Journal of Testing and Evaluation
doi:10.1520/JTE20170068 / Vol. 46
Manuscript received January 31,
2017; accepted for publication
May 2, 2017; published online
February 14, 2018.
1
Instituto Mexicano del Petróleo,
Eje Central Lázaro Cárdenas 152,
Col. San Bartolo Atepehuacan,
México, D.F., C.P. 07730
(Corresponding author), e-mail:
dangelesh0600@alumno.ipn.mx
2
Instituto Mexicano del Petróleo,
Eje Central Lázaro Cárdenas 152,
Col. San Bartolo Atepehuacan,
México, D.F., C.P. 07730
3
Instituto Politécnico Nacional,
Departamento de Ingeniería
Química Industrial, ESIQIE, IPN,
UPALM EDIF. 7, Zacatenco,
México, D.F., C.P. 07738
4
Universidad Autónoma de
Guadalajara, Av. Patria 1201,
Lomas del Valle, 45129
Zapopan, Jal
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Jun 5 15:06:59 EDT 2019
Copyright © 2018 by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959
Downloaded/printed by
(UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul ((UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
/ No. 5 / September 2018 / available online at www.astm.org
D. Angeles-Herrera,1 A. Albiter,2 R. Cuamatzi-Meléndez,2 G. Terán,3 and Gilberto Ochoa-Ruiz4
Fracture-Toughness and Fatigue Crack Growth
Evaluation in the Transversal Direction of the
Longitudinal Weld of an API X52 Steel Pipeline
Reference
Angeles-Herrera, D., Albiter, A., Cuamatzi-Meléndez, R., Terán, G., and Ochoa-Ruiz, G., “Fracture-Toughness
and Fatigue Crack Growth Evaluation in the Transversal Direction of the Longitudinal Weld of an API X52 Steel
Pipeline,” Journal of Testing and Evaluation, Vol. 46, No. 5, 2018, pp. 2110–2120, https://doi.org/10.1520/
JTE20170068. ISSN 0090-3973
ABSTRACT
In this paper, the fracture-toughness and fatigue crack growth rates of the deposited seam weld
on the longitudinal pipeline API 5L X52 were evaluated. The study was performed with
nonstandard curved specimens, which were machined in the transversal direction of the seam
weld with a crack-initiating notch aligned perpendicular to the direction of the deposited seam
weld metal. The fractographic analysis showed that the low fracture toughness of the weld can
be attributed to the the existence of elements capable of nucleating brittle fracture and the fact
that the intrinsic porosity in the transversal direction provided a favorable crack path for
separating the fracture plane, resulting in low fracture-toughness values. Finally, the resistance
decrease with respect to the fatigue crack growth was attributed to the small grain size because
of the effect of roughness-induced crack closure as well as the interaction of the crack and the
inherent porosity.
Keywords
fracture toughness, fatigue crack growth, submerged-arc welding, fractographic analysis
Introduction
Metallic structural components are often jointed together by means of welding. Since welds are critical
locations for failures (especially in the presence of stress concentration phenomena and because of poor
mechanical properties of the material) several methods for accurately assessing the strength of weld
joints are available in the literature [1–4]. For many years, the oil and gas industry has employed steel
pipelines to transport hydrocarbons and products obtained from refineries to consumer markets. API 5L
X52 pipelines are fabricated by a hot-rolling process, thus the steel plates have to be thermomechanically
treated in order to control grain-size refinement and hardening by precipitates [5]. However, the manu-
facturing process of API 5L X52 pipelines requires the application of longitudinal seam welds with a high
level of quality to ensure toughness properties similar to those of the base metal. It is well known that
2110
 ANGELES-HERRERA ET AL. ON FRACTURE-TOUGHNESS, FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH
fusion welding processes generally produce heterogeneous mi-
crostructures in welded high-strength pipeline joints [6], which
results in mechanical properties very different than those of the
base metal. Therefore, the toughness properties of the seam weld,
which are produced by multiple thermal cycles in the multilayer
welded joints, have been the object of many research works [7–9].
Moreover, the fabrication of this type of pipeline requires the
deposition of welds fabricated by several welding steps, employ-
ing the submerged-arc welding technique (SAW) [10]. In the
SAW process, the generated liquid flux is highly conductive,
producing deoxidizing elements that react chemically with the
weld metal, modifying the original chemical composition of
the weld steel. The main parameter variations for the SAW proc-
ess include: current, voltage, electrical stickout (distance from last
contact to plate), deposition speed, and flux depth. Therefore,
any variation of these parameters will affect the shape and
penetration of the weld, and consequently the integrity of the
deposited weld along with the shape, size, and distribution of
the microstructure and inclusions [11]. Additionally, during
the SAW process, inclusions (solid particles) are trapped in
the microstructure of the weld metal during the cooling
process; in most cases, these are nonmetallic compounds such as
oxides, sulphides, and/or nitrides. As a consequence, the size
distribution and the volumetric fraction of these compounds
influence the mechanical behavior of the weld-deposited metallic
microstructure [12,13].
It is well known that a welding process produces porosity and
metal coalescence, which is characteristic of fused metals by the
electric arc interaction between the base metal and the electrode.
The porosity can be associated with the cover layer of the fusible
granular material (flux), which is positioned over the area to be
welded, whereas the filler metal is supplied by the electrode and
gases trapped during the solidification process. The presence of
defects in API 5L X52 pipelines has produced numerous failures
ranging from small leaks to major disasters with catastrophic con-
sequences [10,14]. The state of the art shows that even if API 5L
X52 pipelines are broadly used in the oil and gas industry, nowa-
days little information exists on their fracture toughness values
(KIC) and fatigue crack growth (FCG) rates, particularly in the
transversal direction of the deposited seam welds. Hence, there
is wide concern regarding the fatigue and fracture-toughness
behavior of the welds employed for manufacturing API 5L
X52 pipelines within the oil industry [15,16].
For instance, Matusevich, Mancini, and Giudici [17] evalu-
ated the fracture-toughness properties of an API 5L X52 pipeline
by performing Charpy impact test correlations. The authors
focused their studies on the base metal and the deposited metal
region (the ductile-brittle transition region was analyzed) and
observed that the fracture toughness in the weld metal was about
45 % lower than that in the base metal zone. Similarly, Terán et al.
[18] evaluated the fracture toughness properties of seam welds
in the radial-longitudinal and radial-circumferential directions
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Jun 5 15:06:59 EDT 2019
Downloaded/printed by
(UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul ((UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
2111
using miniature compact specimens (CT), the results of which
showed large variations in the fracture-toughness values.
Bussiba et al. [19] conducted a study to evaluate the FCG in
six different grades of pipeline steel employing middle crack ten-
sion (MT) specimens that had different variations of chemical
composition and microstructure. The six steel types showed a
similar FCG rate (da/dN versus ΔK), and the only minor differ-
ence in the pipeline steels was the KIC threshold (ΔKth) value
in the stage of stable crack growth. Nonetheless, the larger
differences were observed in the final stages of crack growth
and fatigue failure.
Subsequent work by Baek et al. [20] evaluated the FCG rate
and fracture toughness of a 304 stainless steel and weld metal
over a temperature of 162°C by employing CT specimens. The
authors found that the fracture-toughness values were different
for the longitudinal and transversal directions but that the
orientation had no influence on the FCG rates. The authors
demonstrated that the FCG rates as well as the fracture-toughness
values declined as the test temperature decreased.
More recently, it has been documented that a number of fail-
ures occurred when crack propagation arose in the seam welds in
API 5L X52 pipelines, principally in the transversal direction of
the pipelines [21–23]. These results show the necessity of exhaus-
tive research work on the evaluation of the fracture and fatigue
properties of the seam welds of API 5L X52 pipelines. This work
can be performed using linear elastic fracture analysis, given that
it provides the basis and methodology for evaluating fracture
properties in engineering structures [24,25] and allows the use
of such parameters for the design of advanced structures [26].
Nevertheless, the problem becomes critical when it is necessary
to assess the crack growth in the transversal direction of the seam
weld, since the specimen’s size is limited (because of the shortest
direction of the pipe). Therefore, there is not enough material to
machine CT specimens or other types of standard test specimens
like bend specimens (SEB) since the sample extracted from the
pipe must undergo a flattening process. In order to avoid such
issues in the present work, we propose the use of nonstandard
curved SEB specimens, whose geometry is similar to the standard
specimens, with the additional benefit of including the complete
seam weld in the transversal direction. Therefore, by employing
nonstandard curved SEB specimens, we would like to demon-
strate that it is possible to evaluate the fracture properties of
the seam weld such as fracture-toughness and FCG rates.
Materials and Experimental Testing
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
As described above, the material under analysis was a seam weld
extracted from an API 5L X52 pipeline that was 36 inches in
diameter and 1 inch thick; a longitudinal seam weld produced
by SAW. Nonstandard curved SEB specimens were machined
2112 Journal of Testing and Evaluation

Table 1 shows the chemical composition of the longitudinal

FIG. 1 Schematic illustration showing how the nonstandard curved SAW type of the steel pipeline, and Table 2 describes the mechani-
SEB specimens were obtained from the pipeline for the KIC and
FCG tests. cal properties in the transversal direction of the pipe. For the
present study, tensile and hardness tests were carried out in
order to assess mechanical properties, following the recommen-
dations of ASTM E8M, Standard Test Methods for Tension
Testing of Metallic Materials [27], and ASTM E18, Standard
Test Methods for Rockwell Hardness of Metallic Materials [28],
respectively.
The tensile properties of the weld were measured using a
screw-driven tensile testing machine that has a tensile capacity
of 100 kN, provided by a closed-loop servo-hydraulic system.
The tests were conducted under a displacement control rate of
0.25 mm/min. The chemical composition and the mechanical
properties show that the weld material corresponds to an
American Welding Society A5.1 class E7018 weld [29].
The percentage and average of nonmetallic inclusions in the
longitudinal and transversal directions of the weld were also an-
alyzed, and we found that the percentage of nonmetallic inclu-
in such a way that the crack-initiating notch was aligned with sions in the transversal direction was higher than that found
the longitudinal seam weld of the pipeline. Therefore, a set of in the longitudinal direction, proving that the weld properties
specimens were machined in the transversal direction of the seam for the transversal direction should be lower, as will be explained
weld to allow crack propagation through deposited metal (DM), in a subsequent section. Fig. 2 shows typical micrographs of the
as is schematically shown in Fig. 1. weld together with the nonmetallic inclusions in the two
directions.
Table 3 presents a comparison of the average grain size and
TABLE 1 Chemical composition of the tested longitudinal
SAW seam type.
the nonmetallic inclusions percentage for the longitudinal and
transversal directions of the SAW seam type. The observations
Element (wt. %) were carried out according to ASTM E3, Standard Practice for
Fe C Si Mn P S Ti Ca Al N Preparation of Metallographic Specimens [30], and ASTM
E1122, Standard Practice for Obtaining JK Inclusion Ratings
97.62 0.077 0.445 1.383 0.025 0.020 0.25 0.15 0.015 0.0086
Using Automatic Image Analysis [31], (the micrographs were

TABLE 2 Tensile properties and Rockwell hardness of the longitudinal SAW seam type.

Direction Yield Strength (σ0.2) [MPa] Ultimate Tensile Strength [MPa] Elongation [%] Hardness Rockwell B (HRB)

Transversal 331 414 20 75

FIG. 2
Nonmetallic inclusions on the longitudinal SAW seam
type: (a) longitudinal direction and (b) transversal
direction.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Jun 5 15:06:59 EDT 2019
Downloaded/printed by
(UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul ((UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 ANGELES-HERRERA ET AL. ON FRACTURE-TOUGHNESS, FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH 2113

TABLE 3 Characteristics of the nonmetallic inclusions, SEB specimens, which are as follows: width = 0.0254 m (W),
aluminate type (B), silicate type (C), and globular
thickness = 0.0254 m (B), span = 0.127 m (S), and initial notch
oxide (D) with a relatively large size (coarse series)
on the longitudinal SAW seam type at the length = 0.0091 m (a0 ). For the KIC and FCG tests, a0 = 0.0066 m.
longitudinal and transversal directions. In this figure, P corresponds to the applied load.
Direction Type Series Average Size [μm] Inclusion [%] The KQ function for nonstandard curved SEB specimens was
calculated by employing the following formulations [35]:
Longitudinal B, C, and D Coarse 4.54 0.05
Transversal B, C, and D Coarse 5.68 0.25


PQ Sa
KQ = 3 xf (1)
BW 2 W

taken at a resolution of 100X). The table also shows that, for the
transversal direction, larger particle sizes are present as well as a
higher percentage of nonmetallic inclusions [32].
The microstructure for the longitudinal and transversal di-
rections of the SAW seam type is shown in Fig. 3, which was taken
at a resolution of 500X. From these figures, it is observed that the
microstructure consists of a mixture of ferrite grains (GF) and
acicular ferrite grains (AF), as shown in Fig. 3a and b, in accor-
dance with findings made by other authors [8]. Predominantly
in the transversal direction (Fig. 3b), a columnar grain morphol-
ogy with elongated and deformed regions of the GF boundary,
as well as nonmetallic inclusions all along the structure, were
observed. The described microstructures are characteristic of
SAW seam types [33]. The observations were carried out accord-
ing to ASTM E3 [30], ASTM E1122 [31], and ASTM E1382,
Standard Test Methods for Determining Average Grain Size
Using Semiautomatic and Automatic Image Analysis [34].
FRACTURE-TOUGHNESS (KIC) TESTING
Three-point bending fracture-toughness tests were performed
with the nonstandard curved SEB specimens, as schematically
shown in Fig. 4. The figure also shows the dimensions of the
a
2

a a
f = 13.914 − 6.057 + 0.938 (2)
W W W
where KQ is the provisional stress intensity factor, PQ is the provi-
sional fail load, S corresponds to the span, B is the thickness of
the specimen, W is the width of the specimen, and f ða∕WÞ cor-
responds to a specimen geometric factor. In the nonstandard
curved specimens, the crack initiating at notch was machined
from the internal diameter of the pipeline aligned to the DM zone,
as can be clearly seen in Fig. 4. The fracture-toughness tests were
carried out by following the recommendations of ASTM E399,
Standard Test Method for Linear-Elastic Plane-Strain Fracture
Toughness KIC of Metallic Materials [36]. Table 4 presents the
parameters used for the KIC tests.
The standard indicates that before performing fracture-
toughness tests, the specimens need to be precracked. Therefore,
the specimens were subjected to fatigue precracking, and a load
level lower than the elastic limit was applied until a crack size equal
to 0.00635 m was attained. Finally, the load was applied until the
fracture of the specimens and the load and the crack-opening dis-
placement were recorded. In addition, a stereo-microscope was
mounted on a mobile base in order to observe and measure the

TABLE 4 Values used in fatigue precracking tests for the KIC tests.
pffiffiffiffi
Specimen Test Direction ΔK [MPa m] Final [–] R [–] Frequency [Hz] Temperature [°C]

Nonstandard Curved SEB Transversal 20 0.36 0.1 15 25

FIG. 3
Deposited metal microstructures of the longitudinal
SAW seam type: (a) longitudinal direction and
(b) transversal direction.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Jun 5 15:06:59 EDT 2019
Downloaded/printed by
(UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul ((UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
2114 Journal of Testing and Evaluation

since it determines the ΔK dependence of the growth rate. It can also

FIG. 4 Three-point bending loading configuration and nonstandard be seen that the above expression adequately describes the behavior
curved SEB specimen geometry for the KIC and FCG tests.
for the midrange of da∕dN [19]. The stress intensity factor range,
ΔK, was calculated according to the following equation [38]:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi


ΔP πα πα
ΔK = sec (4)
B 2W W

where α = 2a/W. This expression has an accuracy of ±2 % for

2a/W ≤ 0.9 for the pin-loaded sample. The R relation was calculated
according to the following equation:

crack formation progress. At the end of the tests, the critical crack
size and provisional failure loads were recorded. The KIC tests were
carried out at room test temperature in a computerized servo-
hydraulic test machine, Model 810 (MTS Systems Corporation,
Eden Prairie, MN), with a load capacity of 100 kN under load con-
trol (Fig. 5). In addition, these tests were carried out by triplicate in
order to obtain sufficient data for the subsequent analysis.
FCG TESTING
It is well accepted that the crack growth rate, da/dN (where a is
the crack length and N is the number of fatigue cycles), is con-
trolled primarily by the stress intensity factor range, ΔK, and
therefore, the most generally applicable law is the one suggested
by Paris and Erdogan [37], which is described as follows:
Pmin
R= = 0.1 (5)
Pmax
The FCG tests were carried out with three-point bending tests
according to the recommendations of ASTM E647, Standard Test
Method for Measurement of Fatigue Crack Growth Rates [38], for
increasing ΔK. Table 5 shows the parameters and conditions used
for the FCG tests. Similarly, Fig. 5 shows the experimental set up for
the nonstandard curved SEB test specimens.
The FCG tests were carried out at room test temperature in
a computerized servo-hydraulic MTS test machine, Model 810,
with a load capacity of 100 kN under load control. In addition,
these tests were carried out by triplicate in order to have sufficient
data for the analysis.

da
= CðΔKÞm (3)
Results and Discussion
dN
FRACTURE-TOUGHNESS (KIC) TESTS
where C and m are material constants, m being a linear function of The average fracture-toughness value in the transversal direction
log C. In addition, it can be seen that the dominant parameter is m of the longitudinal SAW seam type is shown in Table 6. Table 7

FIG. 5
Equipment used in the KIC and FCG tests:
(a) experimental setup and (b) nonstandard curved SEB
specimens.

TABLE 5 Values used for the FCG tests in the transversal direction.
pffiffiffiffi
Specimen Test Direction ΔK [MPa m] a/W [–] R [–] Frequency [Hz] Temperature [°C]

Nonstandard Curved SEB Transversal 20 0.26 0.1 15 25

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Jun 5 15:06:59 EDT 2019
Downloaded/printed by
(UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul ((UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
 ANGELES-HERRERA ET AL. ON FRACTURE-TOUGHNESS, FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH 2115

TABLE 6 Fracture-toughness values of the SAW seam type fracture corresponds to a cutting edge with its inclined sides called
in the transversal direction.
“shear lips.” These results clearly indicate that the plane strain
Average Value of Standard Deviation of conditions have been met, as recommended by ASTM E399,
pffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffi
Specimens Test Direction KIC [MPa m] KIC [MPa m] for a correct validation. Finally, in Fig. 6, the presence of shiny
areas, which correspond to brittle and/or cleavage fracture
Nonstandard Transversal 56.3 2.9
regions, can be observed.
Curved SEB
From the above discussion, it can be inferred that the
fracture-toughness values in the transversal direction of the
TABLE 7 Parameters and conditions for the nonstandard seam weld were lower than those reported using conventional
SEB specimens according to ASTM E399.
seam weld directions and analyzed with CT specimens [39,40].
Parameters Specimen 1 Specimen 2 Specimen 3 ASTM E399 Furthermore, microscopic analyses on the fracture surfaces of
the nonstandard specimens have shown that the crack propagated
Pmax [kN] 24.50 22.65 24.23 –
mainly in the AF regions where porosities were present. Also,
PQ [kN] 22.60 20.85 22.65 –
because of the presence of AF grains (hard regions), a region
Pmax /PQ [–] 1.084 1.086 1.069 (Pmax/PQ) < 1.10
ac [mm] 12.3 12.2 12.3 –
of brittle fracture was present [41], and thus lower energy for
W-a [mm] 13.1 13.2 13.1 – propagation was needed. In addition, the porosity in this direc-
rp [mm] 9.35 7.59 8.52 rp < (W-a) tion provided a favorable path for separating the fracture planes,
pffiffiffiffi resulting in low fracture-toughness values [42]. Fig. 7 shows the
KQ [MPa m] 59.15 53.29 56.45 Valid
crack-edge microstructure of the seam weld in the transversal di-
rection, showing that the crack path crossed predominantly AF
shows the parameters and testing conditions used for the
and porosity regions, preferring to crack during testing.
validation of the fracture-toughness tests carried out according
For most metals, the process of brittle fracture occurs in the
to ASTM E399 in the transversal direction. By considering the
three main steps described as follows [43,44]:
data reported in Table 7, the “Pmax/PQ” relation was less
than 1.1, whereas the values for the plastic zone, rp, were smaller • Step 1: A specific microstructural element nucleates a sin-
than the (W-a) relation. Therefore, it can be observed that gle microcrack, the result of the action of a tension load.
the tests fulfilled the validation criteria of ASTM E399 and the The microstructural element can be a brittle phase.
KQ values can be considered as the real KIC values of the • Step 2: If the microcrack does not arrest, it will grow and
longitudinal seam weld employed in the fabrication of API 5L pass through the particle matrix boundary.
• Step 3: For crack propagation through the material, there
X52 steel pipe.
must be sufficient energy to cross the grain boundaries.
Furthermore, fractographic analyses on the fracture surfaces
Therefore, if a microstructural element capable of fracture
of the tested specimens were also performed with the aim of iden-
exists in the vicinity of the crack tip (within the plastic
tifying the fracture mechanisms of the seam weld. Fig. 6 shows the zone), the fracture propagation will be brittle, and thus
fracture surfaces of the three nonstandard curved specimens. In it will exhibit a low fracture-toughness value.
these figures, the fracture planes were perpendicular to the prin-
cipal stress direction, and likewise, crack edges and the shear lips Fig. 8 shows a fractographic analysis together with the cleav-

were parallel to the longitudinal direction. Therefore, the maxi-
mum stress in the specimens induced a triaxial stress state, result-
ing in localized deformations in a narrow area, forming shear lips.
In this region the final fracture occurred by shear tearing known
as the “tearing zone.” For this reason, the shape of the final
age regions, which were attributed to the presence of inclusions
that favor brittle crack initiation such as calcium aluminates,
compound complex silicates, and titanium nitride (TiN) [45].
An example of this process is shown in Fig. 8a, where the yellow
arrows indicate the origin of brittle fracture. In the case of the TiN

FIG. 6
Fracture surfaces of the nonstandard curved SEB
specimens that were analyzed.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Jun 5 15:06:59 EDT 2019
Downloaded/printed by
(UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul ((UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
2116 Journal of Testing and Evaluation
FIG. 7
Crack-edge microstructure of the seam weld in the
transversal direction (resolution at 500X).
FIG. 8 Brittle fracture (cleavage): (a) from nonmetallic inclusions
(yellow arrows) on the transversal direction and (b) EDS,
which shows the presence of aluminum, titanium, and
calcium on the transversal direction.
inclusions, they generally present low solubility even when the
welded metal is still in the liquid phase; therefore, they tend to
precipitate in the form of coarse particles with a high geometric
eccentricity, generating high local stress concentrations and thus
initiating a brittle fracture. Additionally, the presence of calcium
and aluminum in the weld metal can result in the formation of
complex calcium aluminates, in which the constituent particles
are very susceptible to brittle fractures.
Finally, Fig. 8b also shows the energy dispersive spectroscopy
(EDS) analysis of selected regions and the presence of elements
such as titanium, calcium, and aluminum, which have been iden-
tified as elements capable of nucleating brittle fracture [46].
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Jun 5 15:06:59 EDT 2019
Downloaded/printed by
(UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul ((UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
FCG TESTS
The FCG rate curves for the longitudinal seam weld by means of
nonstandard curved SEB specimens in the transversal direction
are shown in Fig. 9. From this graph, it can be observed that
the tests presented the typical Paris’ law behavior, exhibiting three
regions: the starting region known as the fatigue threshold (ΔKth),
pffiffiffiffi
with ΔK equal to 20 MPa m; the Paris’ region between 25 to
pffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffi
35 MPa m; and the final fracture region before 40 MPa m.
The superposed black line in the graph indicates the Paris’ region.
Fig. 9 shows a completely transgranular fracture mechanism,
and the columnar microstructure of the weld, which is also clearly
visible, is dominated by grooves and the presence of inherent
porosity caused by the solidification process. Furthermore, stria-
tions were also observed, which are typical of the fatigue process.
It was also observed that greater crack propagation rates result in
a more evident presence of these fatigue striations in some surface
areas (as seen in Fig. 9), increasing the interaction with the pores
present in the microstructure. Finally, Fig. 9d shows the fatigue
striations that present the higher microstructure interactions.
From the analysis discussed above, it is noteworthy to men-
tion that in the tested specimens (during the three stages of
FCG) the presence of quasi-static fracture mechanisms (like
dimple coalescence and/or cleavage fracture) were not observed.
Accordingly, the crack growth was controlled exclusively by the
cyclic deformation mechanism, which is characteristic of the
fatigue process.
Table 8 describes the Paris’ law parameters employed in the
analysis, where C and m have been determined from FCG rate
plots by means of nonstandard curved SEB specimens in the
transversal direction. By rewriting Eq 3 for the case of the DM
zone in the transversal direction, the following equation was
obtained:
 ANGELES-HERRERA ET AL. ON FRACTURE-TOUGHNESS, FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH 2117

FIG. 9
(a) FCG-rate curves versus ΔK for the nonstandard
curved SEB specimens of longitudinal SAW seam type
in the transversal direction, (b) fracture
pffiffiffiffi surface at the
initial fatigue zone (ΔK ∼ 20 MPa mÞ, (c) fatigue
pffiffiffiffi
surface at the Paris’ region (ΔK ∼ 25–35 MPa mÞ,pand ffiffiffiffi
(d) fracture surface at the final zone (ΔK ∼ 40 MPa mÞ.

TABLE 8 Paris’ parameters for longitudinal SAW seam type in crack path in coarse grain materials is more tortuous, lead-
the transversal direction using nonstandard curved ing to higher resistance values of the FCG, as seen in
SEB.
Fig. 10 [50,51]. The micrograph was taken at a resolution
Evaluated Zone Direction Paris’ Parameters ΔKth of 3,500X, and it shows a crack-edge microstructure in the
pffiffiffiffi transversal direction of the seam weld.
DM Transversal C (1 × 10−7) m [MPa m]
(2) The presence of nonmetallic inclusions, which contribute
6 4.15 20
to an increase in the crack growth rates [52]. On the other
hand, the pores facilitate the growing process, generating a
reduced resistance to the crack advance, since they provide
da
= 6.0x10−7 ðΔKÞ4.15 (6)
dN

FIG. 10 Crack-edge microstructure

pffiffiffiffi in DM at the transversal direction
For fatigue testing, it was also observed that the resistance to (ΔK = 30 MPa m, R = 0.1).
FCG in the seam weld in the transversal direction was lower com-
pared to values reported in the literature for conventional direc-
tions with standard test specimens [19,47]. This behavior can be
attributed mainly to the two following factors:

(1) Grain size: it has been reported that in materials with rel-
atively small grain sizes (below 10 μm), the crack growth
rates increased and a lower fatigue limit (ΔKth) was ob-
tained [48,49] compared with materials that exhibit larger
grain sizes. This behavior can be attributed to the effect
of roughness-induced crack closure. More precisely, the

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Jun 5 15:06:59 EDT 2019
Downloaded/printed by
(UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul ((UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
2118 Journal of Testing and Evaluation
the most favorable crack path for a fracture separation
plane, as shown in Fig. 10. Therefore, the presence of non-
metallic inclusions and the inherent porosity of the weld-
ing process lowers the resistance to FCG in the seam weld
of the pipeline.
Conclusions
The aim of the present research work was to show the importance
of evaluating the fracture properties of the deposited metal zone
of a longitudinal SAW seam type of an API 5L X52 steel pipeline
in the transversal direction. It was observed that the average KIC
value was lower than those reported in the literature for the con-
ventional seam weld directions that were analyzed with standard
specimens. The results showed an average fracture toughness
pffiffiffiffi
equal to 56.3 ± 2.9 MPa m. This difference can be attributed
mainly to the three following factors:
(1) The presence of elements such as titanium, calcium, and
aluminum, which have been identified as capable of
nucleating brittle fracture, as shown in the EDS analysis
on selected regions.
(2) The presence of predominated AF regions, which pre-
sented brittle behavior and lower resistance to crack
advance.
(3) The intrinsic porosity in this direction provided a favor-
able crack path for separating fracture plane, resulting in
lower fracture-toughness values.
The results also showed that the FCG rate curves behaved
according to Paris’ law, and the general relationship for the de-
posited metal zone was dN da
= 6.0 × 10−7 ðΔKÞ4.15 .
This behavior was attributed to the small grain size because of
the effect of roughness-induced crack closure, as well as the in-
teraction of the crack with nonmetallic inclusion particles and the
intrinsic porosity of the welding process.
Therefore, the KIC values and Paris’ parameters obtained in
this work are recommended as real parameters to evaluate the
mechanical integrity and residual strength by means of the linear
elastic fracture mechanics concept of components that could have
defects in the transversal direction.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank CONACyT México, Instituto
Mexicano del Petróleo, and Instituto Politécnico Nacional for
financial and material support.
References
[1] Maalek, S., “Shear Testing of Butt Joints,” J. Test. Eval.,
Vol. 42, No. 4, 2014, pp. 1025–1045, https://doi.org/10.
1520/JTE20130025
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Jun 5 15:06:59 EDT 2019
Downloaded/printed by
(UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul ((UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
[2] Carpinteri, A., Ronchei, C., Scorza, D., and Vantadori, S.,
“Fracture Mechanics Based Approach to Fatigue Analysis
of Welded Joints,” Eng. Fail. Anal., Vol. 49, 2015, pp.
67–78, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2014.12.021
[3] Van Minnebruggen, K., Verstraete, M., Hertelé, S., and
De Waele, W., “Evaluation and Comparison Double Clip
Gauge Method and Delta 5 Method for CTOD Measure-
ment in SE(T) Specimens,” J. Test. Eval., Vol. 44, No. 6,
2016, pp. 2414–2423, https://doi.org/10.1520/JTE20150127
[4] Carpinteri, A., Boaretto, J., Fortese, G., Giordani, F., Iturrioz,
I., Ronchei, C., Scorza, D., and Vantadori, S., “Fatigue
Life Estimation of Fillet-Welded Tubular T-Joints Sub-
jected to Multiaxial Loading,” Int. J. Fatigue, Vol. 101,
No. 2, 2017, pp. 263–270, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.
2016.10.012
[5] McAllister, E. W., Pipeline Rules of Thumb Handbook, 7th
ed., Gulf Professional Publishing, Burlington, MA, 2009,
pp. 56–72.
[6] American Welding Society, Welding Handbook: Metals and
Their Weldability (Section 4), 6th ed., Macmillan Publishers
Ltd., Basingstoke, United Kingdom, 1972, pp. 63.29–63.34.
[7] Wang, W. and Liu, S., “Alloying and Microstructural
Management in Developing SMAW Electrodes for HSLA-
100 Steel,” Weld. Res., Vol. 81, 2002, pp. 132–145.
[8] David, S. A., Babu, S. S., and Vitek, J. M.,“Recent Advances in
Modelling and Characterisation of Weld Microstructures,” Sci.
Technol. Weld. Joining, Vol. 6, No. 6, 2013, pp. 341–346,
https://doi.org/10.1179/stw.2001.6.6.341
[9] Kaplan, D. and Lambert-Perlade, A., “Influence of Martensite-
Austenite Constituents on Heat Affected Zone Toughness of
C-Mn Steel Welds,” Rev. Métall., Vol. 98, No. 10, 2001,
pp. 889–898, https://doi.org/10.1051/metal:2001136
[10] Azevedo, C. R. F., “Failure Analysis of a Crude Oil Pipeline,”
Eng. Fail. Anal., Vol. 14, No. 6, 2007, pp. 978–994, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2006.12.001
[11] Olson, D. L., Siewert, T. A., Liu, S., and Edwards, G. R., Eds.,
ASM Handbook Volume 6: Welding, Brazing and Soldering,
10th ed., ASM International, Materials Park, OH, 1993,
pp. 639–642.
[12] Butler, C. A. and Jackson, C. E., “Submerged Arc Welding
Characteristics of the CaO-TiO2-SiO2 System,” Weld. J.,
Vol. 46, No. 11, 1967, pp. 448-s–456-s.
[13] Garcimartín, M. A., “La Soldadura en Estructuras Metálicas
de Edificación,” Revista del Colegio Oficial de Aparejadores y
Arquitectos Técnicos de la Región de Murcia, Vol. 22, 2002,
pp. 12–19.
[14] Hernández, A. H., “Análisis de Falla por Fractura en
Tuberías de Conducción de Petróleo,” Ing. Invest., Vol. 23,
1991, pp. 25–36.
[15] Montero, R., Peñuelas, I., Rodriguez, C., and Belzunce, F. J.,
“Comportamiento a Fractura de Tuberías para Transporte
de Gas: Influencia de la Constricción,” An. Mec. Frac.,
Vol. 28, 2011, pp. 643–648.
[16] Loureiro, A., “HAZ Toughness of Multipass Welded Joints:
Influence of Brittle Zones,” Key Eng. Mater., Vols. 230–232,
2002, pp. 31–35, https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/
KEM.230-232.31
[17] Matusevich, A. E., Mancini, R. A., and Giudici, A. J.,
“Determinación de la Tenacidad a la Fractura del Material
de un Gasoducto,” Lat. Am. J. Metall. Mater., Vol. 32, No. 2,
2012, pp. 253–260.
 ANGELES-HERRERA ET AL. ON FRACTURE-TOUGHNESS, FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH
[18] Terán, G. J., González, J. L., Hallen, J. M., and Martínez, M.,
“Efecto del Tamaño de Probeta y Orientación en la
Resistencia a la Tracción y a la Tenacidad a la Fractura,”
Rev. Metal., Vol. 43, No. 5, 2007, pp. 337–351, https://doi.
org/10.3989/revmetalm.2007.v43.i5.78
[19] Bussiba, A., Darcis, P., McColskey, J. D., McCowan, C. N.,
Kohn, G., Smith, R., and Merritt, J., “Fatigue Crack Growth
Rates in Six Pipeline Steels,” presented at the 2006
International Pipeline Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada,
Sept. 25–29, 2006, ASME, New York, NY, Vol. 2, pp.
475–484.
[20] Baek, J.-H., Kim, Y.-P., Kim, W.-S., and Kho, Y.-T.,
“Fracture Toughness and Fatigue Crack Growth
Properties of the Base Metal and Weld Metal of a Type
304 Stainless Pipeline for LNG Transmission,” Int. J.
Press. Vessels Pip., Vol. 78, No. 5, 2001, pp. 351–357,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-0161(01)00040-0
[21] Saxena, A., Hudak, S., Donald, J., and Schmidt, D.,
“Computer-Controlled Decreasing Stress Intensity Tech-
nique for Low Rate Fatigue Crack Growth Testing,” J. Test.
Eval., Vol. 6, No. 3, 1978, pp. 167–174, https://doi.org/10.
1520/JTE10938J
[22] Jayadevan, K. R., Østby, E., and Thaulow, C., “Fracture
Response of Pipelines Subjected to Large Plastic Defor-
mation under Tension,” Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip., Vol. 81,
No. 9, 2004, pp. 771–783, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.
2004.04.005
[23] Eiber, R. J. and Kiefner, J. F., “Failure in Pipelines,” ASM
Handbook Volume 11: Failure Analysis and Prevention,
W. T. Becker and R. J. Shipley, Eds., ASM International,
New York, 2002, pp. 695–706.
[24] Jaramillo, H. E., Alba, N. C., Cañizales, J. P., and Toro, A. J.,
Introducción a la Mecánica de la Fractura y Análisis de
Fallas, Universidad Autónoma de Occidente, Cali,
Colombia, 2008, pp. 18–30.
[25] Jaramillo, H. E. and Bacca, L. A., “Una Propuesta para la
Determinación de la Tenacidad a la Fractura Mediante
Elementos Finitos,” Lat. Am. J. Metall. Mater., Vol. S1,
No. 4, 2009, pp. 1641–1646.
[26] McEvily, A. J., Metal Failures: Mechanisms, Analysis,
Prevention, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ,
2002, pp. 41–59.
[27] ASTM E8M, Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing
of Metallic Materials, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, 2015, www.astm.org
[28] ASTM E18M, Standard Test Methods for Rockwell Hardness
of Metallic Materials, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, 2015, www.astm.org
[29] Lincoln Electric Company, The Procedure Handbook of
Arc Welding, 12th ed., Lincoln Electric Company, Cleveland,
OH, 1973, pp. 4.1-1–4.1-8.
[30] ASTM E3, Standard Practice for Preparation of Metallogra-
phic Specimens, ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA, 2015, www.astm.org
[31] ASTM E1122, Standard Practice for Obtaining JK Inclusion
Ratings Using Automatic Image Analysis, ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2015, www.astm.org
[32] Angeles-Herrera, D., Albiter-Hernández, A., Cuamatzi-
Meléndez, R., and González-Velázquez, J. L., “Fracture
Toughness in the Circumferential–Longitudinal and
Circumferential–Radial Directions of Longitudinal Weld
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Jun 5 15:06:59 EDT 2019
Downloaded/printed by
(UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul ((UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
2119
API 5L X52 Pipeline Using Standard C(T) and
Nonstandard Curved SE(B) Specimens,” Int. J. Fract.,
Vol. 188, No. 2, 2014, pp. 251–256, https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10704-014-9949-1
[33] Smith, N. J., McGrath, J. T., Gianetto, J. A., and Orr,
R. F., “Microstructure/Mechanical Property Relationships
Submerged Arc Welds in HSLA 80 Steel,” presented at the
69th Annual AWS Meeting, New Orleans, LA, April 17–22,
1988, American Welding Society, Miami, FL, pp. 112–120.
[34] ASTM E1382, Standard Test Methods for Determining
Average Grain Size Using Semiautomatic and Automatic
Image Analysis, ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA, www.astm.org
[35] Angeles-Herrera, D., González-Velázquez, J. L., and de
Morales, R. A. J., “Compliance Experimental Determination
in Nonstandard SEN Samples in API 5L Steel Pipe in the
Short Radial Direction,” J. Mater. Sci. Eng., Vol. 4, 2010,
pp. 27–32.
[36] ASTM E399, Standard Test Method for Linear-Elastic Plane-
Strain Fracture Toughness KIC of Metallic Materials, ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA, www.astm.org
[37] Paris, P. and Erdogan, F., “A Critical Analysis of Crack
Propagation Laws,” J. Basic Eng., Vol. 85, No. 4, 1963,
pp. 528–533, https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3656900
[38] ASTM E647, Standard Test Method for Measurement of
Fatigue Crack Growth Rates, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, www.astm.org
[39] ASTM, Fracture Toughness Testing and its Applications,
ASTM STP381, ASTM International, Philadelphia, PA,
1965, pp. 341–349, https://doi.org/10.1520/STP381-EB
[40] Neves, J. and Loureiro, A., “Fracture Toughness of Welds—
Effect of Brittle Zones and Strength Mismatch,” J. Mater.
Process. Technol., Vols. 153–154, 2004, pp. 537–543.
[41] Fuentes, D. M. and Gutiérrez, I., “Relación Entre el
Comportamiento a Fractura y la Unidad Microestructural
en Microestructuras Bainítico/Aciculares,” presented at
the XXI Congreso del Grupo Español de Fractura, Punta
Umbria, Vol. 21, 2004, pp. 228–233.
[42] Broek, D., Elementary Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 4th
ed., Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 1986,
pp. 8–19.
[43] Lin, T., Evans, A. G., and Ritchie, R. O., “A Stochastic
Modeling of Independent Roles of Particle Size and Grain
Size in Transgranular Cleavage Fracture,” Metall. Mater.
Trans. A, Vol. 18, No. 4, 1987, pp. 641–651, https://doi.
org/10.1007/BF02649480
[44] Angeles-Herrera, D., Albiter-Hernández, A., Cuamatzi-
Meléndez, R., and de Morales-Ramírez, A. J., “Influence
of Non-Metallic Inclusions on the Fracture-Toughness
Properties on the Longitudinal Welding of an API 5L
Steel Pipeline,” J. Test. Eval., Vol. 45, No. 2, 2017,
pp. 687–694, https://doi.org/10.1520/JTE20150061
[45] Nicholson, A. and Gladman, T., “Non-Metallic Inclusions
and Developments in Secondary Steelmaking,”
Ironmaking Steelmaking, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1986, pp. 53–69.
[46] Linaza, M. A., Romero, J. L., Rodríguez Ibabe, J. M., and
Urcola, J. J., “Comportamiento a Fatiga y Fractura de
Aceros Microaleados de Forja con Estructuras Ferrítico-
Perliticas [Fatigue and Fracture Behavior of Microalloyed
Forging Steels with Ferritic-Pearlitic Structures],” An.
Mec. Frac., Vol. 10, 1993, pp. 56–63.
2120 Journal of Testing and Evaluation
[47] Fuentes, P. M., Rodriguez, J. I., and Linaza, A. M., “Estudio
de la Propagación de Grietas por Fatiga en el Acero A515
G70,” Propiedades y Comportamiento en Servicio,
European Comission, 1995, pp. 54–66.
[48] González-Velázquez, J. L., Mecánica de Fractura, 2nd ed.,
Limusa, Ed., 2004, México, pp. 146–152.
[49] Anderson, T. L., Fracture Mechanics Fundamentals and
Application, 3rd ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2005,
pp. 457–463.
[50] Gray, G. T., Williams, J. C., and Thompson, A. W.,
“Roughness-Induced Crack Closure: An Explanation for
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Wed Jun 5 15:06:59 EDT 2019
Downloaded/printed by
(UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul ((UFRGS) Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
Microstructurally Sensitive Fatigue Crack Growth,” Metall.
Trans. A, Vol. 14, No. 2, 1983, pp. 421–433, https://doi.
org/10.1007/BF02644220
[51] Kim, J. H. and Lee, S. B., “Behavior of Plasticity-Induced
Crack Closure and Roughness-Induced Crack Closure in
Aluminum Alloy,” Int. J. Fatigue, Vol. 23, Suppl. 1, 2001,
pp. 247–251, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-1123(01)00155-4
[52] Ayaso, F. J., González, B., and Toribio, J., “Influencia de las
Inclusiones Sobre el Comportamiento en Fractura de
Aceros Perlíticos Trefilados,” An. Mec. Frac., Vol. 1, 2007,
pp. 99–104.