Anda di halaman 1dari 8

Proceedings of the ASME 2017 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference

July 16-20, 2017, Waikoloa, Hawaii, USA



Nazrul Islam Tasnim Hassan
North Carolina State University North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC, USA 27607 Raleigh, NC, USA 27607
Email: Email:

ABSTRACT q, Yeq Strain memory surface dimensions

Earlier studies [1] showed that the ANSYS software P Force response of elbows
package customized with an advanced rate-independent p Prescribed internal pressure
constitutive model was unable to simulate some of the low-
cycle fatigue responses of elbow components. Hence, t time
simulations are performed to investigate the influence of T Temperature
manufacturing and welding residual stresses on elbow low-
𝛿 ′ ,𝑎 𝛿′ , 𝑏𝛿′ , 𝑐𝛿′ , 𝐷𝛿′ , Multiaxial ratcheting parameters
cycle fatigue responses. The sequentially coupled thermo-
mechanical finite element analysis is performed to determine Prescribed displacement
the initial residual stress states in elbows due to the elbow a Displacement amplitude
manufacturing processes and welding of elbows to straight
pipes. Real-time girth-welding processes are taken into account Dx Flank to flank diameter change
to simulate the welding induced residual stress field. Dmx Mean values of Dx response
Incorporating these initial residual stresses in the computations, εx Axial strain
low-cycle fatigue and strain ratcheting responses are simulated
by ANSYS. The simulation responses demonstrate that the εax Amplitude of axial strain
influence of manufacturing and welding residual stresses in εmx Mean of axial strain
elbows on its low-cycle fatigue responses is negligible. Hence,
the question remains what is missing in the simulation models ε Circumferential strain
that some of the elbow low-cycle fatigue responses cannot be εm Mean of circumferential strain
simulated. p Plastic strain tensor
Keywords: Elbow, Ratcheting, Initial Residual Stress, Welding 𝜸𝒙𝒚 Shear strain
Residual Stress
𝜼 Welding efficiency
σo Yield stress
σx Axial stress
ai Back stress tensor
σ Circumferential stress
𝑎𝛾𝑖 , 𝑏𝛾𝑖 , 𝑐𝛾𝑖 Strain range parameters
σ Amplitude of axial stress
Ci, γi Kinematic hardening parameters
σm Mean of circumferential stress
𝐷𝛾𝑖 𝛾𝑖 saturation rate
𝜃 Crown section angle
N Number of loading cycles
dp Magnitude of plastic strain increment
n Normal to yield surface
𝑖 Number of kinematic hardening rules

1 Copyright © 2017 ASME

Downloaded From: on 11/15/2017 Terms of Use:

INTRODUCTION responses without including the initial residual stresses. It is
Pressurized elbows in the piping systems may be subjected demonstrated below that the initial residual stresses relax
to cyclic loading due to seismic events or flexible thermo- quickly during displacement controlled loading cycle,
mechanical operations. Such fluctuating load can cause LCF consequently, do not have much influence in the elbow LCF-
and ratcheting damage in the elbows which are one of the ratcheting response simulations for the particular thin-walled
critical components in piping systems. Hence, towards elbow geometry presented in this study.
understanding fatigue life of the piping joints and the inelastic εx 𝜎x
deformation mechanism, detail experimental and analytical
studies are necessary. εa 𝜎a
Long and short radius elbows are studied experimentally t t
and analytically by the authors [1-5] to understand the fatigue-
ratcheting deformation behavior of the elbow under internal UF1 UR1
pressure and LCF loading. Advanced constitutive models are 𝜀x
developed in [1, 2, 4] to evaluate the experimentally observed 𝛾𝑥𝑦 /ξ3
responses motivated by the fact that the Chaboche model in
ANSYS software package cannot predict the elbow LCF-
ratcheting responses [1, 2, 4]. Hence, a modified Chaboche 𝜎𝑚𝜃 𝜎𝜃 𝜀𝑥
model is developed and validated in [1] against a set of SS304/
SS304L (elbow material) responses developed under uniaxial MR1 MOP
and multiaxial cyclic loading histories as shown in Fig. 1. These Figure 1: Loading histories, UF1 (uniaxial fatigue), UR1
room temperature uniaxial (UF1 and UR1) and multiaxial (uniaxial ratcheting), MR1 (multiaxial ratcheting) and
(MR1 and MOP) material data are collected from [2, 6, 7]. MOP (multiaxial out-of-phase), in developing
An experimental program for long and short radius SS304/SS304L low-cycle-fatigue and strain ratcheting
schedule 10-90 ° elbows (D/t = 20) developed by [3, 5] are used responses by [2, 6, 7].
by the authors in [1] to further validate the modified Chaboche
model at the component level. Response simulations of
pressurized (p = 11.0, 20.8 MPa) and unpressurized elbow
components under displacement controlled saw-toothed Elbow components used in the low-cycle-fatigue
loading (𝛿 = ±11.8 mm) are investigated in [1]. Force, experiments by [3, 5] were manufactured through hot bending
displacement, ovalization and strain ratcheting responses at and subsequent air cooling. These elbow components were then
flank, intrados and extrados of elbows are validated against the welded to straight pipes for securing the specimens for
experimentally observed responses. It has been demonstrated experiments. Readers are referred to [3-5] for details on the
that Chaboche model can reasonably predict the force- specimen geometry and dimensions. The above-stated elbow
displacement and flank ratcheting responses but it overpredicts manufacturing and specimen fabrication steps may change the
ovalization [1, 2]; intrados axial ratcheting and extrados hoop initial constituent property of the virgin material and develop an
ratcheting are simulated in the compression direction when initial residual stress field in the elbow component. Due to
experimental ratcheting responses are in the tensile direction. difficulty in developing macro-scale material properties of
Hence, the constitutive model is improved in [1] by introducing elbow materials, in this study, the material properties of straight
an evolving multiaxial ratcheting parameter in the modified pipe is considered. For calculation of initial residual stresses in
Chaboche hardening rule and strain range dependent hardening elbows due to manufacturing and welding to straight pipes the
due to hysteresis curve shape change (𝛾-hardening or shape simulation steps used are as follows. In the first step, the
hardening). The developed modeling features improved manufacturing residual stresses are computed, followed by the
ovalization and strain ratcheting responses at all locations of computation of welding to straight pipe residual stresses. In
elbow but strain ratcheting at some location (axial strain both steps, the sequentially coupled thermo-mechanical
ratcheting at intrados) of high pressurized elbows is analysis is performed. The temperature field is determined
overpredicted. based on applied thermal load and resultant thermal history is
used to simulate the residual stress. The residual stress
To address these drawbacks of the finite element calculation is discussed below.
simulation models, the initial residual stress state of elbow
components in piping systems is investigated to understand its
influence on elbow LCF response simulations. The ELBOW MANUFACTURING INITIAL RESIDUAL
investigation is motivated by the study [8] that showed STRESS SIMULATION
significance of residual stresses on LCF responses. Hence,
simulation responses considering the manufacturing and Finite element simulation of elbow manufacturing residual
welding residual stresses are compared to the simulation stresses is performed based on presumed manufacturing steps

2 Copyright © 2017 ASME

Downloaded From: on 11/15/2017 Terms of Use:

of hot mandrel bending by pushing heated pipe through a die,
cut-off the elbow followed by air-cooling. As the actual
manufacturing processes are proprietary information, in this
study, elbow initial residual stresses are calculated based on
heating a SS304/ SS304L elbow to 800oC, hold it for 5 minutes
before air-cooling to the ambient temperature. It is noted here
that the pushing of the heated pipe through the mandrel is not
included in the analysis due to lack of information. The long
radius elbow for which the manufacturing residual stresses are
calculated is shown in Fig. 2a which has an average outer
diameter of 60.4 mm and radius of curvature of 76.2 mm, and
an average thickness 3.7 mm.
The thermo-mechanical analysis in ANSYS was performed
using both the four noded layered shell (4 layers) (not shown)
and 20 noded brick elements (4 layers) as shown in Figs. 2b.
Assuming thermo-mechanical problem as sequentially coupled, (c)
heat transfer analysis is conducted first and resultant thermal
distribution is then used for the stress analysis. The SS304L
thermo-material properties, such as, thermal conductivity,
specific heat, enthalpy and film coefficient are collected from
[9] and is used for the heat transfer analysis. During heating of
the elbow, the temperature is applied to a sink at the outer
surface of the elbow, and during cooling, all applied
temperatures are removed and allowed to air-cool. When brick
elements are used, the sink temperature is applied to the
external surface of the outer elements. For shell elements,
temperatures are applied at the outer layers of the layered shells.
During heating and cooling of the thin section of the elbow, MPa
temperature variation through the thickness was not observed. (d)
The calculated thermal histories in each element of the elbow Figure 2: (a) Long radius elbow geometry (dimension in mm)
from this heating and cooling steps are stored. An example of [3], (b) FE mesh of the elbow using brick element, (c) simulated
the temperature histories from an outer layer of the shell temperature at the outer surface of the elbow, (d) simulated
elements is shown in Fig. 2c. These thermal histories are then circumferential stress field by the heating and air-cooling of the
prescribed to elbow for thermo-mechanical stress analysis using elbow (Unit in MPa).
temperature dependent bilinear material property and thermal
expansion coefficient collected from [10]. Residual stresses
simulated in elbow through this simulation process by the brick ELBOW-PIPE WELDING SIMULATION
elements is shown in Fig. 2d, where note that the residual A real time girth welding between two straight pipes at two
stresses calculated are small. It is also noted here that the ends of the elbow is simulated considering the real time welding
residual stresses, both the magnitude and distribution, sequence. Readers are referred to [3, 11] for this welding
calculated by the brick and shell1
elements are similar. procedure. At each end welding is simulated using four pass and
single bead welds with arc voltage as 8V, arc current as 110 A
and arcFEBefficiency
9 2017
21:36:37 𝜂 = 30%.
In this analysis, the elbow finite element mesh was
developed using four noded shell elements for both the straight
60.4 pipe and elbow. To represent the weld joint between the straight
𝑡𝑎𝑣 =3.7 pipe and elbow, a shell-solid-shell module is developed as
shown in Fig. 3a and 3b. In this module, shell and solid nodes
at the joint are coupled. Eight noded brick elements are used to
develop the solid FE mesh. The solid geometry is divided into
three segments longitudinally where mid segment is utilized to
simulate welding flow. The welding sequence followed was 1-
76.2 2-3-4 as shown in Fig. 3c. At the completion of the weld-1
(a) (b) sequence, the weld-2 sequence is being laid, after which air-
HASSAN to below 200oC was allowed before laying the weld

3 Copyright © 2017 ASME

Downloaded From: on 11/15/2017 Terms of Use:

sequences 3 and 4. A higher mesh density is considered at the Temperature history at seven locations of the elbow (Fig.
vicinity of welding as shown in Fig. 4a. Finite element 4a) during welding is shown in Fig. 4b. It can be observed from
simulation of this thermo-mechanical analysis was performed these results that the thermal history of the crown section of the
assuming sequentially coupled analysis which is similar to elbow is less affected by the welding. The effect of weld
elbow manufacturing process simulation. The welding sequence is observable in the vicinity of welding but not at the
sequence and weld flow are simulated using element death and crown section. The effect of 2nd welding sequence (after 200
birth technique. The SS304L thermo-material data [9] was used sec) at these locations does not prolong for a long time and
for the heat transfer analysis. thermal history slowly reaches to its ambient temperature after
completing both weldings.





Figure 4: Thermal history of elbow (a) FE mesh of the elbow
(b) component showing different location, (b) thermal history due
to weld sequence in Fig 3c.

Based on the temperature history of welding, residual

stress is simulated using the thermo-mechanical bilinear
material property of SS304 and thermal expansion coefficient
[10]. Initial manufacturing residual stresses are found
Tack negligible (shown in earlier section) and do not have any
Weld influence on welding residual stresses. The von-Mises stress
distribution of the elbow circumferential ( 11) and axial ( 22)
stress are shown in Fig. 5. From the von-Mises stress contour
(Fig. 5a) and 11 and 22 welding residual stresses, it is observed
that the residual stresses are high near the welded joints
comparing to the crown section. Residual stresses in the crown
remain within the elastic range (less than the yield strength, 𝜎0
Weld Sequence (1-2-3-4) =155 MPa of the material) and near the welded joint it is beyond
(c) the elastic range. In the crown section, circumferential residual
Figure 3: Elbow-pipe welding simulation (a) welds in a long stress varies from -145 to 86 MPa, and the axial residual stress
radius elbow and FE modeling of elbow-pipe weld connection, varies from -73 to 39 MPa. Bending stress is not radially
(b) schematic view of the weld connection, (c) welding sequence symmetric in the crown section.

4 Copyright © 2017 ASME

Downloaded From: on 11/15/2017 Terms of Use:

SS304/ SS304L Maximum tensile residual stresses at the crown are
Schedule 10-90° Elbow developed near the intrados at 𝜃 = 42° and at one flank at 𝜃 =
Long Radius 270°. Maximum compressive residual stress is found near the
Von-Mises Stress intrados at at 𝜃 = 330°. The asymmetric nature of the bending
Initial and Welding stress distribution is induced by the welding sequence used.


Long radius elbow experimental responses developed
by[3] are simulated in this study considering the initial residual
stress calculated in the earlier section. FE model, boundary
condition and loading prescribed on of the elbow specimen
were performed according to [1, 4] and shown in Fig. 6. Four
noded structural shell elements were used for modeling pipe
and elbow and eight noded brick elements are used for the end
MPa cap modeling. FE mesh density, node and element numbers are
kept consistent to the developed mesh during manufacturing
and welding simulations. The nonuniform thickness of the
elbow specimen reported by [3] was used in the analysis. Pin
support as shown in Fig. 6 is at the top of the specimen and a
displacement controlled opening-closing saw-toothed signal
(𝛿𝑎 = 11.8 mm) is prescribed at the bottom. Only the
unpressurized elbow is investigated to demonstrate the
influence of residual stresses on LCF response simulations. An
improved Chaboche model developed by the authors in [1] was
used in the ANSYS FE analysis while the calculated residual
stresses used as initial condition. A short description of the
constitutive model used is presented below for the convenience
of discussion but the readers are referred to [1] for details of the


(b) 7102 21 BEF

End Cap
42:20:61 A (Solid 5)


p=0 MPa
Pipe & Elbow
(Shell 181)


Figure 5: Residual stress due to initial and welding procedure
in elbow (a) von-Mises stress (𝜎𝑒 in MPa), (b) bending stress Figure 6: FE mesh of elbow, BC, and loading used in the
in the hoop direction (𝜎11 ), (c) bending stress in axial direction simulation.
(𝜎22 )

5 Copyright © 2017 ASME

Downloaded From: on 11/15/2017 Terms of Use:

CONSTITUTIVE MODEL Without With Without With
Residual Residual Residual Residual
The modified Chaboche kinematic hardening rules of the
plasticity model are presented in Eqs. 1-2 to describe SS304/
SS304L LCF and ratcheting (uniaxial and multiaxial) behavior.
As discussed in [1], a constant multiaxial ratcheting parameter,
𝛿 ′ cannot simulate elbow ratcheting responses, hence an
evolving 𝛿 ′ is developed based on the postulation that t=1.01
t=1 sec
ratcheting of the material depends on the current state of strain. MPa sec MPa
(a) (b)
In this evolution equation (Eq. 3), strain memory surface
parameter (𝑌𝑒𝑞 ) [1] is included. The elbow material SS304/
SS304L also shows cyclic hardening mainly due to curve shape
change and strain range dependence, hence cyclic hardening
through kinematic hardening parameters (𝛾-hardening) as
shown in Eqs. 6-7 are considered in the modeling. In Eqs. 3-7,
𝑎𝛿′ , 𝑏𝛿 ′ , 𝑐𝛿′ , 𝐷𝛿′ are modified multiaxial ratcheting and 𝑎𝛾𝑖 , t=1.375 sec MPa t=1.75 sec MPa
(c) (d)
𝑏𝛾𝑖 , 𝑐𝛾𝑖 , 𝐷𝛾𝑖 are the 𝛾-hardening parameters. Model parameter sec
are calibrated by following [1, 12] using the SS304/ SS304L
uniaxial and multiaxial LCF and ratcheting responses [2, 6, 7].
Kinematic hardening rule: a ai (1)
i 1
Modified Chaboche Model:
dai Ci dε p i ai 1 ai : n n dp (2)
d D ' ( 's '
)dp (3)
' c ' Yeq
s a ' b ' exp (4)
a ' b' 1 (5) (e)
Strain range dependent 𝛾-hardening:
d i Di i q i dp (6)
0 c iq
i q a i b ie (7)

FE analysis of the elbow LCF experiment starts with
solving the initial residual stress field calculated from the
previous section. FE simulation responses for the unpressurized
long radius elbow are shown in Figs. 7 to 9. Circumferential
stress contours in Fig. 7a-7d demonstrate that the initial residual
stress quickly relaxes during applied displacement (opening).
Flank circumferential stress at the crown section of the elbow (f)
immediately relaxes, stress responses remain same for LCF Figure 7: Relaxation of residual hoop stress (𝜎𝜃 in MPa) in
responses whether residual stress is considered or not (Fig. 7e). MPa due to applied displacement (a) stress contour at t=1 sec,
Influence of residual stress is observed for the circumferential (b) stress contour at t=1.01 sec, (c) stress contour at t=1.375
stress adjacent to the straight pipe-elbow welded joint (𝜃 = 108° sec, (d) stress contour at t=1.75 sec, (e) 𝜎𝜃 -t in the 1st opening-
in Fig 7f). Force-displacement hysteresis loop is simulated well closing displacement at Flank, (f) 𝜎𝜃 -t in the 1st opening-
with or without considering the initial residual stresses as closing displacement near weld
shown in Fig. 8.

6 Copyright © 2017 ASME

Downloaded From: on 11/15/2017 Terms of Use:

Figure 8: Experimental and simulated responses of load- (b)
displacement (P-𝛿)

Circumferential and axial strain ratcheting responses at

flank of the unpressurized long radius elbow with 𝛿𝑎 = 11.8 mm
are plotted in Fig. 9. Influence of the initial residual stresses on
elbow ratcheting responses (𝜀𝜃 -𝛿 at flank in Fig 9a and 9b and
𝜀𝑚 -𝑁 in Fig. 9c, 9d and 9e at flank and intrados) are found
negligible, and for both cases (with and without residual stress),
experimentally observed responses are reasonably predicted.
As demonstrated in [1], the improved simulations are obtained
due to the evolving multiaxial ratcheting parameter and strain
range dependent 𝛾-hardening rule of the modified Chaboche



7 Copyright © 2017 ASME

Downloaded From: on 11/15/2017 Terms of Use:

ASME 2016 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, ASME
[2] Hassan, T., and Rahman, M., 2015, "Constitutive Models in
Simulating Low-Cycle Fatigue and Ratcheting Responses of
Elbow," Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, 137(3) pp.
[3] Hassan, T., Rahman, M., and Bari, S., 2015, "Low-Cycle
Fatigue and Ratcheting Responses of Elbow Piping
Components," Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, 137(3)
pp. 031010.
[4] Islam, N., Fenton, M., and Hassan, T., 2015, "Long and
Short Radius Elbow Experiments and Evaluation of Advanced
Constitutive Models to Simulate the Responses," ASME 2015
Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, pp. V008T08A016,
ASME PVP2015-45688.
(e) [5] Fenton, M. A., 2014, "Low-Cycle Fatigue Failure and
Figure 9: Elbow ratcheting comparison with and without Ratcheting Responses of Short and Long Radius Elbows at
residual stress (a) Experimental hoop strain-displacement (𝜀𝜃 - Room and High Temperatures." MSc Thesis, NC State
𝛿) hysteresis response at flank, (b) simulated hoop strain- University.
displacement (𝜀𝜃 -𝛿) hysteresis response at flank (c) hoop [6] Kang, G., Gao, Q., Cai, L., and San, Y., 2002,
ratcheting (𝜀𝑚𝜃 -N) at flank, (d) axial ratcheting (𝜀𝑚𝑥 -N) at "Experimental Study on Uniaxial and Nonproportionally
flank, (e) axial ratcheting (𝜀𝑚𝑥 -N) at intrados. Multiaxial Ratcheting of SS304 Stainless Steel at Room and
High Temperatures," Nuclear Engineering and Design, 216(1)
It has been demonstrated through earlier studies [1] that the [7] Kang, G., Kan, Q., Zhang, J., and San, Y., 2006, "Time-
ANSYS software package customized with an advanced rate- Dependent Ratchetting Experiments of SS304 Stainless Steel,"
independent constitutive model was unable to simulate some of International Journal of Plasticity, 22(5) pp. 858-894.
the low-cycle fatigue responses of elbow components. Hence, [8] Cheng, P., and Hassan, T., 2009, "Residual Stress and Strain
simulations are performed to investigate the influence of Responses of Welded Piping Joints Under Low-Cycle Fatigue
manufacturing and welding residual stresses on elbow low- Loading," ASME 2016 Pressure Vessels and Piping
cycle fatigue responses. The simulated results demonstrate Conference, pp. 95-101, ASME PVP2009-77813.
negligible residual stress influence on LCF responses. During [9] Li, M., 1995, "An Experimental and Finite Element
application of the initial loading, the residual stresses relax Analysis of Temperature and Stress Fields in Girth Welded
quickly and hence subsequent responses are not influenced by 304L Stainless Steel Pipes," PhD Thesis, Oregon Graduate
the initial residual stresses. Hence, question remains what is Institute of Science and Technology.
missing in the simulation models that some of the elbow low- [10] Cheng, P., 2009, "Influence of residual stress and heat
cycle fatigue responses can’t be simulated. It is pointed out that affected zone on fatigue failure of welded piping joints," PhD
the constitutive model parameters were calculated based on Thesis, NC State University.
material responses of straight pipes, whereas, manufacturing of
elbows from straight pipes goes through the sequences of [11] Rahman, S. M., 2006, "Finite Element Analysis and
thermomechanical deformation, which may have changed the Related Numerical Schemes for Ratcheting Simulation," PhD
elbow material properties compared to the straight pipe material Thesis, NC State University.
properties. In addition, elbow material properties might be [12] Bari, S., and Hassan, T., 2000, "Anatomy of Coupled
heterogeneous due to different thermomechanical deformations Constitutive Models for Ratcheting Simulation," International
at different locations of elbows. Possible change of material Journal of Plasticity, 16(3–4) pp. 381-409.
properties due to thermomechanical deformation needs further
investigation. Besides, the challenge remains how to determine
the model parameters of a constitutive model for simulation of
elbow low-cycle-fatigue responses.

[1] Islam, N., and Hassan, T., 2016, "Improving Simulations for
Low Cycle Fatigue and Ratcheting Responses of Elbows,"

8 Copyright © 2017 ASME

Downloaded From: on 11/15/2017 Terms of Use: