Proceeding

Proceedings of the ASME 2009 Pressure Vessels of PVP2009

and Piping Division Conference
2009 ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Division Conference PVP2009
July 26-30, 2009, Prague,
July 26-30, 2009, Czech
Prague,Republic
Czech Republic

PVP2009-77998

DETERMINATION OF FRACTURE ARREST STRESS

Jeremy C. Staats
The Equity Engineering Group, Inc.
Shaker Heights, Ohio USA

David A. Osage, P.E.

The Equity Engineering Group, Inc.
Shaker Heights, Ohio USA

Therefore, the use of a fracture arrest stress value equal to 10%

INTRODUCTION of the UTS detailed in paragraph 3.11.5.1 of the ASME
Section VIII, Division 2, Part 3 criteria document may not be
Pressure vessel components constructed to the ASME B&PV valid. A review of the work conducted by Robertson and
Code, Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2 that are not subject to Pellini and current code rules is provided and compared to
Post Weld Heat Treatment (PWHT) have a fracture arrest fracture assessments results using procedures from API 579-
stress value set equal to 10% of the Ultimate Tensile Strength 1/ASME FFS-1 and ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Part 3.
(UTS) of the material. The fracture arrest stress designates an
applied stress value for a material at or below which crack
propagation would cease in a component with a small flaw. ARREST STRESS BACKGROUND
The fracture arrest stress value in the code is based upon work
In December of 1953, T.S. Robertson published “Propagation
conducted by T. S. Robertson [1] and William S Pellini[2].
of Brittle Fracture in Steel”, a paper which documented
This work included testing of base metal and welded joints
notched-bar tests and the development of a new test which
without significant constraint. Pellini concluded that for
applies a known transverse (perpendicular) stress to determine
welded plates without constraint, localized residual stress
an arrest stress level for a material [1]. Typical brittle fracture
fields, resulting from restraint of longitudinal shrinkage during
tests for the time consisted of a notched specimen, which
cooling of the weld metal, act in a direction parallel to the weld
caused a lower crack initiation stress, followed by cracking till
and thus can only propagate cracks oriented in a direction
failure. These tests resulted in inconsistent data and were
normal to the localized residual stress (i.e. perpendicular to the
expensive to conduct since full thickness specimens were used.
weld joint). The perpendicular cracks may propagate into the
This led to the development of a test with crack initiation and
base metal; however, these cracks will arrest due to lower or
propagation through the material with a transverse stress until
negligible residual stresses outside of the weld zone in the base
it arrests. Liquid nitrogen was used to cool the end of the
metal. Therefore, for manufacture of components welded
specimen where crack initiation occurred, creating a
without significant constraint, i.e. manufacture of ships and
temperature and toughness gradient through the material.
atmospheric storage tanks, the fracture arrest stress value equal
Arrest of the crack occurred due to propagation into
to 10% of the UTS appears to be valid. In the manufacture of
increasingly tougher material due to increased temperature.
pressure vessels, the geometrical constraint of typical weld
Test pieces were welded to thinner sections attached to the
joints results in a different residual stress distribution that have
testing machine and pulled to produce the transverse stress for
stress components that are orientated both parallel and
crack propagation. A bolt hammer was used to strike the end
perpendicular to the weld. Due to the presence of residual
of the test piece and initiate crack propagation. See Figure 1
stresses perpendicular to the weld, small cracks parallel to the
for a diagram of the test piece. Through the use of this method
weld joint may result in unstable crack propagation or brittle
with a known temperature gradient, a crack arrest temperature
fracture because they remain in the residual stress field.

1 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

(CAT) was also determined for specific stress levels. The
CAT is referenced by temperature increment from the nil
ductility temperature, NDT. The NDT is a critical temperature
where elastic fracture initiation is possible for a stressed flaw.
This equates to the temperature of the bottom shelf on the
ductile-brittle transition curve. The NDT is similar to the
Minimum Design Metal Temperature (MDMT) which is
determined in a brittle fracture assessment in API 579-
1/ASME FFS-1 and ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Part 3.
William S. Pellini, former superintendent of the Metallurgy
Division at the Naval Research Laboratory, utilized data from
studies of service failures in conjunction with crack testing
performed by Robertson to create a Fracture Analysis Diagram
(PFAD) [2]. In his 1971 Adams Lecture [2], Pellini discussed
his research into brittle fracture and applicability of the PFAD.
The PFAD is a combination of stress in terms of yield strength
(YS) - the y-axis, temperature referenced from the NDT
(ΔT=CAT) - the x-axis, and multiple curves with varying crack
size. A lower bound CAT curve is also displayed on the
PFAD, where no cracking will occur below this line. The CAT
curve was first defined by Robertson tests and expanded with
flaw size curves by Pellini leading to the PFAD. If a plotted
point based upon flaw size, stress and temperature lies to right
or under the curve, fracture arrest occurs; if a point lies above
or to the left of the curve fracture initiation occurs. A line
segmenting elastic (brittle) and plastic (ductile) failure is also
drawn on the PFAD. A stress limitation of 5-8 ksi is taken
directly from Robertson’s work and used as the lower bound
on the PFAD. At any point below this line fracture will arrest
or fail to initiate, regardless of temperature and flaw size. See
Figure 2 for the PFAD diagram.
The Robertson crack test provided consistent brittle fracture
results from which material property trends could be
determined. For mild steel similar to carbon steel used in
pressure vessels and piping associated with the process
industry, the stress level at which cracks arrested or failed to
initiate ranged from 4 to upwards of 8 ksi. Pellini’s work [2]
referenced the Robertson arrest stress as a range of 5 to 8 ksi.
Typical carbon steel UTS values provided in ASME Section II,
Part D range from 45 to 75 ksi (310 MPa to 517 MPa),
approximately 10 times the arrest stress value. Pellini’s work
also consisted of extensive brittle fracture drop weight testing
(DWT) used as comparison testing to Robertson’s work. A
distinct interrelationship between the Robertson and drop
weight tests was obtained, allowing for the inexpensive DWT
to be reliably used to locate the CAT curve.
Pellini stated special consideration must be used for the PFAD
in as-welded structures. In Pellini’s work, the arrest stress
determined in Robertson’s work and from DWT was utilized
for ship manufacturing [2]. During manufacture, plates are
welded together one by one, free of constraint, able to contract
and expand as needed. This produces residual stresses 1 to 2
weld widths wide parallel to the weld caused by contraction
from cooling of the hot weld metal adjacent to the cold metal.
Such small localized residual weld stresses only create small
flaws, other larger flaws may be present but caused by other
factors such as poor welding technique and quality. During
this process, a majority of crack formation would be
2 Copyright © 2009 by ASME
perpendicular to the residual stress. Thus, the residual stress
parallel to the weld will then propagate the perpendicular
cracks out into the base metal where they will then arrest due
to the decay of residual stresses in the base metal away from
the weld. Therefore, for welding of non constrained plates
typically found in the manufacture of ship’s structures, the
determined critical arrest stress value used in the PFAD is
applicable.
In the manufacture of pressure vessels or piping, the
geometrical constraints create varying stress distributions
through the weld. In some instances, depending on constraint,
residual stresses can be both parallel and perpendicular to the
weld. Therefore, cracks formed during welding may propagate
parallel to the weld due to the presence of welding residual
stresses perpendicular to the weld. Since the residual stress is
much higher in the weld and heat affected zone relative to the
base metal, the crack propagating in the weld parallel to the
weld direction will continue to grow and not arrest creating a
brittle failure. Because of this fact, the 10 % UTS arrest stress
value may not be valid for use in designing pressure vessels,
piping, and repair welds that are not subject to PWHT.
From Annex E of API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 2007, residual
stresses parallel to the weld, such as ones seen in as-welded
ship plates and pressure vessels, can reach 1.5 times the offset
yield strength (OYS). Residual stresses perpendicular to the
weld seen in vessel manufacture can reach magnitudes of 1.2
times or greater than the OYS, but are significantly lower in
low constraint welded joints typically found in ship’s
structures. These localized near weld residual stresses extend
about 1 to 2 weld widths from either side of the weld and in a
through wall direction. Highly localized residual stresses are
not the same as general weld contraction residual stresses,
which are generally less than 0.5 times the OYS and extend out
in all directions much further than 1 to 2 weld widths. High
residual stresses near welds remain present even if there is no
applied stress. However, as discussed by Pellini, with low
applied loads, fracture near welds is only present at or below
the NDT temperature [2]. Above this temperature, the severe
plastic loading required for initiation of small flaws is not
present. Furthermore, as the temperature significantly increases
above the NDT the arrest stress level rises substantially for all
crack sizes as seen in the PFAD. Buried flaw tests conducted
by Wells verified this assumption [3].
API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 Annex E provides multiple cases to
calculate stress distributions in welds for pressure vessel plates,
tanks, nozzles and other components. It also contains
distributions of weld residual stresses parallel and
perpendicular to both circumferential and longitudinal welded
joints. Residual stresses parallel to the weld joint remain
consistent and predictable whereas residual stresses
perpendicular to the weld seam are highly dependent on weld
constraint that is a function of the radius to thickness ratio
(R t) . The greater the thickness, the higher the perpendicular
residual stress can be, ultimately leading to greater
susceptibility to brittle fracture. This trend is readily apparent
in the MDMT impact exemption curves, Figures 3 and 4.
Equations for calculating weld stress are provided in API 579-
1/ASME FFS-1 Annex E.
DEVELOPMENT OF STRESS RATIO MDMT 100°F (55°C) for Rts > 0.24 . For Rts ≤ 0.24 , the coldest
REDUCTION DIAGRAMS FOR SECTION VIII,
MDMT approach is the same as in earlier editions of Section
DIVISION 2
VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, with a minimum MDMT value set at -
155°F (-104°C).
Overview

To develop the new toughness rules in ASME Section VIII, Development of MDMT Rules
Division 2, Part 3, an applied stress equal, to the allowable To compute the crack driving force, an elliptical surface flaw
design stress, and a residual stress for both the as-welded and with the depth, a , and length, 2c , is assumed as a reference
heat treated condition were considered in conjunction with a flaw. This flaw size was established based on early research
surface breaking reference flaw size. A driving force for brittle work pertaining to the sensitivity and detection capability of
fracture or applied stress intensity is computed by the applied radiographic examination as reported in WRC 175.
stress and reference flaw size. The resistance to brittle fracture
or required material fracture toughness is set equal to this a = min [t 4 , 1 in (25 mm) ] (1)
computed stress intensity. The required Charpy V-Notch
impact energy (CVN), the Minimum Design Metal 2c = 6 a or c a = 3 (2)
Temperature (MDMT) determined using the familiar
exemption curve designations (i.e. A, B, C, and D), and the To compute the crack driving force, the following membrane
further reduction in the MDMT permitted based on design
stresses are assumed for the applied primary stress, σ m , and
P
loading conditions were determined using a new MPC fracture
toughness model described in API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 2007, residual stress, σ m .
SR

Appendix F, paragraph F.4.5.3.

The crack-like flaw assessment procedure used to establish 2

material toughness requirements is based upon the FAD
σ mP = σ ys (3)
3
approach detailed in API-1/ASME FFS-1 Part 9. The FAD is a
diagram of toughness, K R , vs. load ratio, LR , producing a curve 2
σm = σ ys
SR
component not subject to PWHT (4)
of expected brittle fracture failure for points lying on or outside 3
of it. Points directly on the FAD curve correspond to MDMT
values for that specific load ratio. The FAD analysis is σ mSR = 0.20σ ys component subject to PWHT
(5)
described in greater detail by Prager [5] and Osage [6].
As shown in API 579-1/ASME FFS-1, Annex E, stress
The method for determining the impact test exemption distributions can reach values up to 1.5σ ys but are not constant
temperature using a FAD analysis is essentially unchanged
from the ASME Section VIII, Division 1 and 2 (2004 and throughout the material. Therefore, it was decided to use a
earlier). In the 2007 Edition of Section VIII, Division 2, constant membrane stress level equal to ( 2 3 ) σ ys for the
impact test exemption curves are now provided with or without residual stress levels in parts not subject to PWHT, even
the influence of PWHT, see Figures 5 and 6. Note that the though maximum residual stress levels can be significantly
maximum governing thickness at any welded joint not higher. This assumption is conservative in light of other
subjected to PWHT is 1.5 in (38 mm). Above this thickness assumptions used in the construction of the stress ratio MDMT
impact testing is mandatory for non-postweld heat treated reduction diagrams.
parts. Impact testing is required for governing thicknesses
greater than 4 in. (100 mm). The dynamic fracture toughness for a material for a given yield
A further reduction in the MDMT based on design loading strength, σ ys , temperature, T , and ASME Exemption Curve

conditions can be determined by calculating the ratio Rts using may be estimated by Equation 6, see API 579-1/ASME FFS-1,
Annex F, paragraph F.4.5.3.
one of three methods; thickness basis, stress basis, and
pressure-temperature rating basis. The stress basis was utilized
for calculations performed for this paper, see Equation 7.
Figures 5 and 6, with or without the influence of PWHT,
respectively, determine the additional reduction in temperature
with proper accounting for residual stresses using a Rts ratio.
Effectively, this is trading stress for temperature when
determining susceptibility to brittle fracture for an operating
condition. Two reduction curves are provided in these figures
rather than the single curve provided in earlier version of
Section VIII, Division 2. In Figure 6, the ≤ 50 ksi (345 MPa)
curve closely parallels the curve in earlier editions of Section
VIII, Divisions 1 and 2.. The reduction in MDMT is limited to

3 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

 ⎪⎧ ⎛ 27 ⎞ ⎡ T − T0 ⎤ ⎪⎫
In ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Part 3(2007), if the
K1d = σ ys ⎨ 3 + ⎜ 3 − ⎟ ⋅ tanh ⎢ ⎬
⎣ C ⎥⎦ ⎪⎭
computed value of the Rts ratio is less than or equal to the
⎪⎩ ⎝ σ ys ⎠
0.24, see Figure 5, then the MDMT may be set to
T0 = 114 F for ASME Exemption Curve A
o
−155o F (−104o C ) and impact testing is not required unless a
lower MDMT is desired. This requirement essentially
T0 = 76 o F for ASME Exemption Curve B (6) stipulates that if the operating stresses are equal to or less than
10% of the ultimate tensile strength, see paragraph 3.11.5.2 of
T0 = 38 o F for ASME Exemption Curve C
the Criteria Document, and then operation for ferritic materials
T0 = 12 o F for ASME Exemption Curve D is permitted on the lower shelf. This rule is consistent with
earlier editions of Section VIII, Division 2 where the limit for
C = 66 o F the Rts ratio is 0.3 and Section VIII, Division 1 where the limit
The reduction in the MDMT without impact testing shown in for the Rts ratio is 0.35. The justification for lower shelf
Figures 5 and 6 for components not subject to PWHT and operation is that the stress is low enough such that brittle
components subject to PWHT, respectively, is calculated using fracture is not possible. However, lower shelf operation may
Equation 8 that is derived from Equation 6 as follows. The not be justified for welded components. This rule is the basis
required toughness of the material, Kmat (t ) , based on the for the present paper and study into the applicability of fracture
reference flaw size given by Equations 1 and 2 and the applied arrest stress.
stresses given by Equations 3 through 5, is determined using
the FAD approach in API 579-1/ASME FFS-1, Part 9. This
EXAMINATION OF CODE RULES
toughness is set equal to K1d in Equation 6. It should be noted
Calculations were conducted based upon rules and procedures
that the required toughness of the material is a function of listed in ASME Section VIII Division 2 Part 3 and API 579-
thickness as a result of the reference flaw size. The stress ratio 1/ASME FFS-1 Part 9. Initial calculations were conducted in
is defined by the following equation. order to produce consistent results with ASME Part 3. This
was done with a SA537 Class 1 material which had a yield
⎛2 ⎞
σ mp = Rts ⎜ ⋅ σ ys ⎟ (7) strength near 50 ksi (345 MPa), vessel dimensions of 100 in
⎝3 ⎠ (2540 mm) diameter and 2 in (50 mm) thickness, and a
reference flaw with the same dimensions used to create the
When this equation is combined with the expression for stress ratio curves in Part 3, see Figures 5-7.
Kmat (t ) , the required material toughness becomes a function of Next, calculations were conducted with varying geometries
the stress reduction ratio, Rts , or Kmat ( Rts ) . In addition, when and materials to further extend knowledge of crack arrest stress
trends. For this paper, four additional cases were tested: a 60
evaluating Kmat ( Rts ) for use in Part 3 of ASME Section VIII, in–(1500 mm) diameter 1 in– (25 mm) thick cylindrical vessel
Division 2 in developing the MDMT reduction diagrams, a with SA516-70 and SA516-60 material not subject PWHT, a
cylindrical shell with a thickness equal to 2 in (50 mm) and 60 in- (1500 mm). diameter 1 in- (25 mm) thick cylindrical
radius equal to 100 in (2500 mm) was used. The derivation of vessel of SA16-70 material that is subject to PWHT, and a 2
in (50 mm) thick 100 in- (2500 mm) diameter cylindrical
the equation for Kmat (t ) and Kmat ( Rts ) is provided by Osage vessel with SA516-60 material that is subject to PWHT. Input
[6]. parameters for the analyses are summarized in Table 1. The
commercial VCESageTM software based upon the rules and
With these assumptions, Equation 6 may be written as follows: procedures from API 579-1/ASME FFS -1 and ASME Section
VIII, Division 2, Part 3 was used to perform MDMT
⎡ ⎤ calculations.
⎢ ⎥
−1 ⎢
K mat ( Rts ) − 3 ⋅ σ ys ⎥
TR ( Rts ) = tanh ⋅ C + T0 (8) A MDMT for a component was determined in accordance with
⎢ ⎛ 27 ⎞ ⎥ the procedure outlined below.
⎢ σ ys ⎜ 3 − ⎟ ⎥
⎢⎣ ⎝ σ ys ⎠ ⎥⎦ STEP 1 – Determine all input parameters such as vessel
diameter, thickness, crack dimensions, assessment temperature,
The final equation for the temperature reduction, ΔT , in and stress levels. Residual stresses for material not subject to
Figures 5 and 6 is given by: PWHT material are set at 2/3 yield, and a value of 0.20 of yield
for materials subject to PWHT. Primary stress is listed as 2/3
ΔT ( Rts ) = TR (1) − TR ( Rts ) (9) yield strength, typical value of a design allowable stress, and
used when calculating Rts values.
This equation is evaluated for both the non PWHT and PWHT
condition, and for the range of yield strengths shown in the STEP 2 – Using Equation 9 determine the desired stress value
Figures 5 and 6. for each calculation to achieve a resultant MDMT for varying

4 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

Rts values.
S *E*
Rts = ( Stress Basis ) (10)
SE
STEP 3 – Determine the temperature reduction based upon
calculated MDMT values. The MDMT value for Rts = 1 – the
MDMT value for Rts ( x) → ( x 0→1 = stress level) results in the
temperature reduction value, TR. This is based upon Equation
(1.9)
STEP 4 – Determine final MDMT value for a desired value by
subtracting the TR value from the code MDMT value obtained
from Figures 3 and 4.
RESULTS
The main goal of testing was to prove the code rule in ASME
Section VIII, Division 2, Part 3 that, at an applied stress value
of 10% UTS pressure vessel steel is deemed to be free of
cracking at temperatures down to −155o F (−104o C ) , is invalid.
A 10% UTS stress value correlates to a Rts value of 0.24.
Stress ratio value diagrams were created for all cases to
determine Rts and corresponding TR values. Figures 7-11
illustrate calculated stress ratio diagrams.
As previously mentioned, Figure 7 corresponds to Figure 5
from ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Part 3. In Part 3, once
an Rts value of 0.24 is reached, it is assumed the metal is free of
brittle fracture at −155o F (−104o C ) even though it appears the
curve continues on past 0.24. From Figure 7 it is shown the
curve does continue downward and does not level off. At an
Rts value of 0.24, the TR value is around 50°F (10 °C). Given
the code MDMT for SA537 Class 1 is greater than 10°F, a
final adjusted MDMT value greater than -40°F (10 °C) is
obtained, which is far above the −155o F (−104o C ) value given
by the ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Part 3 code for a
material with an Rts value of 0.24 or less. Therefore this
suggests the assumption of a 10% UTS fracture arrest stress
code value is invalid.
Even in a lower yield strength material such as SA516-70 (a
curve B material on the MDMT curves), at an Rts value of 0.24
SUMMARY
The previous basis for a 10% UTS arrest stress for welds not
subject to PWHT in ASME Section VIII, Division. 2, Part 3
was based upon work by Pellini and Robertson. Crack arrest
testing performed by Pellini and Robertson was on base
material and not welds or heat affected zones. Pellini justified
the application of this data for welded structures, specifically
ship manufacturing, because residual stress in welds and heat
affected zones runs parallel to the weld; therefore, cracks
perpendicular to the weld would propagate into lower stressed
base material and arrest. However, this justification does not
hold true for fabrication of pressure vessels and welds on
nozzles, piping and tee joints since material is constrained.
This constraint of the material during fabrication leads to
varying residual stresses including a stress component
perpendicular to the weld. Cracks may therefore propagate in
the weld or along the HAZ in high stress areas, never arresting
and leading to brittle fracture. Therefore, this does not provide
the technical basis for the arrest stress value used in ASME
Section VIII, Division 2 Part 3 for vessels with operating
temperatures near the NDT.
Calculations performed creating stress ratio diagrams based
upon procedures from ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Part 3
also highlight a lack of fracture arrest at temperatures of
−155o F (−104o C ) . At and below a Rts value of 0.24
(approximately 10% UTS), the determined MDMT was still
higher than −155o F (−104o C ) for certain materials and
components not subject to PWHT. However, for materials
subject to PWHT, fracture arrest is achievable at an MDMT of
-155°F (-104°C) and a 10% UTS stress level based upon
materials tested for this study. Further work is needed to
accurately determine arrest stress values for various materials,
geometries, and crack sizes.
NOMENCLATURE:
a = Reference flaw depth
b = Reference flaw length
C = K1d parameter
E = Weld joint efficiency
E* =
* *
E equal to E except E = max [E, 0.80]
K1d = Dynamic fracture toughness
Kmat = Material fracture toughness

the TR value is 115°F (46 °C), see Figure 8, resulting in an KR = Toughness ratio.
adjusted MDMT value of -60°F (-16 °C) based upon a 55°F LR = Load ratio
(16 °C) code MDMT value. Again a value significantly higher
R = Inside vessel radius
than the listed code value of −155o F (−104o C ) for non impact
tested material.
Rts = Stress reduction ratio defined as stress for
operating condition divided by stress at
However, plate that was subject to PWHT or made of material design minimum temperature
with even lower yield strengths, such as SA516-60 (a curve C S = Allowable stress from Part 3 Annex 3a
material on the MDMT curve), the curve levels out and
S* = Applied general primary stress
remains above an Rts value of 0.24. This indicates that at
−155o F (−104o C ) and 10% UTS fracture arrest is possible.
5 Copyright © 2009 by ASME
σ ys = Engineering yield stress evaluated at 2. Pellini, William S. “Principles of Fracture-Safe Design –
Part 1”. American Society of Mechanical Engineers,
temperature of interest Pressure Vessels and Piping: Design and Analysis-A
σ p
m = Primary membrane stress Decade of Progress, Volume One Analysis. New York
1972, pg. 275-293
σ msr = Secondary membrane stress
3. Wells, A.A. “Brittle Fracture Strength of Welded Steel
t = Thickness of component Plates,” British Welding Journal., 8:259-277 (May 1961)
T = Temperature
4. ASME Section VIII Division 2, Part 3 Materials
T0 = K1d parameter Requirements, 2007
TR = Reduction in temperature based upon Rts 5. Prager, M. and Osage, D.A., “Development of Material
value Fracture Toughness Rules for Section VIII, Division 2,”
2007 Edition, WRC Bulletin In Preparation.
6. Osage, D.A., ASME Section VIII, Division 2 Criteria
REFERENCES:
Document, To be published.
1. Robertson, T.S. “Propagation of Brittle Fracture in Steel.”
Journal of the Iron and Steel Institute, London pg. 175-
361. December, 1953

6 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

 Table 1 – Parameters for MDMT Calculations in VCESageTM Software

Cases Examined
Parameter
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5

Figure 7 8 9 10 11

Inner Radius in 100 60 60 60 100

(mm) (2540) (1524) (1524) (1524) (2540)

Thickness 2 1 1 1 2
In (mm) (50) (25) (25) (25) (50)

Longitudinal Longitudinal Longitudinal Longitudinal Longitudinal

Crack Type Semi-elliptical Semi-elliptical Semi-elliptical Semi-elliptical Semi-elliptical
Crack Crack Crack Crack Crack ck

Crack Depth, a 0.5 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.5

in (mm) (12) (6) (6) (6) (12)

Crack Length, 2c 3 1.5 1.5 1.5 3

in (mm) (75) (38) (38) (38) (75)

Material &
SA537 SA516-70 SA516-60 SA516-70 SA516-60
Specification

Inferred Lower - Inferred Lower - Inferred Lower - Inferred Lower - Inferred Lower -
Toughness
MPC KID MPC KID MPC KID MPC KID MPC KID

32660 24707 20910 24707 20910

Yield Strength (225) (170) (144) (170) (144)
psi (MPa)
( = 0.67σ ) ys ( = 0.67σ ) ys ( = 0.67σ ) ys ( = 0.67σ ) ys ( = 0.67σ ) ys

Applied Stress 48750 to 0 24707 to 0 20910 to 0 24707 to 0 20910 to 0

psi, (MPa) (336) (170 to 0) (144 to 0) (170 to 0) (144 to 0)

7412
6273
32660 24707 20910 (51)
(43)
Residual Stress (225) (170) (144)
( = 0.20σ ys ) ( = 0.20σ )
psi, (MPa)
( = 0.67σ ) ys ( = 0.67σ ) ys
( = 0.67σ ) ys
ys

PWHT No No No Yes Yes

Assessment
100 100 100 100 100
Temperature
(38) (38) (38) (38) (38)
°F (°C)

Temperature
Reduction [ MDMT Calculated at Rts (1)] − [ MDMT Calculated at Rts ( x )] ; 1 ≥ x ≥ 0
(°F)

7 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

 Load

Load

Liquid Nitrogen
6 in. Applied
Reaction
Mass
Saw Cut
Weld

Wedge Crack
Impact 24 in.
Impact Crack
Saw Cut Weld
Balancing
Cut 6 in.
36 in.
Weld

Load

Load

Features of the Robertson tests are shown. In one type (left), the fracure is initiated by plastic deformation of the
saw cut region by wedge impact. The original Robertson specimen (right) utilizes the force developed by spreading
open a nub region that is deformed by impact while being coooled to low temperatures. In both cases, the crack is
made tranverse to a region of fixed temperature and elastic stress. Note that in both test specimens, the weld is
located away from the crack to minimize the effects of residaul stress in determining the crack arrest temperature
and is only used to mount lugs on the test plate for applciation of the load.

Figure 1 – Robertson Test Samples (from ASME Section VIII, Division 2 Criteria Document, Part 3, Figure
3.10)

Figure 2 – Pellini FAD Diagram

8 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

 120

Minimum Design Metal Temperature, °F

100
A
80

60
B
40

C
20
D
0

-20

-40
Impact Testing Required
-60
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50

Nominal Governing Thickness, in.

Figure 3 – Impact Test Exemption Curves – Parts Not Subject to PWHT (from ASME Section VIII, Division 2,
Part 3, Figure 3.7)

120
Minimum Design Metal Temperature, °F

100
A
80

60
B
40

20
C
0
D
-20

-40

-60
Impact Testing Required
-80
0 1 2 3 4

Nominal Governing Thickness, in.

Figure 4 – Impact Test Exemption Curves – Parts Subject to PWHT and Non-Welded Parts (from ASME
Section VIII, Division 2, Part 3, Figure 3.8)

9 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

 1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

Stress Ratio - Rts 0.6

0.5
≤ 50 ksi
0.4
> 50 ksi, ≤ 65 ksi
0.3

0.2

0.1 See paragraph 3.11.2.5.a.5.i when Rts is less than or equal to 0.24

0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100

Temperature Reduction - TR, °F

Figure 5 – Reduction in the MDMT Without Impact Testing – Parts Not Subject to PWHT (from ASME Section
VIII, Division 2, Part 3, Figure 3.12)

1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7
≤ 50 ksi
Stress Ratio - Rts

0.6

0.5 > 50 ksi, ≤ 65 ksi

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1 See paragraph 3.11.2.5.a.5.i when Rts is less than or equal to 0.24

0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100

Temperature Reduction - TR, °F

Figure 6 – Reduction in the MDMT Without Impact Testing – Parts Subject to PWHT and Non-Welded Parts
(from ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Part 3, Figure 3.12)

10 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

 1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Rts

0.5 SA537 Class 1

0.4 <50ksi
0.3 >50ksi <65ksi
0.2
0.1
0
0 20 40 60 80 100

Temperature Reduction, TR, F

Figure 7 – Calculated Reduction in the MDMT for Case 1: SA537 Class 1, Not Subject to PWHT. Reduction in
MDMT for materials less than 50 ksi and between 50ksi and 65ksi not subject to PWHT from ASME Section
VIII Division 2, Part 3, Figure 3.12 are also included.

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Rts

0.5 SA516‐70
0.4 <50ksi
0.3 >50ksi <65ksi
0.2
0.1
0
0 25 50 75 100 125

Temperarture Reduction, TR, F

Figure 8 – Calculated Reduction in the MDMT for Case 2: SA516-70, Not Subject to PWHT. Reduction in
MDMT for materials less than 50 ksi and between 50ksi and 65ksi not subject to PWHT from ASME Section
VIII Division 2, Part 3, Figure 3.12 are also included.

11 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

 1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Rts

0.5 SA516‐60
0.4 <50ksi
0.3 >50ksi <65ksi
0.2
0.1
0
0 25 50 75 100 125

Temperarture Reduction, TR, F

Figure 9 – Calculated Reduction in the MDMT for Case 3:SA516-60, Not Subject to PWHT. Reduction in MDMT
for materials less than 50 ksi and between 50ksi and 65ksi not subject to PWHT from ASME Section VIII
Division 2, Part 3, Figure 3.12 are also included.

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6 SA516‐70 PWHT
Rts

0.5
<50ksi PWHT
0.4
0.3 >50ksi <65ksi PWHT
0.2
0.1
0
0 25 50 75 100 125

Temperarture Reduction, TR, F

Figure 10 – Calculated Reduction in the MDMT for Case 4:SA516-70, Subject to PWHT. Reduction in MDMT
for materials less than 50 ksi and between 50ksi and 65ksi subject to PWHT from ASME Section VIII Division
2, Part 3, Figure 3.12 are also included.

12 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

 1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Rts

0.5 SA516‐60 PWHT

0.4 <50ksi PWHT
0.3 >50ksi <65ksi PWHT
0.2
0.1
0
0 25 50 75 100 125

Temperature Reduction, TR, F

Figure 11 – Calculated Reduction in the MDMT for Case 5: SA516-60, Subject to PWHT. Reduction in MDMT
for materials less than 50 ksi and between 50ksi and 65ksi subject to PWHT from ASME Section VIII Division
2, Part 3, Figure 3.12 are also included.

13 Copyright © 2009 by ASME