CASE
--`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
Approval Date: August 9, 1996
See Numeric Index for expiration
and any reaffirmation dates.
Case N-494-3
Pipe Specific Evaluation Procedures and
Acceptance Criteria for Flaws in Class 1 Ferritic
Piping that Exceed the Acceptance Standards of
IWB-3514.2 and in Class 1 Austenitic Piping that
Exceed the Acceptance Standards of IWB-3514.3
Section XI, Division 1
E Inquiry: As an alternative to the requirements of
IWB-3650, may Class 1 ferritic piping containing a
flaw exceeding the acceptance standards of IWB-3514.2
be evaluated and accepted for continued service as
provided in IWB-3132.4 when actual pipe material
strength or toughness properties are available or when
either the Pb /Pm ratios or the Pm values exceed the
limits for circumferential flaws stated in Appendix H?
Furthermore, as an alternative to the requirements of
IWB-3640, may Class 1 austenitic piping containing a
flaw exceeding the acceptance standards of IWB-3514.3
be evaluated and accepted for continued service as
provided in IWB-3132.4 when actual pipe material
strength or toughness properties are available?
Reply: It is the opinion of the Committee that, as
an alternative to the requirements of IWB-3650, flaws
in Class 1 ferritic piping exceeding the acceptance
standards of IWB-3514.2 may be evaluated for contin-
ued service in accordance with the following procedure.
In addition, it is the opinion of the Committee that,
as an alternative to the requirements of IWB-3640, flaws
in Class 1 austenitic piping exceeding the acceptance
standards of IWB-3514.3 may be evaluated for contin-
ued service in accordance with the following procedure.
1.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES AND
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
Piping containing a flaw exceeding the acceptance
standards of IWB-3514.2 or IWB-3514.3 may be evalu-
ated by analytical procedures to determine acceptability
for continued service to the next inspection or to the
end of service lifetime. The pipe containing the flaw
is acceptable for continued service during the evaluated
time period if the criteria of 1.2 (a) and (b) are satisfied.
The evaluation shall be the responsibility of the Owner
Copyright ASME International
Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
N-494-3
and shall be submitted to the regulatory and enforcement
authorities having jurisdiction at the plant site.
1.1 Evaluation Procedures
Evaluation procedures based on use of a failure
assessment diagram such as in Appendix A or B of
this Case shall be used, subject to the following:
(a) The evaluation procedures and acceptance criteria
are applicable to ferritic and austenitic piping NPS 4
or larger and portions of adjoining pipe fittings within
a distance of冪R2t from the weld centerline, where R2
is the outside radius and t is the thickness of the pipe.
(b) For ferritic piping, the evaluation procedures and
acceptance criteria are applicable to seamless or welded
wrought carbon steel pipe and fittings with specified
minimum yield strength not greater than 40 ksi, and
associated weld materials.
(c) For austenitic piping, the evaluation procedures
and acceptance criteria are applicable to pipe, fittings,
and associated weld materials that are made of wrought
stainless steel, Ni-Cr-Fe alloy, or cast stainless steel
with ferrite level less than 20% or 20 FN (ferrite
number); with specified minimum yield strength less
than 45 ksi; and have Sm values in Section II, Part D,
Table Y-1.
1.2 Acceptance Criteria
(a) Flaws in ferritic piping characterized to have
depths greater than 75% of the wall thickness at the
end of the evaluation period are unacceptable. Other
flaws exceeding the acceptance standards of IWB-3514.2
may be evaluated using the analytical procedures of
Appendix A of this Case. Piping containing these other
flaws is acceptable for continued service during the
evaluation period when the criteria in (b)(1) and (2)
below are satisfied.
(b) Flaws in austenitic piping characterized to have
depths greater than 75% of the wall thickness at the
end of the evaluation period are unacceptable. Other
flaws exceeding the acceptance standards of IWB-3414.3
may be evaluated using the analytical procedures of
Appendix B of this Case. Piping containing these other
flaws is acceptable for continued service during the
evaluation period when the criteria in (1) and (2) below
are satisfied.
631
SUPP. 5 – NC
Licensee=BP International/5928366101
Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT
 CASE (continued)

N-494-3
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE

(1) For each specific set of loading conditions,

one or more assessment points with coordinates (Sr′,
Kr′), shall be inside the failure assessment curve. For
lower shelf and transition temperatures, only one assess-
ment point is required to be calculated. For upper shelf
temperatures, a series of assessment points for various
amounts of ductile flaw extension may be required to
be calculated to meet this criterion.
(2) The Sr′ coordinate of the assessment point that
satisfies criterion (1) above shall satisfy

Sr′ ≤ Srcutoff

where Srcutoff is the limit load cutoff on the applicable

failure assessment diagram.
(c) Formulae for (Sr′, Kr′) and Srcutoff applicable to
ferritic and austenitic piping are given in Appendix A.
The values of (Sr′, Kr′) and Srcutoff are functions of actual
pipe stresses, required safety margins, pipe material
properties, end of evaluation period flaw length and
depth, and flaw orientation. The failure assessment
curve is independent of flaw orientation, flaw depth,
flaw aspect ratio, and pipe radius to thickness ratio.

632
SUPP. 5 – NC --`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International

Provided by IHS under license with ASME Licensee=BP International/5928366101
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT

CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
APPENDIX A
EVALUATION OF FLAWS IN FERRITIC PIPING
A-1000 INTRODUCTION
A-1100 Scope
(a) This Appendix provides a method for determining
acceptability for continued service of ferritic piping
containing flaws that exceed the allowable flaw stan-
dards of IWB-3514.2. The evaluation methodology is
based on a failure assessment diagram approach that
includes consideration of the following failure mecha-
nisms:
(1) brittle fracture described by linear elastic frac-
ture mechanics;
(2) elastic plastic fracture mechanics, when ductile
flaw extension occurs prior to reaching limit load;
(3) limit load failure of the pipe cross section,
which is reduced by the flaw area, for ductile materials
where the limit load is assured.
(b) This Appendix accounts for actual pipe material
toughness properties through input of either the JR
resistance curve that characterizes ductile flaw extension,
or the fracture toughness JIc. Flaws are evaluated by
comparing the actual pipe applied stress, for the flaw
size at the end of the evaluation period, with the
--`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
allowable stress, using the graphical procedure of a
failure assessment diagram approach. All combinations
of applied stresses Pm , Pb , and Pe are permitted in
the evaluation.
(c) This Appendix provides requirements for flaw
modeling and flaw growth. Flaw growth analysis is
based on fatigue. When stress corrosion cracking (SCC)
is active, the growth shall be added to the growth from
fatigue. The acceptance criteria of 1.2 shall include
safety margins on failure for the three failure mecha-
nisms described above. The acceptance criteria shall
be used to determine acceptability of the flawed piping
for continued service until the next inspection, or until
the end of service lifetime, or to determine the time
interval until a subsequent inspection.
Copyright ASME International
Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
CASE (continued)
N-494-3
A-1200 PROCEDURE OVERVIEW
The following is a summary of the analytical pro-
cedure:
(a) Determine the flaw configuration from the mea-
sured flaw in accordance with IWA-3000, using A-2000.
(b) Resolve the actual flaw into circumferential and
axial components using A-2000.
(c) Determine the stresses normal to the flaw at
the location of the detected flaw for normal, upset,
emergency, faulted and test conditions.
(d) Perform a flaw growth analysis, as described in
A-3000, to establish the end of the evaluation period
flaw dimensions, af and ᐉf .
(e) Obtain actual pipe material preperties, E , ␴y , ␴f ,
and the JR resistance curve or JIc , at the temperatures
required for analysis.
(f) Calculate the appropriate vertical cutoff, Srcutoff,
for the flaw configuration of interest, circumferential
or axial, using the formulae in A-4211 or A-4212.
(g) Using the formulae in A-4300, calculate the
assessment point coordinates (Sr′, Kr′), for the piping
stresses Pm , Pb and Pe for circumferential flaws, or p
(pressure) for axial flaws, using the specified safety
factors in Table A-4400-1.
(h) Plot the assessment points calculated in (g) above
on the failure assessment diagram in Fig. A-4200-1
and apply the acceptance criteria of 1.2 to determine
the acceptability of the pipe for continued service.
A-1300 NOMENCLATURE E
The following nomenclature is used in this Appendix.
ap initial flaw depth, in.
⌬ap ductile flaw extension, in.
afp maximum depth to which the de-
tected flaw is calculated to grow by
the end of the evaluation period, in.
a′p sum of flaw depth plus ductile flaw
extension, in.
633 SUPP. 5 – NC
Licensee=BP International/5928366101
Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT
 CASE (continued)
N-494-3
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
Cop material constant in fatigue growth
equation
da/dNp fatigue flaw growth rate, in./cycle
Ep Young’s modulus, ksi
E′p E/(1 − ␮2), ksi
fcp geometry correction term that ac-
counts for flaw depth and wall thick-
ness relative to pipe inside radius
f(z)p bulging factor correction
Fmp parameter for circumferential flaw
membrane stress intensity factor
Fbp parameter for circumferential flaw
bending stress intensity factor
F1p total geometry correction factor for
interior axial part-through-wall in
pressurized pipe
Jep linear elastic J-integral calculated
from stress intensity factor K1, in-
lbs/in2
JIcp measure of toughness at crack initia-
tion at upper shelf, transition, and
lower shelf temperatures, in-lbs/in2
JRp J-integral resistance to ductile tearing
at prescribed ⌬a value obtained from
accepted test procedures, in-lbs/in2
KIp mode I stress intensity factor, ksi
冪in.
⌬KIp maximum range of KI fluctuation
during transient, ksi冪in.
Krp ordinate of failure assessment dia-
gram curve
Kr′p brittle fracture component of assess-
ment point defined by ratio of stress
intensity factor to material fracture
toughness
KIrp stress intensity factor for residual
stress, ksi冪in.
E ᐉp initial flaw length, in.
ᐉfp maximum length to which detected
flaw is calculated to grow at end of
evaluation period, in.
ᐉcritp critical flaw length for stability of
an axial through-wall flaw, in.
M2p parameter for circumferential col-
lapse stress
E M1′, M2′, M3′p geometry correction factor for inte-
rior axial part-through-wall flaw in
pressurized pipe: accounts for flaw
aspect ratio, a/ᐉ
np material constant in fatigue flaw
growth equation
pp internal pressure, ksi
634
SUPP. 5 – NC
Copyright ASME International
Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
Pmp primary membrane stress in the pipe
at the flaw, ksi
Pmᐉp membrane stress at collapse limit load
with zero primary bending stress, ksi
Pm′p membrane stress at reference limit
load for any combination of primary
and expansion stresses, ksi
Pbp primary bending stress in the pipe
at the flaw, ksi
Pb′p bending stress at collapse limit load
for any combination of primary and
expansion stresses, ksi
Pep pipe expansion stress, ksi
Pᐉp internal pressure at collapse limit
load for axial flaw, ksi
Pop reference limit load pressure, ksi
Qp flaw shape parameter
Rp mean radius of pipe, in.
Rcp sum of flaw depth and inside radius
of pipe, in.
R1p inside radius of pipe, in.
R2p outside radius of pipe, in.
Smp the design stress intensity given in
Section II, Part D, ksi
Srp abscissa of failure assessment dia-
gram curve
Sr′p limit road component of assessment
point, defined for circumferential
flaws by ratio of applied stress to
stress at reference limit load, and
for axial flaws as ratio of pressure
to reference limit load pressure
Srcutoffp maximum value of Sr at vertical
(limit load) boundary of failure as-
sessment diagram curve
(SF)p safety factor
tp pipe wall thickness, in.
xp parameter a / t
zp global limit load geometry
␤p angle to neutral axis of flawed pipe,
radians
␥p factor in reference limit load expres-
sion for Pm′ reflecting ratio of Pb
to Pm
⌫mp factor in reference limit load expres-
sions reflecting effect of flaw size
␪p one-half of final flaw angle (see Fig.
A-4211-1), radians
␮p Poisson’s ratio
␴fp flow stress, equal 3Sm for austenitic
piping, as defined in Section XI,
Appendix H for ferritic piping, ksi
--`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Licensee=BP International/5928366101
Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT

CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
␴hp hoop stress in the pipe at the flaw, ksi
␴yp yield strength, ksi
␺p angle used in defining Pmᐉ , radians
A-2000 FLAW MODEL FOR ANALYSIS
A-2100 Scope
This Article provides requirements for flaw shape,
multiple flaws, flaw orientation, and flaw location used
to determine acceptance.
A-2200 Flaw Shape
The flaw shall be completely bounded by a rectangular
or circumferential planar area in accordance with the
methods described in IWA-3300. Figures A-2200-1 and
A-2200-2 illustrate flaw characterization for circumfer-
ential and axial pipe flaws, respectively.
A-2300 Proximity to Closest Flaw
For multiple neighboring flaws, when the shortest
distance between the boundaries of two neighboring
flaws is within the proximity limits specified in
IWA-3300, the neigoring flaws shall be bounded by a
single rectangular or circumferential planar area in
accordance with IWA-3300.
A-2400 Flaw Orientation
Flaws that lie in neither an axial1 nor a circumferen-
tial2 plane shall be projected onto these planes in
accordance with the rules of IWA-3340. The axial and
circumferential flaws obtained by these projections shall
be evaluated separately in accordance with this Appen-
dix. Figures A-2400-1, A-2400-2, and A-2400-3 illus-
trate flaw characterization for skewed flaws.
--`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
A-2500 Flaw Location
For analysis, the stresses due to system loading shall
be computed at the flaw location. Surface or subsurface
flaw characterizations shall be used, depending on the
type of flaw. Subsurface flaws within the proximity
limit of IWA-3340 to the surface of the component
shall be considered surface flaws and shall be bounded
by a rectangular or circumferential planar area with
the base on the surface.
1
A plane containing the pipe axis.
2
A plane perpendicular to the pipe axis.
Copyright ASME International
Provided by IHS under license with ASME
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
CASE (continued)
N-494-3
A-3000 FLAW GROWTH ANALYSIS
A-3100 Scope
This Article provides the methodology for determina-
tion of subcritical flaw growth during the evaluation
interval.
A-3200 Subcritical Flaw Growth Analysis
When a flaw is characterized in terms of an equivalent
axial or circumferential flaw, the maximum depth, af ,
and the maximum length, ᐉf , at the end of the evaluation
period shall be determined. Subcritical flaw growth
shall be considered. When stress corrosion cracking
(SCC) is determined to be an active flaw growth
mechanism for the pipe being evaluated, SCC shall
also be considered. Residual stresses shall be included
for both growth mechanisms.
A-3210 Subcritical Flaw Growth Due to Fatigue E
(a) Fatigue flaw growth shall be computed by
da/dN p Co (⌬KI )n
where KI is the applied stress intensity factor, and n
and Co are constants dependent on the material and
environmental conditions.
(b) A cumulative fatigue flaw growth calculation
shall be performed using operating conditions and tran-
sients that apply during the evaluation period. Each
transient shall be considered in approximate chronologi-
cal order as follows.
(1) Determine ⌬KI , the maximum range of KI
fluctuation associated with the transient.
(2) Determine the incremental flaw growth corres-
ponding to ⌬KI from the fatigue flaw growth rate curve
of A-4300 of Appendix A.
(c) After all transients have been considered, the
procedure of (a) and (b) above yields the final flaw
sizes, af and ᐉf , at the end of the evaluation period,
considering only fatigue flaw growth.
A-3220 Flaw Growth Due to Stress Corrosion
Cracking (SCC)
Subcritical flaw growth due to SCC has not been
observed to be a significant flaw growth mechanism
in ferritic piping. When growth due to SCC is deter-
mined to be active, characterization shall be the responsi-
bility of the Owner.
635 SUPP. 5 – NC
Licensee=BP International/5928366101
Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT
 CASE (continued)

N-494-3
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE

FIG. A-2200-1 FLAW CHARACTERIZATION — FIG. A-2200-2 FLAW CHARACTERIZATION — AXIAL

CIRCUMFERENTIAL FLAWS FLAWS

and lengths up to one-half the inside circumference of

A-4000 FAILURE ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM the pipe.
ANALYSIS Figure A-4200-1 shall also be used for axial flaws
of depths up to 75% of the pipe wall thickness and
A-4100 Scope
lengths up to ᐉcrit, where ᐉcrit is given by the limit
This Article describes the failure assessment diagram load stability condition for through-wall flaws:
procedure for the evaluation of flaws in ferritic piping.
The procedure requires:
ᐉcrit p 1.58(Rt )1/2 [(␴f /␴h)2 − 1]1/2
(a) a failure assessment diagram curve;
(b) failure assessment point coordinates;
The failure assessment diagram shown in Fig.
(c) flaw acceptance determination
A-4200-1 has a vertical cutoff for upper bound limits
on Sr. The value of the cutoff is given in A-4210. The
failure assessment diagram curve is limited to R /t ≤ 15.
A-4200 Failure Assessment Diagram Curve
The failure assessment diagram given in Fig. A-4210 Failure Assessment Diagram Curve Cutoff
A-4200-1 is applicable for ferritic piping having: for Limit Load
(a) part-through-wall circumferential flaws under any The vertical cutoff of the failure assessment diagram
combination of primary membrane, primary bending, curve is provided for the following conditions:
and expansion stresses (see Fig. A-4211-1); and (a) part-through-wall circumferential flaws (see Fig.
(b) part-through-wall axial flaws under internal pres- A-4211-1) under any combination of primary membrane
sure (see Fig. A-4212-1). and primary bending stress:
Figure A-4200-1 shall be used for circumferential (b) part-through-wall axial flaws (see Fig. A-4212-1)
flaws of depths up to 75% of the pipe wall thickness under internal pressure.

636
SUPP. 5 – NC
--`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International

Provided by IHS under license with ASME Licensee=BP International/5928366101
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT
 CASE (continued)

N-494-3
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE

FIG.A-2400-1 FLAW CHARACTERIZATION — SKEWED AXIAL FLAWS

PROJECTED INTO AXIAL PLANE

637

--`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International

Provided by IHS under license with ASME Licensee=BP International/5928366101
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT
 CASE (continued)

N-494-3
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
--`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

FIG.A-2400-2 FLAW CHARACTERIZATION — SKEWED CIRCUMFERENTIAL FLAW

PROJECTED INTO CIRCUMFERENTIAL PLANE

638

Copyright ASME International

Provided by IHS under license with ASME Licensee=BP International/5928366101
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT
 CASE (continued)

N-494-3
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE

FIG.A-2400-3 FLAW CHARACTERIZATION — COMPOUND SKEWED FLAW

PROJECTED INTO CIRCUMFERENTIAL AND AXIAL PLANE

639

--`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International

Provided by IHS under license with ASME Licensee=BP International/5928366101
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT
 CASE (continued)

N-494-3
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE

FIG.A-4200-1 FAILURE ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM CURVE FOR PART THROUGH-THE-WALL

CIRCUMFERENTIAL AND AXIAL FLAWS

640

--`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International

Provided by IHS under license with ASME Licensee=BP International/5928366101
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT
 CASE (continued)

N-494-3
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE

where

Pm′ p ␴y␥⌫m

2 0.5

冤冢8P 冣 + 1冥
-␲Pb ␲P b
␥p +
8Pm m

冢 冣
␪
冤R 2
2
− Rc2 + 1 − (R 2 − R12)
␲ c 冥
⌫m p 2 2
(R2 − R1 )

Rc p R1 + a

For circumferential flaws not penetrating the compres-

sive region of the pipe cross-section, ␪ + ␤ ≤ ␲
FIG. A-4211-1 CIRCUMFERENTIAL FLAW
2␴f
Pb′ p [2 sin ␤ − (a /t ) sin ␪]
␲

where

␲(SF )Pm
冤 冥
1 a
␤p ␲− ␪−
2 t ␴f

For longer flaws penetrating the compressive region of

the pipe cross-section, ␪ + ␤ > ␲
FIG. A-4212-1 AXIAL FLAW

冢 冣
2␴f a
Pb′ p 2− sin ␤
␲ t

E A-4211 Circumferential Flaw Cutoff

where
␲
冤 冥
(a) For pure membrane stress, Pb p 0, the limit (SF )Pm
␤p 1 − a /t −
load cutoff for Sr is given by 2 − a /t ␴f

Here the specified safety factor, SF , is given in Table

Srcutoff p Pmᐉ / Pm′ A-4400-1.
(c) For pure bending stress, Pm p 0, the limit load
cutoff for Sr is given by
where
Pmᐉp ␴f [1 − (a / t) (␪ / ␲) − 2␺ / ␲]
␺p arcsin [0.5 (a / t) sin ␪] Srcutoff p (␲/4) Pb′ /(␴y⌫m )
Pm′p ␴y ⌫m
where ⌫m is defined in (b) below. where Pb′ and ⌫m are as defined in (b) above.
(b) For membrane plus bending stresses, the limit
--`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

A-4212 Axial Flaw Cutoff E

load cutoff for Sr is given by
For axial flaws in pipes under internal pressure the
limit load cutoff for Sr is given by
Pb′ (Pm /Pb )
Srcutoff p
Pm′ Srcutoff p Pᐉ /Po

641 SUPP. 5 – NC

Copyright ASME International

Provided by IHS under license with ASME Licensee=BP International/5928366101
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT
 CASE (continued)

N-494-3
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE

where

冢 冣
␪
2t
冤R 2
2
− Rc2 + 1 − (R 2 − R12)
␲ c 冥
Po p [1 − x + x/f (z )]␴y ⌫m p
冪3R1 (R22 − R12)

f(z ) p (1 + 1.61z )0.5 Rc p R1 + a + ⌬a

0.1542 ᐉ2 where ⌫m is recalculated for each value of ⌬a. When

zp
at (R1 /t + 0.5)
the primary membrane stress, Pm , is zero, the coordinate
Sr′ is given by
Pᐉ p (t /R1) ␴f [(1 − x )/(1 − x /M2)]

␲Pb (SF )
where Sr′ p
4␴y⌫m

x p a /t
M2 p {1 + [1.61ᐉ2 /(4Rt )]}0.5 where ⌫m is recalculated for each value of ⌬a . The
coordinate Kr′ is given by

A-4300 Failure Assessment Point Coordinates

Kr′ p 冪Je /JR
′
The failure assessment point coordinates, Sr and Kr′ ,
shall be calculated for the end of the evaluation period
flaw dimensions and for stresses at the location of, for any value of Pm , where Je and JR are also re-
and normal to, the flaw using the JR resistance curve calculated for each value of ⌬a .
data, where ductile flaw extension at upper shelf temper- The linear elastic J-integral is given by
atures may occur prior to reaching limit load, or using
JIc fracture toughness data at transition or lower shelf
temperatures. Je p 1000 K12/E ′

E A-4310 Circumferential Flaws

where
The equations necessary to calculate the failure as-
sessment point coordinates, Sr′ and Kr′ , for part-through-
wall circumferential flaws for a specified amount of K1 p (SF ) P m 冪␲a′ Fm
ductile flaw extension, ⌬a , are given below. When the
temperature is in the transition or lower shelf region,
+ [(SF )Pb + Pe ] 冪␲a′ Fb + Klr
JR shall be replaced by JIc and ⌬a shall be zero. When
the primary membrane stress, Pm, is not zero, the
coordinate Sr′ is given by Fm p 1.1 + (a′ /t) 0.15241 冤
Sr′ p (SF ) Pm /Pm′ 0.855

冢 冣 冢 t ␲冣冥
a′ ␪ a′ ␪
+ 16.722 − 14.944
t␲
where SF is the specified safety factor in Table
A-4400-1, Pm′ is recalculated for each value of ⌬a , and Fb p 1.1 + (a′ /t ) −0.09967 冤
Pm′ p ␴y␥⌫m 0.565

冢 t ␲冣 冢 t ␲冣 冥
a′ ␪ a′ ␪
+ 5.0057 −2.8329
2 0.5

冤冢 冣 冥
-␲ Pb ␲Pb
␥p + +1
8 Pm 8Pm a′ p a + ⌬a

642
SUPP. 5 – NC --`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International

Provided by IHS under license with ASME Licensee=BP International/5928366101
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT
 CASE (continued)

N-494-3
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE

In the above equations, a′ is updated after each TABLE A-4400-1

increment of ductile flaw extension, while ␪ is fixed SPECIFIED SAFETY FACTORS, SF
at its end-of-evaluation-period value. Residual stresses Flaw Type SF
shall be included with a safety factor of 1.0.
Circumferential Flaws
E A-4320 Axial Flaws Normal and Upset Conditions 2.77
Emergency and Faulted Conditions 1.39
The formulae necessary to calculate the failure assess-
--`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

ment point coordinates. Sr′ and Kr′ for part-through- Axial Flaws
Normal and Upset Conditions 3.0
wall axial flaw with a specified amount of ductile flaw
Emergency and Faulted Conditions 1.5
extension, ⌬a, are given below. When the temperature
is in the transition or lower shelf region, JR shall be
replaced by JIc and ⌬a shall be zero. The coordinate
Sr′ is given by Qp 1 + 4.593 (a / ᐉ)1.65
F1p 0.97 [M1′ + M2′ (a′ / t)2 + M3′ (a′ / t)4] fc
Sr′ p (SF )p /Po fcp [(R22 + R12) / (R22 − R12) + 1 − 0.5冪a′ / t]t / R1
M1′p 1.13 − 0.18 (a / ᐉ)
where SF is the specified safety factor given in Table
M2′p − 0.54 + 0.445 / (0.1 + a / ᐉ)
A-4400-1 and Po is re-calculated for each value of ⌬a ,
M3′p 0.5 − 1 / (0.65 + 2a / ᐉ) + 14(1 − 2a / ᐉ)24
2t
Po p [1 − x + x /f (z )]␴y In the equations above, a′ is updated after each
冪3R1
increment of ductile flaw extension, while a / ᐉ is fixed
at its end-of-evaluation-period value. Residual stresses
f (z ) p (1 + 1.61z )0.5
shall be included with a safety factor of 1.0.

0.1542 ᐉ2 A-4400 Flaw Acceptance Determination

zp
at (R1/t + 0.5) The failure assessment point coordinates, Sr′ and Kr′ ,
shall be calculated for each loading condition according
a′ p a + ⌬a to A-4300, using the specified safety factors, SF, in
Table A-4400-1 to determine flaw acceptance.
x p a′ /t (a) For lower shelf and transition temperatures, set
⌬a to zero and JR to JIc at the temperature of interest
The coordinate Kr′ is given by in the calculation of the failure assessment point coordi-
nate. Plot the assessment point on the failure assessment
Kr′ p 冪Je /JR diagram in Fig. A-4200-1 and apply the acceptance
criteria of 1.2 to determine the acceptability of the
where Je and JR are also re-calculated for each value pipe for continued service.
of ⌬a. The linear elastic J-integral is given by (b) For upper shelf temperatures when ductile flaw
extension may occur prior to reaching limit load, calcu-
Je p 1000 K12/E ′ late a series of assessment points for various amounts
of ductile flaw extension, ⌬a , and plot the points on
and the failure assessment diagram in Fig. A-4200-1. Apply
the acceptance criteria of 1.2. to determine the accept-
KIp (SF ) p (R1 / t )冪␲a′ /Q F1 + KIr ability of the pipe for continued service.

643 SUPP. 5 – NC

Copyright ASME International

Provided by IHS under license with ASME Licensee=BP International/5928366101
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT
 CASE (continued)
--`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

N-494-3
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE

APPENDIX B
EVALUATION OF FLAWS IN AUSTENITIC PIPING

B-1000 INTRODUCTION
B-1100 Scope
(a) This Appendix provides a method for determining
acceptability for continued service of austenitic piping
containing flaws exceeding the allowable flaw standards
of IWB-3514.3. The evaluation methodology is based
on a failure assessment diagram approach that includes
consideration of the following failure mechanisms:
(1) brittle fracture described by linear elastic frac-
ture mechanics;
(2) elastic plastic fracture mechanics, when ductile
flaw extension occurs prior to reaching limit load;
(3) limit load failure of the pipe cross section
reduced by the flaw area, for ductile materials when
the limit load is assured.
(b) This Appendix accounts for actual pipe material
toughness properties through input of either the JR resist-
ance curve that characterizes ductile flaw extension, or the
fracture toughness, JIc. Flaws are evaluated by comparing
the actual pipe applied stress, for the flaw size at the end
of the evaluation period, with the allowable stress, using
the graphical procedure of a failure assessment diagram
approach. All combinations of applied stresses Pm , Pb , and
Po are permitted in the evaluation.
(c) The acceptance criteria of 1.2 shall include safety
margins on failure for the three failure mechanisms
described above. The acceptance criteria shall be used
to determine acceptability of the flawed piping for
continued service until the next inspection, or until the
end of service lifetime, or to determine the time interval
until a subsequent inspection.
B-1200 Procedure Overview
The following is a summary of the analytical pro-
cedure:
(a) Determine the flaw configuration from the mea-
sured flaw in accordance with IWA-3000, using A-2000
of this Case.
(b) Resolve the actual flaw into circumferential and
axial components using A-2000 of this Case.
(c) Determine the stresses normal to the flaw at
the location of the detected flaw for normal, upset,
emergency, faulted, and test conditions.
(d) Perform a flaw growth analysis, as described in
Section XI, C-3200, to establish the end of the evaluation
period flaw dimensions, af and ᐉf .
(e) Obtain actual pipe material properties, E , ␴y , ␴f ,
and the JR resistance curve or JIc , at the temperatures
required for analysis.
(f) Calculate the appropriate vertical cutoff, Srcutoff,
for the flaw configuration of interest, circumferential
or axial, using the formulae in A-4211 or A-4212 of
this Case.
(g) Using the formulae in A-4300 of this Case,
calculate the assessment point coordinates (Sr′ , Kr′ ),
for the piping stresses Pm , Pb and Po for circumferential
flaws, or p (pressure) for axial flaws, using the specified
safety factors in Table A-4400-1 of this Case.
(h) Plot the assessment points calculated in (g) above
on the failure assessment diagram in Fig. B-4000-1 of
this Case, and apply the acceptance criteria of 1.2 to
determine the acceptability of the pipe for continued
service.
B-1300 Nomenclature
The nomenclature is identical to that given in A-1300
of this Case.
B-2000 FLAW MODEL FOR ANALYSIS
The procedures of A-2000 of this Case shall be used.
B-3000 FLAW GROWTH ANALYSIS
The procedures of Section XI, C-3200 shall be used.

644
SUPP. 5 – NC

Copyright ASME International

Provided by IHS under license with ASME Licensee=BP International/5928366101
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT
 CASE (continued)

N-494-3
CASES OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE

B-4000 FAILURE ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM
ANALYSIS
(a) The failure assessment diagram procedure of
A-4000 of this Case shall be used, except that the
failure assessment diagram for austenitic piping in Fig.
B-4000-1 of this Case shall be used in lieu of Fig.
A-4200-1. Figure B-4000-1 is applicable to austenitic
piping having:
E (1) part-through-wall circumferential flaws under
any combination of primary membrane, primary bend-
ing, and expansion stresses (see Fig. A-4211-1 of this
Case);
E (2) part-through-wall axial flaws under internal
pressure (see Fig. A-4212-1 of this Case).
(b) Figure B-4000-1 shall be used for circumferential
flaws of depths up to 75% of the pipe wall thickness
and lengths up to one-half the inside circumference of
the pipe, and Fig. B-4000-1 shall also be used for
axial flaws of depths up to 75% of the pipe wall
thickness and lengths up to ᐉcrit where ᐉcrit is given by
the limit load stability condition for through-wall flaws:
ᐉcrit p 1.58(Rt )1/2 [(␴f /␴h )2 − 1]1/2
The failure assessment diagram shown in Fig.
B-4000-1 of this Case has a vertical cutoff for upper
bound limits on Sr . The value of the cutoff is given
in A-4210 of this Case. The failure assessment diagram
curve is limited to R /t < 20.

E FIG. B-4000-1 FAILURE ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM CURVE FOR PART-THROUGH-WALL

CIRCUMFERENTIAL AND AXIAL FLAWS

645 SUPP. 5 – NC
--`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International

Provided by IHS under license with ASME Licensee=BP International/5928366101
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT
 --`,```,,,````,,`,,`,,``,`,`,,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright ASME International

Provided by IHS under license with ASME Licensee=BP International/5928366101
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale, 06/23/2009 14:45:42 MDT