16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems

170
12.0 FATIGUE ASPECTS OF PRESSURE VESSEL DESIGN
During service, pressure vessels may be subjected to cyclic or repeated stresses. In its
most simplified form the variation of stress with time is shown in Figure 12.1. BS 5500,
Appendix C lists examples of fatigue loading are follows:
(a) application or fluctuations of pressure (including testing);
(b) temperature transients;
(c) restrictions of expansion or contraction during normal temperature variations;
(d) forced vibrations;
(e) variations in external loads.
Figure 12.1 A simplified form of fluctuating stress
Brief details of the failures in fatigue are given in Table 12.1. In this it will be seen that
fatigue loading due to vibration, usually induced by high speed gas flow or moving plant
elsewhere in the system, was the most common cause of failure. This emphasises the need
to pay special attention to sources of vibration. It also means that high-cycle fatigue is
relevant to pressure vessels, although on the face of it the pressure cycling of the vessel
itself may in fact be quite small.
In relation to vibrations, it is worth noting that these can occur unexpectedly and the
possibility of this should be borne in mind by designers. A couple of examples will serve
to make the point. The first occurred during the transportation of a vessel, when fatigue
cracking occurred in a manner not at all connected with the operation of the vessel. A
second case involved pipework which suffered wind-induced vibration while standing on a
dock side waiting for transportation.
Other failures occur during service life, but again are not strictly covered under service
loading. They are associated with temporary welded attachments, which are sometimes
used during the carrying and assembly of the plant, and left welded in position on the
vessel. During the service life of the vessel the attachment may not be under any applied
loading itself, but could be in a region of high vessel stress. During normal service
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
171
conditions the incipient cracks associated with the weld, may propagate into the vessel
plate material, resulting ultimately in the catastrophic failure of the vessel. In such cases
the temporary attachments should be removed and the remaining surface flush ground and
checked for residual surface damage.
Table 12.1 Details of fatigue failures in pressures vessels, piping, boilers and containment
plant.
12.1 Fatigue Crack Initiation and Propagation.
In recent years it has been necessary to revise the fatigue rules in BS 5500 because of a
recognition that welded pressure vessels behave quite differently from components that do
not contain welds. The philosophy relates mainly to the process of fatigue crack initiation
and crack propagation. It is now widely recognised that the fatigue lives of welded joints
are dominated by fatigue crack propagation. It is important to draw a distinction between
the two processes because factors which influence fatigue life can have quite different
effects during each process. The result of this is that conclusions drawn about their
influence on fatigue crack initiation may be incorrect during fatigue crack propagation.
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
172
In the past the approach was to use S - N curves (i.e. stress ~ number of cycles) for the
material derived from data obtained from small polished specimens, in conjunction with
fatigue strength reduction factors (or stress concentration factors), which relate to
structural discontinuities, including welds. This was found to be inadequate as illustrated
in Figure 12.2. The S - N curves for the notched or welded components cannot be
deduced from the material-based S - N curves by simply applying a factor like the fatigue
strength reduction factor since the curves have different slopes. In general, the S - N
curve becomes steeper as the severity of the stress concentration increases, until it is
equivalent to a crack.
Figure 12.2 Comparison of fatigue strengths of plain steel plate, notched plate and plate
with fillet welded attachment.
Figure 12.2 also illustrates that the SCF of a weld, related, for example, to its profile, does
not necessarily give a true reflection of the real SCF and hence the fatigue strength. The
same type and size of plate specimen was used to obtain all the data shown in Figure 12.2.
The stress concentration factor of the hole in the plate and that for the 45
o
fillet weld are
approximately the same, around 3. However, as will be seen the weld toe is far more
severe that the general profile suggests, due to the presence of crack-like flaws. The effect
of these flaws, which are inevitable in fusion welds, is to eliminate the need for a crack
initiation period, so that the fatigue life consists of the growth of a crack.
Another important point to note concerns the effect of material properties on fatigue
strength. Fatigue data obtained from unwelded material clearly show an increase in fatigue
strength with increase in tensile strength. However, the benefit of material tensile strength
relates only to crack initiation, rate of crack growth is found to be insensitive to material
strength. Thus, welded joints do not show any increase in fatigue strength with increase in
tensile strength. This is illustrated in Figure 12.3. This is an important point for the
designer to note, since it would appear at first sight that the higher strength materials
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
173
would be a preferred option. They obviously lead to a thinner vessel, but have no
beneficial effect on the fatigue life of the vessel. Such facts should be viewed with caution!
Figure 12.4 Effect of steel ultimate tensile strength on fatigue strength.
12.2 Fatigue Design Method
The basic design of the vessel is performed according to section 3 of BS 5500.
Consequently, a fatigue assessment is carried out when the material thicknesses and design
details have already been selected. The stresses arising in service are thus known and the
fatigue life of the vessel is based on the specified use of the vessel. In such circumstances,
the fatigue assessment is essentially a check to ensure that the vessel designed to carry the
static loading will not fail as a result of fatigue cracking. The steps in the fatigue
assessment are as follows:-
(1) identify design details which will introduce stress concentrations and are,
therefore, potential sites for fatigue cracking (openings, welds, bolted joints);
(2) identify all repeated or cyclic loads and hence stresses to be experienced by details
during service operations of the vessel;
(3) using the appropriate design S - N curves in the Standard, deduce the fatigue lives
of the details and compared them with the required design life.
If the deduced life is less than that required, then one could reduce the stresses arising by
improving the design detail, or if the vibrations are a significant source of fatigue damage
take appropriate action to eliminate, reduce or more usually, try and isolate them.
12.3 Fatigue Design Curves
The new rules adopt the approach used in virtually all other design codes for structures
whereby weld details are separated into different classes, each with its own design S - N
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
174
curve. The weld details in a particular class have similar fatigue strengths. In this new
presentation the S - N curves already allow for the stress concentration factor of the detail
itself.
The design curves, shown in Figure 12.5, were derived from a statistical analysis of a large
body of published data obtained from simple welded specimens in steel. This procedure
was justified since it has been found that the fatigue data obtained from pressure vessels
are in good agreement with data obtained from all-scale test specimens containing the
relevant weld detail. The weld detail was the important unifying factor.
The mean minus two standard deviations S - N curves, corresponding to approximately
97.7% probability of survival, are given as the design curves in Figure 12.5. As discussed
later, in some circumstances the mean minus three standard deviations curve is considered
to be more appropriate and will be used.
The S - N curves are expressed in terms of stress range (twice the amplitude), since this is
the conventional way to express fatigue data for welded joints. Also, it emphasises the
fact that for welds the full stress range is damaging, even if part of it is compressive. For
high-cycle fatigue conditions this is because of the presence of high tensile residual
stresses which, in real structures, will be of yield strength magnitude. under such
circumstances, the application of any cyclic stress leads to an effective stress range of
similar magnitude cycling down from tensile yield. Thus, applied mean stress is irrelevant
and for all loading conditions fatigue strength is proportional to stress range.
Figure 12.5 Fatigue design curves for weld details, applicable to ferritic steels up to
350
o
C, austenitic steels up to 430
o
C and aluminium alloys up to 100
o
C.
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
175
In addition to the graphical presentation of the design stress, tabulated values of the
constants in the following equation:
S N A
r
m

(12.1)
where S
r
is the stress range, are also provided in Appendix C of BS 5500. These are given
below in Table 12.2. All six design curves for weld details are parallel, with m = 3. A
seventh curve, class C, is given for unwelded and this has a slope of m = 3.5.
Table 12.2 Details of fatigue design curves to be used with equation 12.1
12.4 Stresses
In common with other fatigue design rules for welded joints, design to the new rules is
based on the maximum principal stress range directly, the stress intensity is not used at all.
In some circumstances, of course, the maximum principal stress range will be the same as
the stress intensity. For example, for biaxial tension. In other cases the stress intensity is
less. There is much evidence that the relevant data supports the use of the maximum
principal stress range.
12.5 Criteria for Establishing the need for Detailed Fatigue Analysis
BS 5500 states that A detailed fatigue analysis of the vessel or part of the vessel need not
be performed in accordance with C.3 if the design is based on previous and satisfactory
experience of strictly comparable service, or if the conditions of either C.2.2 or C.2.3 are
met. [Note, sections C.3, C.2.2 and C.2.3, of BS 5500, will be dealt with later in these
notes].
In this work a new stress term f
f
is introduced for use in cases where the upper limit stress
allowable from Appendix A of the Standard, of 3 x maximum allowable design stress, is
assumed. It allows for the possibility that the maximum stress actually adopted by the
designer can be different from the value f given in Table 2.3 of BS 5500. Such a situation
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
176
arises if, in order to satisfy the requirements of the simplified analysis, the designer
chooses to use a lower value of f. The value of f
f
might also be greater than f, if thermal
stresses need to be considered.
Criterion C.2.2 Limitation on number of stress fluctuations.
The procedure set out here is a highly conservative requirement based on limitation of the
total number of cycles of fatigue loading from all sources. The criterion is intended to act
as a sieve through which effectively statically-loaded structures should pass. It is based
on the assumption that every load cycle produces a stress range of 3f
f
and that this occurs
at a low fatigue strength class G weld detail. Furthermore, the mean minus three standard
deviations design S - N curve is applied. This is,
S N
r
3 11
1 63 10
(12.2)
It is worth comparing this figure with the value given in Table 12.2 where A is equal to
2.50 x 10
11
, which is for the mean minus two standard deviations. The figure given in
equation (12.2) is clearly slightly more conservative. The mean minus three standard
deviations represents approximately 99.8% probability of survival.
Substituting S f
r f
3 , into equation (12.2) the total allowable number of cycles N
becomes:
( )
N
f
f
f
f

1 63 10
3
6 10
11
3
9
3
(12.3)
Two further modification are made to this equation. The first introduces a method of
accommodating different values of the elastic modulus, E. The second is a thickness
term. This allows for the fact that the fatigue strength of some welded joints decreases
with increase in the plate thickness. The equation used for this is based upon work done
for the design of offshore structures. It is currently the subject of a number of research
projects and could well be revised in future. Presently the correction factor reduces the
design stress by ( )
22
0 25
e
.
, or the life by ( )
22
0 75
e
.
for an S - N curve with a slope of 3,
where e is the plate thickness in mm. Thus, the limitation on the total number of stress
fluctuations becomes:-
N
f
E
e
f

_
,

_
,

6 10
2 09 10
22
9
3 5
3
0 75 .
(12.4)
In equation (12.4) e is the maximum of the greatest thickness, or 22 mm. That is, if the
thickness is less than 22 mm, then 22 mm should be used. If the number of cycles is such
that the equation (12.4) is not satisfied then Criterion C.2.3 must be considered.
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
177
Criterion C.2.3 Simplified fatigue analysis using design curves.
The second simplified method requires the designer to establish separately numbers of
stress cycles (n
i
) arising from the various load sources (pressure, temperature and
mechanical). These are then used with endurances N
i
, which relate to the mean minus
three standard deviations design S - N curves, in cumulative damage calculations (Miners
rule). The thickness correction is again introduced. Thus, the following equation must be
satisfied:
n
N
n
N
n
N
n
N e
i
i
1
1
2
2
3
3
0 75
0 6
22
+ + +

_
,

etc
.
(12.5)
where i = 1, 2, 3, etc. N
i
values are obtained from the appropriate fatigue design curve,
adjusted where necessary for elastic modulus. The design curves, Figure 12.5 and Table
12.2, are used directly, with an allowance made for the difference between them and the
mean minus three standard deviation curves being incorporated in the constant ( ) 0 6 on
the right hand side of equation (12.5). The ( ) 0 6 factor also introduces a further element
of conservatism, one suspects the real factor should be 1.63/2.50 = 0.65, see page 176,
under Criterion C.2.2.
The class D fatigue design curve or, if the vessel or part under consideration contains any
welds other than flush ground butt or flush ground repair welds, the curve for the lowest
class weld detail to be incorporated in the vessel or the class G curve is used.
If a number of different loading cycles are know to take place, as shown in Figure C.2 in
Appendix C, BS 5500, then the number of these can be assessed. An example of this is
shown in Figure C.2. For this approach a simplified cycle counting method is used.
A conservative estimate of the stress range due to pressure change, p
r
, is:
S
p
p
f
r
r

_
,

3
(12.6)
and a conservative estimate of the stress range due to change of temperature difference
T between adjacent points is :
S E T
r
2 (12.7)
Heating and cooling cycles both produce complete thermal stress cycles which, since they
act in opposite senses, must be added to maximise their damaging effect.
In this simplified method the designer has a choice about how detailed the stress analysis
should be at this stage of the fatigue assessment. If the assessment fails to satisfy equation
(12.5) then the more detailed assessment must be carried out.
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
178
12.6 Criterion C.3 - Detailed Assessment of Fatigue Life.
In this approach the S - N curves provided in Figure 12.5 (and Table 12.2) are used
without any modification, other than for elastic modulus and thickness. That is, two
standard deviations below the mean, representing 97.7% probability of survival. The
form of these is given in equation (12.1), to be used with Table 12.2.
If there are two or more types of stress cycle, their cumulative effect shall be evaluated and
the following condition met:-
n
N
n
N
n
N
n
N
i
i
1
1
2
2
3
3
1 + + +

etc
(12.8)
where n
i
are the number of times that each type of stress cycle, S
ri
, will occur during the
life of the vessel and N
i
are the fatigue lives corresponding to S
ri
, obtained from the
appropriate fatigue design curve.
In order to ensure that the full effect is considered of the superposition of cycles from
various sources of loading, which produces a total stress range greater than the stress
ranges due to the individual sources, and also to define cycles when a stress variation
does not start and finish at the same level, a cycle counting method has to be employed.
The reservoir method is recommended. The use of this, however, is outwith the work of
this course.
As in the earlier work the elastic modulus and the vessel thickness are incorporated into
equation (12.1) : S N A
r
m
, which can be modified to the following:-
N A
e
S
E
m
r
m

_
,

_
,

22 2 09 10
4
5
(12.9)
12.7 Fatigue Analysis of Weld Details.
In this new approach to fatigue assessment S - N curves are provided for particular weld
details which already incorporate the local stress concentration factors and are, therefore,
used in conjunction with nominal stresses in the vicinity of the weld. In order to assist the
designer in choosing the appropriate design S - N curve for a particular weld, a
classification system is given. Each part of the construction detail is placed into one of six
classes, designated D to W, corresponding to six fatigue design curves. The classification
of each part of the detail depends upon the following:
(1) the direction of the fluctuating stress relative to the detail;
(2) the location of possible crack initiation at the detail;
(3) the geometric arrangement and proportions of the detail; and
(4) the method of manufacture and inspection.
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
179
Thus, more than one class may apply for a given weld detail, since the class refers to one
particular mode of fatigue failure, there are a number of ways in which a weld detail might
fail, as illustrated in Figure 12.6. Appendix C gives a large number of examples, with
some helpful sketches, which indicate the potential mode of failure cracking and the
position and direction of relevant fluctuating stress. It is clearly important for the designer
to consider all possible sites for fatigue cracking in order to establish the fatigue life of the
vessel.
Figure 12.6 An example of the various possible detail classifications in the same joint
depending on the mode of fatigue failure being considered.
The details of these are given in Table C.2 of Appendix C from BS 5500 and cover
(a) Seam Welds, (b) Branch connections, (c) Attachments, (d) Supports and (e) Flanges.
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
180
12.8 An Example of a Fatigue Assessment of a Vessel under Pressure Cycling
Consider a cylindrical vessel, made of a ferritic material, closed with 2 : 1 ellipsoidal
ends. The shell is fitted with a 200 mm nozzle. The vessel is subject to 10,000 cycles of
pressure from 0 N/mm
2
to 1.35 N/mm
2
. Find the fatigue life for the vessel with the design
and material data as follows.
Design pressure, p = 1.5
N/mm
2
Pressure fluctuation, p
r
= 1.35
N/mm
2
Design temperature = 150
o
C
Corrosion allowance (CA) = 3.0 mm
Shell design stress at 150
o
C, f
s
= 148
N/mm
2
Nozzle design stress at 150
o
C, f
n
= 148
N/mm
2
Required number of cycles = 10,000
Inside diameter of shell (uncorroded) = 1500 mm
Thickness of shell (including CA) = 15 mm
Outside diameter of 200 mm nozzle (uncorroded) = 219.1 mm
Thickness of 200 mm nozzle (uncorroded) = 12.5 mm
The fatigue strength of a vessel is usually governed by the fatigue strength of particular
features; such as welds, nozzles, or other structural discontinuities (e.g. cone to cylinder
junctions, knuckles, etc.). It is often necessary to analyse a number of these features to
determine which will control the failure life but it is usually around the nozzles that the
higher stresses occur, which is the case in this example.
Criterion C.2.2
The maximum allowable number of stress fluctuation, N, is given by equation C.1 of
Appendix C, equation (12.4) of the notes.
N
f
E
e
f

_
,

_
,

6 10
2 09 10
22
9
3 5
3
0 75 .
where
e = the maximum of greatest thickness or 22 mm, in this case = 22 mm as
maximum thickness is equal to 15 mm;
E =
2.02 x 10
5
N/mm
2
(from table 3.6(3)) at 150
o
C;
f
f
=
f = 148 N/mm
2
using these values;
N

_
,

_
,

6 10
148
22
22
2 02 10
2 09 10
1 671
9
3
0 75
5
5
3
.
.
.
, cycles
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
181
As the required number of cycles is 10,000, the requirement of criterion C.2.2 has not been
met.
Criterion C.2.3 : Simplified fatigue analysis using design curves
Step 1
In this example there is only one fluctuating load (pressure) and only one frequency.
Step 2
A conservative estimate of the stress range S
r
(in N/mm
2
), due to pressure is calculated
from equation C.2 of App C, or equation (12.6) of these notes:
S
p
p
f
r
r

_
,

_
,

3
1 35
1 5
3 148 399 6
.
.
. N / mm
2
Step 3
The number of cycles, N, is obtained from the appropriate fatigue design curve. The curve
for the lowest class of weld detail to be incorporated in the vessel should be used. From
table C.2(b) the toe of the weld at a nozzle attachment is classified as class F. Using the
class F fatigue curve given in figure C.3 (Appendix C) or Figure 12.5, and correcting for
differences in elastic modulus, E, of material covered by Figure 12.5, the number of cycles
N is given by equation C.5 (equation 12.1), is as follows:
( ) N A S
r
m


where m and A are constants obtained from table C.1, Table 12.2 of these notes. For class
F, for N < 10
7
cycles, m = 3 and A = 6.33 x 10
11
.
Thus the allowable number of cycles N

_
,

6 33 10 399 6
209000
202000
8957
11
3
. .
Note this equation includes the correction for the elastic modulus difference.
The damage factor limit, of equation C.4 (App C), equation (12.5), can be tested as
follows:
n
N e

_
,

0 6
22
0 75 .
where
e = the maximum of the greatest thickness or 22 mm = 22 mm
n = 10,000
N = 8,957
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
182
Therefore,
n
N

10000
8957
1116 . , which exceeds the limiting value of
0 6
22
22
0 6
0 75

_
,

.
and thus the criterion is not satisfied.
As neither of these criteria were satisfied the rules require a detailed assessment.
Criterion C.3 - Detailed assessment of fatigue life.
The fatigue life of the vessel is identified as usually being limited by the nozzle detail. For
this assessment it is necessary to determine the value of the peak stress at the various
nozzle/shell discontinuities. This value will be the product of the stress concentration
factor (SCF) for the detail and the local stress. For the nozzle in the cylindrical shell the
important stress is the circumferential stress at the junction of the vessel and the nozzle. In
the case of a nozzle located in the spherical portion of a dished end, an SCF can be found
from the Leckie and Penny curves given in G.2.5.2 (App G, BS 5500)
When the nozzle (or a manway) is located in a cylindrical shell it is not strictly correct to
obtain SCF values from the methods in BS 5500. It is therefore proposed, for the
cylindrical shell, to use an equation suggested by Decock (Determination of stress
concentration factors and fatigue assessment of flush and extruded nozzles in welded
pressure vessels 2nd Intern. Conf. on Pressure Vessel Tech, Part II, ASME, San Antonio,
Texas, Oct 1973). This formulation is based upon the fact that the maximum stress
invariably occurs at the crotch corner.
SCF
d
D
d
D
t
T
d
D
D
T
t
T
d
D
t
T

+ +

'

'

2
2 1 25
1
.
where
d is the mean diameter of the corroded nozzle (in mm)
D is the mean diameter of the corroded shell (in mm)
t is the corroded thickness of the nozzle (in mm)
T is the corroded thickness of the shell (in mm)
In the present example the following parameters are for the corroded condition.
Shell thickness T = 12.0 mm
Inside diameter of shell
D
i
= 1500 + 6 = 1506 mm
Mean diameter of shell D = 1506 + 12 = 1518 mm
For the 200 mm nozzle in the cylindrical shell, the following parameters for the corroded
condition and allowing for a 12.5% mill tolerance.
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
183
Nozzle thickness t = 12.5 x 0.875 - 3 = 7.94 mm
Inside diameter of nozzle
d
i
= 219.1 - 15.88 = 203.22 mm
Mean diameter of nozzle d = 203.22 + 7.94 = 211.16 mm
Using the Decock equation above,
SCF
+

+

'

'

2
2 21116
1518
21116
1518
7 94
12
1 25 21116
1518
1518
12
1
7 94
12
21116
1518
7 94
12
. . . . .
. . .
The above leads to an SCF of the following value,
SCF = 3.365
Stress calculations
To obtain the peak stress at the nozzle/shell discontinuity the appropriate stress
concentration factor is multiplied by the circumferential membrane stress in the shell.
The circumferential membrane stress range in a cylindrical shell can be calculated from the
classical stress/pressure relationship for a cylinder, as follow:-

p D
e
r
2
where

is the circumferential stress in N/mm

2
p
r
is the pressure range in N/mm
2
D is the mean diameter of the shell in mm
e is the wall thickness of the shell in mm
Thus

1 35 1518
2 12
85 39
.
. N / mm
2
(for the shell in the corroded condition)
Therefore, the maximum stress range is 3.365 x 85.39 = 287.33 N/mm
2
.
[It is worth noting that for certain cases this stress range is greater than the 3f,
conservatively assumed earlier. The reason for this is that the design of the nozzle is based
on BS 5500 which makes use of centre-line shell theory and cannot predict accurately the
behaviour at the crotch corner.
16426/16587 - Pressurised Systems
184
Fatigue analysis
For nozzles in cylindrical shells the peak stress usually occurs at the inside corner of the
nozzle in the longitudinal plane (the crotch corner) in the circumferential direction. The
stress on the outside surface is significantly lower (typically about half) and occurs on the
transverse plane. Therefore, for the nozzle geometries allowed in BS 5500, the stress on
the inside corner, as supplied by the equation of Decock, is generally considered the worst
case for fatigue assessment. Reference to table C.2(b) (App C, BS 5500), indicates that
failure from this point may be considered as class D. It can be treated as class C provided
the region is free from welds (including flush-ground repairs).
It is worth noting that if the stress in the transverse plane on the outside surface of the
cylindrical shell, in the region of the toe of the weld were obtained, say, by using finite
element analysis, then the weld category would be class F.
For this example, the higher value of the inside surface stress range, S
r
= 287.33 N/mm
2
,
coupled with the class D is a worst case. Using these values with the equation (12.9) page
178, the allowable number of cycles of loading can be found, as follows:-
N A
e
S
E
m
r
m

_
,

_
,

22 2 09 10
4
5
The values of m = 3 and A = 1.52 x 10
12
are appropriate for class D, from Table 12.2 and
give the following:-
N

_
,

_
,

1 52 10
22
22
287 33 2 09 10
2 02 10
57852
12
0 75
5
5
3
.
. .
.
.
cycles
This value is clearly greater than the required number of cycles (10,000) and thus the
vessel is adequately designed.