ex )
TC - CX
2 2 ( 14)
ª = (rr - ex- 2sin ex - ~sin2:'.X)
rr - rJ. 2
A circumferentially flawed pipe will fail if
cr* = a1 + 0'2 ( 15)
which in more explicit form is
sin ex ( sin ex )
rrpr¡
2
rm - - coscc + - - + ~Mex
* rr n - ex n - ex 1
6
O' = rr ~-,;_ ªa•+ ( 1 .
sin 2 o: ) , ------ ( )
rr - !X - 2 - - - - sm 2ex r;,,t
rr-ct 2
and for the case of interna] pressure only and r¡ ~ rm

2 sin ex(cos rx. + sm rx. )

a* rr rr - ex
= 1+ . 2 l ( 17)
(J'ax n; - O: sm ex
rr - ex - 2 - - - - - sin 2cx
7t-C( 2
This purely elastic and one-dimensional (with respect to the stress) solution, as can
be seen in Fig. 9, shows good agreement for many experimental results, but is very
 CRITICAL CRACK SIZES IN DUCTILE PIPING 209

~ 0.9

0.8-t----t----1-- - - - - -- - -- --4
6 finill! - element resutts
0.7 + KWU - experiiwt (chaphr l2.ll'is paper)

9 ntntnm - expll"imtnts 1111

O.S

-mlf crack anglt 11

Fig. 9. Experimental and theoretical results on circumferential through-wall flaws.

conservative compared to the results of axial flaws proposed by Hahn et a/.,4 and
finite element results achieved with the same methods as for the pipe bends (see
Tables 5 to 8).
Two corrections are necessary :
To take into account the biaxiality of the stress acting at the crack tip.
To demonstrate the influence of a plastic zone ahead of the crack tip.
The first is not possible with such a simple analysis, the effect of the second is briefly
outlined below.
In eqn. (6) the stress is assumed to be proportional to the distance of the centre of
gravity, only if a, + a 2 < a* and a 2 = a* - a 1 elsewhere.
Then there exists an angle p such that
a i( </>) = a* - O' 1 <X :$ </> ~ /3
(18)
cos </> + e 2
t1i(</>) = (a"' - 0'1) p
cos + e 2
 TABLE 5 ....o
N

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS Of CIRCUMFERENTIALLY THROUGH-WALL-FLAWF.0 PIPES SUBJECTED TO INTERNAL PRESSURE

Number rm I 'X
ª"X. (J , · a,, a_./a,, Material Tempera tu re Reference
(Nmm- 2 ) (Nmni - 2 (Nmm - 2)
( ºC)
(mm)
- -··--·- ..- - - --·
(mm)
·- -- -- -
(degrees)
- - - - ·-----
)
-·
__ _ .. _ -- -- -·
1 83 ·25 10·9 17 0·5 AI06-B RT 9
2 375 8·2 21 294 414 599 0·49 Carbon ST RT 10
3 83 ·25 10·9 34 0·465 AJ06-B RT 9
4 375 8·2 38 275 414 599 0-46 Carbon ST RT 10
5 105 8·3 78 64 266 492 0· 13 IOCrMoNiNh RT 11
6 105 ·5 8·0 IOO 37 266 492 0·075 IOCrMoNiNh RT 11
7 333 38 95 84·7 535 625 0·14 20MnMoNi55 so see Section 3.2
-·-· --- -- - --· - · - - - -- ··- - .

TABLE 6
EXPERIME!'sTAL R(SL'L TS O!'; CIRCUMFERENTIALl. Y PART-THROUGH-fLAWf:D PIPES SUBJECTED TO INTERNAL PRESSURE
-~--- - - - -
Numher r,- I a cr. '1 u x (J. a,. Material Tempera1ure Refen•nce
(mm) (mm) (mm) (degrt>es) (Nmm - 1 ) (Nmn1 - 2 ) (Nmm - 2)
( º C)

8 so 5·7 3-42 43 2!0 304 576 AISI-304 RT 12

9 so 5·7 4 43 173 304 576 AISl-304 RT 12
10 300 17·4 13 45 97 219 568 A106-B 279 2
11 300 17 25 12 ·87 90 68 219 568 AI06-B 274 2
12 300 17 ·5 13· I 112·5 65 219 568 AI06-B 273 2
13 300 17 ·55 13· l 7 135 85 219 568 AI06-B 293
14 300 17-45 13 157 77 219 568 AI06-B 283 2 V,

;l
z
TABLE 7 =
e
(i
t:XPERIMEr-TAL RESLL.l'S ON CIR(TMFERl:'r-TJAI.LY THROUGH-WALI .-FLAWEO PIPES WJTH l"-TERNAL PRESSURE AND EXTERNAL MOMENTUM LOADING :r:
- - - - - -·- ... - --·· - -----
Numher r; / rx p M,.., (J •. (1 u Material Tempera1Ure Reference

-- ... ___
(mm) (mm) (degret>s) (Nmm - 2) (Nmm) (Nmni- 2) (Nmm - 2)

- -··--
( º C)

15 53-4 8·56 38 17·2 13 ·8 X 10 6 310 633 Type 304 4 8

16 53·4 8·56 67·5 7·23 9-432 X 10 6 310 633 Type 304 4 8
··- - -- --- ···· ·- - --·-· ·- - - - - - ·-- --· ·-- - --··
 CRITICAL CRACK SIZES IN DUCTILE PIPING 211

TABLE 8
FINITE·ELEMENT RFSUL TS ON CIRCUMFERENTIAL THROUGH·WALL·FLAWED PIPES

Number oc u.,.;u• M Leakage area

(degrees) (Nmm) (mm 2 )
17 72 0·24 o 2040
18 77 0·21 o 2450
19 90 0·14 o 6564
20 60 0·348 fixed ends at 660
21 90 0·288 ~ 2m distance 1200
22 72 0·22 1·92 X 10 8 2116
23 72 0·20 3·84 X 10 8 2264

Dimensions of pipes: r m = 401 mm, t = 42 mm, 1 = 1920 mm .

Load : p = 15·5 Nmm- 2 .
Young's modulus : E= 185,000 Nmm - 2 .

where
sin f3 - (/3 - rx) cos /3
( 19)
e2= - - - - --
1t - (1

is the new centre of gravity.

With this input the analysis has to be done again. We find , that the pipe flawed at
an angle 2Cl can support a load, which increases by an increasing value of {3, until a
maximum and then decreases rapidly.

3.2. Experimental verijication

To prove the analytical prediction for a circumferential through-wall crack in a
pipe loaded by interna! pressure, a test with a full scale main coolant pipe element
was performed by K WU.
For the experiment the pipe prolongations of the elbow test object (Section 2.3)
were cut off and welded together. This resulted in a pipe of the material
20 MnMoNi 55 with
wall thickness t = 38·5 mm
inner diameter 2r¡ = 628 mm
pipe length / = 2347 mm
which was closed at both ends with caps. In one cap there was installed a 16 kW rod
heater. The schematic test set-up is shown in Fig. 10.
The pipe investigated hada predetermined through-wall breaking flaw, which was
fabricated by milling a slot to simulate a crack of 190º of the pipe perimeter in the
circumferential welding to get a pressure of pipe failure in the range of the main
coolant piping pressure. Overa crack length of about 1100 mm the crack width was
l ·8 mm. At the tips of the flaw there were only small milled gaps of 0·85 mm with a
length of 2·4 mm, as shown in Fig. 10.
212 W. KASTNER , E. ROHRICH , W. SCHMJTT, R. STEINBUCH

¡ndeh!rmoned tt.-ou,;, - 1/0ll flaw

,,,l
.
A-f-S1 B

1 !
L______ .! ;L~------..J
~~nred ~ut'~!!lw
~ - -~ - - -i"j
~ - -··· -- -- 2, , nos- --- _j ~:·.~:
11 · T4

Fig. 10. Test set-up with instrumentation .

To record the occurrences during the test, transducers were installed (Fig . 10), to
measure:
pressure of the fluid (strain gauge pressure transducers DI , 02):
fluid temperature (thermocouples TI to T4):
distances, which were run by the flaw flanks, i.e. crack extension (displacement
transducers Sl , S2) ;
break of the pipe due to the crack extension (displacement transducer S3) .
The output from seven transducers was recorded continuously on a magnetic tape
recorder and after test completion an error analysis was made .
The test performance was similar to the experiment with the longitudinal through-
wall crack in a pipe elbow (Section 2.3). The pressurised water in the pipe was heated
up to 51 ºC. So that it could be ensured that the wall temperature was sufficiently
high (46 ºC) to ensure that any failure was ductile. Pressurising the water by a piston
pump produced considerable plastic deformation and eventually pipe failure at 205
bar. The through-wall crack ran on the outer pipe surface at both ends transverse to
the flaw direction about 30 mm in the tough material of ful] thickness and was then
stopped . The maximum flaw extension was measured immediately after breaking to
be 34 mm . As shown in Fig. 11 the crack width after de-pressurisation and cooling
down the pipe was only about 32 mm.
Dueto the increase of the flaw width there occurred a break of the pipe which was
measured by the displacement transducer S3 (see Fig. 1O). Just at the moment of
cracking this displacement increased from 1O to 16·5 mm. The gradient of the two
pipe-parts to the horizontal was approximately 1º . measured after the test
performance.
 CRITICAL CRACK SIZES IN DUCTILE PIPING 213

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1~ + -1-1---~ ~ - + - - ~ ~ ---1------
1
l
1

4~ 1
1
/
1
1
\

1
50 +-+-tmur;, - 1-
- - - -lol!i +--- - ·--¡-
floll widlh befare 1
the eXIJe'iment 1
1
flaw width II
aftrr th! test
1
1

o 10 2() 30 nwn 1,()

flall wdt1 b

Fig. 11 . Maximum width of the circumferential through-wall flaw as a function of pressure.

From measuring the diameters of the pipe after test completion a large plastic
deformation of the pi pe in the region of the predetermined flaw could be recognised .
The pipe was no longer circular. The measured maximum diameter increase was
about 1Omm, the maximum diameter decrease was about -6· l mm.
With different assumptions for the flow stress a• the experimental result is plotted
in Fig. 9, together with other test results obtained by GE,9 Zeibig and Fortmann 11
and Watanabe et al. 12
The trend of the analytical curve in Fig. 9 indicates, as expected, an
underestimation of the burst pressure for large crack sizes.

3.3. Circumferentialfy part-through crack

For the problem of circumferentially flawed pipes, a solution like that proposed in
the last section is available (see also BMI 1908 2 ). As this method is not conservative
compared to the experiments, we shall outline another approach:
The centre of gravity of the flawed pipe is

e¡= - r f SlD<X
(20)
m n-f(J.
 214 W . KASTNER, E. ROHRICH, W . SCHMITT, R. STEINBUCH

The pressure then causes a bending moment

. sm (X
M = pr.2 rm.f -
1 rr. _-
f(X (21)

This bending moment is not only acting in the flawed cross-section but also sorne
distance ahead, causing a bending stress at (/> = O
, 'j. sin (X pr¡ r¡ 2fsin (X
ª2 = 2 7t - f(X -- -
2tp r m
~
7t - f(X
(J
ax
(22)
.

In the flawed cross-section this stress in the unflawed pipe is augmented by the ratio
of wall thickness and ligarnent thickness, thus
2f sin (X
a2 = -1 ---·-¡-· -n--¡-·
_(X
a ax (23)

Thís stress has to be added to the stress caused by the internal pressure
7t
(l 1 = ---,-. (J ax (24)
7t - .,(X

so the critica! crack-angle for a certain flaw depth is given by

a* ( n 2f sin r1. )
(25)
ªªx = n - IO( + -¡-:-7 n - fa
For the case of an externa! bending moment eqn . (22) modifies to

1
Clz -
- 2'j' sin (J.
-- j-:-Gax
L M-ex
+- (22')
7t - (J. nrmi
Equations (23)---(25) then have to be changed in the same way .

3.4. Experimental verification

The analytical evaluation of critica! crack lengths for circumferential part-
through cracks compared with test results obtaíned by Watanabe et al. 12 and
BMI 1908 2 is shown in Fig. 12. The analytical curve after eqn. (28) is plotted for a
ratio of the crack depth f = O· 75, in agreement with the test performed.
The choice of the flow stress a* has obvíously a great influence on the estimation
of critica! crack lengths, especially for large crack sizes.
The analytical results from eqn. (16) for through wall circumferential cracks
subjected to interna! pressure and externa! moment loading are shown in Fig. 13.
The curves are plotted for the loading conditions of experiments performed by
EPRl. 13
The scatter band in the test results is comparable with the internal pressure
loading case.
 CRITICAL CRACK SIZES IN DUCTILE PIPING 215

1.0
L. LIClk
B.. 8""11<

Q75
BHI - pn,posci /2/, -t:O,7S

0,5

0,25

B B

o 90" 120' 1~· 180°

hall crock - argle Cl

Fig. 12 . Comparison of theoretical and experimental results on part-through cracks.

0 , 3 1 ~ - - - - - - - - , - - - - - -- -...--- - -- - -
0., 10
Oo, IO 1
f 0a . 10 11

ex¡,enment no 15, tablt 7

o • 1so· 1eo'
o 61)' 120'
- tdt CRl:k angle Cl

Fig. 13. Experiments and theory : Internal pressure and external bending moment.
216 W. KASTNER, E. RÓHRICH, W. SCHMITT, R. STEINBUCH

4. LEAK-BEFORE-BREAK

When crack lengths are much smaller than the critica! crack length they tend, as
shown by theoretical and experimental work done by Stahn and Doll, 14 to grow
through the wall before they significantly extend as a through-wall crack in an axial or
circumferential direction. This leak-before-break behaviour of part-through cracks
can be used to assure safe operation of nuclear power plants by the assessment of
leakages detected in the piping system and their correlation to actual leakage areas
and corresponding crack lengths .

4. 1. Leakage areas in straight pipes and pipe bends

The determination ofleakage areas in pipes may be derived from the displacement
of the centre line of a slit to the flank of a crack embedded in an elastic unbounded
flat plate loaded to tension as shown in Fig. 14.

4K (x
=-y Vh
1
V(X) (26)

where K 1 is the stress intensity factor (opening mode 1). Xis measured from thecrack
tip along the crack border.

. ·------ ( ·-·--···- · -- -···-·- ·-· í pl .J

Fig. 14. Shape of the leakage area with plastic correction .

By the extent of the crack length with a plastic zone (assumed circular) ahead of
15
the crack tip, and the approximation of the length r ri of the plastic zone by

r
pi
= .!_
2n
(K1)2
<J*
(27)

the leakage area in a plate may be extrapolated from the crack tip profile by the
following approxirnation as shown in Fig. 15
32 K

f
c + rpl
A 1
=4 V(X)dX = -- :.:- [(e+ rr 1) 3 : 2 - r;¡2 ] (28)
r
'p1
3 E v·2n
 CRITICAL CRACK SIZES IN DUCTILE PIPING 217

8r--- - - ~ -- - ~ - - - ~ ~ ~

tS
7
),_X : S : Sll'llqltp~
j B : Pipo! bond
E Extrados
.~
6 1 : Jnlrados
i
il
5

í
o
O
··--.-- -~·
1 2 3
1
¡
~- -·. - - ~- ··· ·- -
4
r -·

5
_J 6 7
X:1,81 .,.5.,.-
rro·I

Fig. 15. Correction factors for the leakage areas of axially flawed pipe bends and straight pipes.

Taking into account the effect of curvature in cylindrical shells, the component of
the crack surface displacement in an axially and circumferentially cracked
cylindrical shell, given by Erdogen and Ratwani, 16 can be used to determine the
relation between the leakage a rea of a crack in a straight pi pe and a fla te plate by the
following approximations :
(29)
where
a(í.) = 1 + 0· 1i. + 0· 162 (30)

(for axial cracks in a symmetrically loaded cylindrical shell)

and
-'.X( Í.) = (1 + Ü · 117Í. 2 ) I · 2 (31)

(for circumferentially cracked cylindrical shells under axial loading)

). is the shell parameter defined by
('
i. = .j"12(1 - v2) -- (32)
J0
where v is Poisson's ratio.
218 W . KASTNER, E. ROHRICH, W . SCHMITT, R. STEINBUCH

The leakage areas in pipe bends may be obtained by the evaluation of the crack
surface displacement in straight pipes and pipe bends resulting from the 3D-finite
element calculations described in Section 3.
The ratio /3 of the leakage area for longitudinal cracks in the piping elbow and
straight pipes versus the shell parameter ic is plotted in Fig. 15.
By the least square polynomial fit the following approximations are given for
longitudinal cracks in the intrados (in) and extrados (ex)
= 0·00)96ic 3 -0·0)64}. 2 - 0·046). + 1·292
/J;n(Í.) (33)
{3j).) = 0·86 - 0·0008).3 + 0·0126.1c 2 - 0·00794). (34)
The determination of leakage areas, A , for longitudinal cracks in pipe bends is then
given by the relations :

A(;n, =A 0 y,//3;n(). ) (intrados) (35)

Ate•>= Acy,//J 0 .().. ) (extrados) (36)
where A 0 y, is the leakage area in the straight pipe as defined by eqn. (29).
The curvature etfect of cylindrical shells on the crack surface displacements for
longitudinal cracks in pipe bends and straight pipes is shown in Fig. 16. For short
cracks the influence of the stress leve! in the pipe bend can readily be observed by the
higher magnification factor, /J, on the intrados and the lower magnification factor, /J ,

,.---,----.-------,--.-------,-----r---.---- - , - - . - - - - , - - r - ~- ~
6C<rtW,-~--1-----t--- 4----+---- -+----+----+--+----j---;---1--,---.,
IMI!

... 6CXD

~
J~i.----4---4-~-1---+-~i----,------,--4----- ; - - ~~ -,------qr---,

1----- - t-- t ·- -+---+----,------+- - ------+--1-+------1

·-··± ·
'
-+--:·-·
1
1
•
1
1 - •'
--i----
--·

ZOO? J_ :-.~--------4- l~ -- -+-··

Fig. 16. Leakage arcas of circumferentially flawed pipes (see Table 8) .

 CRITICAL CRACK SIZES IN DUCTILE PIPING 219

on the extrados ofthe pipe bend compared to the straight pipe. For longer cracks the
decreasing stitfness in the pipe bend has a greater influence on the crack surface
displacements than the stress level.

5. CONCLUSIONS

(a) Longitudinal cracks in pipe bends do not behave significantly differently

from similar cracks in straight pipes.
(b) Experimental results for critica! crack sizes of circumferential cracks show
reasonable agreement with the analytical approach described in the paper
(Figs 12 and 13).
(c) The choice of flow stress a• has a great influence in the estimation of critica!
crack lengths, especially for large crack sizes.
(d) The leakage areas for through flaws in pipe elbows and straight pipe have
been assessed (Figs 15 and 16).

REFERENCES

l. ElJIER, R ., MAXEY, W. A ., DuFFEY, A . R . and ATTERBURY , T . J., Jnvestigation of the initiation and
extent of ductile pipe rupture, BMI-1866, July, 1969.
2. E1J1ER, R., MAXEY, W. A., OuFFEY, A . R . and ATTERBURY, T . J., lnvestigation of the initiation and
extent of ducti/e pipe rupture, BMl-1908, June, 1971 .
3. DARLASTON, B. J. L. and HARRISON, R . P., The ductilefai/ure of thin wal/edpipes with defects under
combinlltion of internlll pressure and bending, SMIRT-4, Paper F8/4, August, 1977.
4. HAHN, G. T . et al., Criteria for crack extension in cylindrical pressure vessels. lntern. J. Fracture
Mechanics, , (1969), pp. 187-210.
5. FOLIAS, E. S., On the effect of initial curvature on cracked sheets, UTEC CE 69-002, January, 1969.
6. RóHRtCH, E. and STEINBUCH, R. , Zahbruch von Hauptkühlmittelleitungen. In: Deutscher Verband
fiir Materialprüfung, Vortrage dcr 10. Sitzung des Arbeitskreises Bruchvorgiinge, 11- 12 Oktober,
1978.
7. Forschungsprogramm Reaktorsicherheit, AbschluBbericht Forderungsvorhaben BMFT RS 104 und
RS 294. Untcrsuchungsprogramm zur Erprobung eincr Berstsicherung für Reaktorkomponenten,
RE 23/021 /78, Erlangen, 1978.
8. Mechanicalfracture predictionsfor sensitized stee/ piping with circumferentia/ cracks, EPRI NP-192,
September, 1976.
9. Reactor primary coolanl system rupture study, Quarterly Progress Report No. 14, July- September,
1968, GE AP-5716.
10. SzvsLOWSKY, J. J. and SALVATORI, R., Determination of design plate breaks for the Wcstinghouse
Reactor Coolant System, WC AP-7403, Review I , February, 1972.
11 . ZEIBIG , H . and FoRTMANN, F ., Fracture behaviour offerritic and austenitic steel pipes, SMIRT-2.
Paper F4/ 8, Berlin, 1973.
12. WATANABE, M ., MUKAI , Y., KAGA, S. and FunHARA , S., Mcchanical Behaviour of Bursting of
Longitudinally and Circumfercntially Notched AISl -304 Stainless Stecl Pipes by Hydraulic and
Explosion Tests. Osaka Univcrsity, Paper der Intern. Konf. In Tokio, 4.77 .
13. Mechanicalfracture predictionsfor sensitized stainless steelpiping with circumferential cracks, EPRI
NP-192, September, 1976.
14. STAHN, D . and DóLL, W., Experimente/Je Untersuchungen zur Ausbreitungscharakteristik von
teilweise durchgehenden Rissen in spródbrechenden Platten unter Zugebeanspruchung, Bericht V
18/78 des FKM Freiburg, Freiburg, 1978.
15 . IRWJN, G. R., Structural aspects of brittle fracture, Appl. Mat. Research, 3 (1964), pp. 65-81.
16. ERPOOAN, F . and R.ATWANI, M ., Fracture ofcylindrical and spherical shells containing a crack, Nucl.
Eng. Design, 20 (1972), pp. 265-86.