Shakedown Limit Loads for 90

Degree Scheduled Pipe Bends

Hany F. Abdalla
Assistant Professor of Mechanics and Design
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The American University in Cairo,
P.O. Box 74–11835 New Cairo,
New Cairo, Egypt
e-mail: hany_f@aucegypt.edu
Mohammad M. Megahed
Professor of Solid Mechanics
Department of Mechanical Design and
Production,
Faculty of Engineering,
Cairo University,
P.O. Box 12613,
Giza, Egypt
e-mail: mmegahed47@yahoo.com
Maher Y. A. Younan
Professor of Mechanics and Design
Chair, Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The American University in Cairo,
P.O. Box 74–11835 New Cairo,
New Cairo, Egypt
e-mail: myounan@aucegypt.edu
Subjected to Steady Internal
Pressure and Cyclic Bending
Moments
A simplified technique for determining the shakedown limit load for a long radius 90 deg
pipe bend was previously developed (Abdalla, H. F., et al., 2006, “Determination of
Shakedown Limit Load for a 90 Degree Pipe Bend Using a Simplified Technique,” ASME
J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 128, pp. 618–624; Abdalla, H. F., et al., 2007, “Shakedown
Limits of a 90-Degree Pipe Bend Using Small and Large Displacement Formulations,”
ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 129, pp. 287–295). The simplified technique utilizes
the finite element (FE) method and employs the small displacement formulation to deter-
mine the shakedown limit load (moment) without performing lengthy time consuming full
cyclic loading finite element simulations or utilizing conventional iterative elastic tech-
niques. The shakedown limit load is determined through the calculation of residual
stresses developed within the pipe bend structure. In the current paper, a parametric
study is conducted through applying the simplified technique on three scheduled pipe
bends, namely, nominal pipe size (NPS) 10 in. Sch. 20, NPS 10 in. Sch. 40 STD, and NPS
10 in. Sch. 80. Two material models are assigned, namely, an elastic perfectly plastic
(EPP) material and an idealized elastic-linear strain hardening material obeying Zie-
gler’s linear kinematic hardening (KH) rule. This type of material model is termed in the
current study as the KH-material. The pipe bends are subjected to a spectrum of steady
internal pressure magnitudes and cyclic bending moments. The cyclic bending includes
three different loading patterns, namely, in-plane closing, in-plane opening, and out-of-
plane bending moment loadings of the pipe bends. The shakedown limit moments output-
ted by the simplified technique are used to generate shakedown diagrams of the sched-
uled pipe bends for the spectrum of steady internal pressure magnitudes. A comparison
between the generated shakedown diagrams for the pipe bends employing the EPP- and
the KH-materials is presented. Relatively higher shakedown limit moments were recorded
for the pipe bends employing the KH-material at the medium to high internal pressure
magnitudes. 关DOI: 10.1115/1.4002055兴

1 Introduction elastically calculated stresses, constitute a system of stresses

Structures are often subjected to the combined effect of simul-
taneous steady and cyclic load types. The combination of both the
steady and the cyclic loads often results in exceeding the material
initial yield strain 共␧0兲 within several parts or regions of the struc-
ture. Hence, the shakedown limit load of the structure, which is
the upper ceiling of the shakedown domain, should be determined.
It is the objective of the designer to ensure that exceeding the
initial yield strain 共␧0兲 would not lead to either development of
progressive damage due to low cycle fatigue 共reversed plasticity兲
and/or collapse due to incremental accumulation of plastic strain
共ratchetting兲 associated with every load cycle. The upper ceiling
of loads, which does not cause either reversed plasticity 共RP兲
and/or ratcheting 共R兲, is the shakedown limit load.
The term shakedown was initially introduced into the context of
solid mechanics in 1938 by Melan 关1,2兴 through the lower bound
shakedown theorem stated as follows: “For a given load set P, if
any distribution of self-equilibrating residual stresses can be found
共assuming perfect plasticity兲 which, when taken together with
Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication
in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received February 1,
2010; final manuscript received June 9, 2010; published online April 6, 2011. Assoc.
Editor: Zhangzhi Cen.
within the yield limit, then P is a lower bound shakedown load set
and the structure will shakedown.” In common with Melan’s
lower bound shakedown theorem, current piping design codes uti-
lize EPP-material models. This would show conservative struc-
tural behavior 共load carrying capacity兲 compared with real mate-
rials’ behaviors or responses, which reveal undeniable hardening.
The KH rule is accounted for and incorporated within the simpli-
fied technique 关3,4兴 rather than the isotropic hardening rule. The
isotropic hardening rule postulates uniform expansion of the yield
surface about the origin of the stress space but its shape and center
remain unchanged. Consequently, KH is considered more critical
than isotropic hardening since the latter involves continuous and
indefinite increase in its yield surface size with increasing the
applied load thereby rendering unrealistic outcomes.
2 Literature Review
Despite the introduction of the shakedown theorem in 1938 by
Melan 关1,2兴, active research efforts started in the mid-1960s. Most
of the work accomplished focused on determining shakedown do-
mains for pressure vessels 关5兴, nuclear reactor components 关6兴,
and aeronautical applications 关7兴.
Iterative elastic techniques have been proposed to obtain rapid
and approximate bounds for shakedown and limit loads 关8–10兴.

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology Copyright © 2011 by ASME JUNE 2011, Vol. 133 / 031207-1

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 The iterative elastic techniques begin with an initial elastic solu-
tion, which is modified in an iterative manner, through a series of
linear elastic finite element 共FE兲 solutions, to redistribute stresses
within the structure by changing the elastic moduli of the ele-
ments. The iterations proceed until a stress distribution in equilib-
rium with the externally applied loads is reached. The iterative
elastic techniques include the elastic compensation method
共ECM兲 introduced by Marriott 关8兴, the Dhalla reduction procedure
proposed by Dhalla 关9兴 and the GLOSS R-node method proposed
by Seshadri 关10兴. Conversely, the simplified technique requires
performing only two FE analyses instead of performing iterative
series of FE simulations like the iterative elastic techniques. In
addition, the simplified technique accounts for plastic deforma-
tion, which occurs within the structure, in determining the shake-
down limit load unlike iterative elastic techniques, which deter-
mine the shakedown limit load based on linear elastic finite
element analyses. Detailed explanation of the simplified technique
is presented in Sec. 3.
The ECM is the most commonly used iterative elastic technique
for shakedown load applications. Mackenzie and Boyle 关11兴 uti-
lized the ECM to determine the shakedown load for internally
pressurized thick-walled cylinders and compared the outcomes
with analytical solutions. They also evaluated the shakedown load
for internally pressurized thin-walled shells with flush nozzles and
compared the outcomes with Leckie and Penny 关5兴. Mohamed et
al. 关12兴 implemented the ECM in evaluating the shakedown pres-
sure for the radial nozzle of a thin-walled spherical pressure vessel
under internal pressure and thrust load. Muscat and Mackenzie
关13兴 used a superposition method based on Melan’s shakedown
theorem and investigated the shakedown behavior of axisymmet-
ric nozzles under internal pressure.
Abdalla et al. 关14兴 applied the simplified technique on two clas-
sical benchmark shakedown uni-axial stress problems, namely, the
two-bar structure, analytically analyzed by Megahed 关15兴, and the
Bree thin-cylinder problem 关6兴. The outcomes of the simplified
technique showed very good correlation with the analytical results
of both problems. Later Abdalla et al. 关3兴 applied the simplified
technique on another classical benchmark shakedown problem,
namely, the problem of a large square plate with a small central
hole subjected to cyclic tensile stresses on the plate edges, thereby
extending the application of the simplified technique to multi-
axial state of stress problems and accounting for KH-material.
Abdalla et al. 关16兴 extended the application of the simplified
technique to a long radius 90 deg pipe bend subjected to a spec-
trum of steady internal pressures and cyclic IPC 关17兴, IPO, and
OP bending moment loadings 关16兴 employing an EPP-material.
The shakedown limit moments outputted by the simplified tech-
nique were used to plot the shakedown domain of the pipe bend
over the spectrum of steady internal pressure magnitudes. The
outcomes of the simplified technique showed very good correla-
tion with the results of full elastic-plastic cyclic loading finite
element simulations.
Abdalla et al. 关16兴 developed another technique for shakedown
limit load determination named the “iterative large displacement
technique,” which accounts for geometric nonlinearity owing to
the considerable ovality experienced by pipe bends within the
plastic domain. The iterative large displacement technique em-
ploys an EPP-material and performs a successive series of full
elastic-plastic cyclic loading simulations with varying peak loads
until the maximum residual stress achieved, at load removal, is
slightly less than the material yield strength. A comparison be-
tween the shakedown diagrams generated from both the simplified
technique and the iterative large displacement technique was pre-
sented for the 90 deg pipe bend under cyclic IPC, IPO, and OP
bending moment loadings. Abdalla et al. 关6兴 applied the modified
simplified technique employing the elastic-linear strain hardening
material model following a linear KH rule to a 90 deg pipe under
cyclic IPC, IPO, and OP bending moment loadings. The outcomes
of the simplified technique employing the elastic-linear strain
031207-2 / Vol. 133, JUNE 2011
Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 1 Stress-strain curve of an elastic-linear strain hardening
material
hardening material model showed very good correlation with the
results of full elastic-plastic cyclic loading finite element simula-
tions 关6兴.
Chen et al. 关18兴 published interesting experimental and FE
simulation results on ratchetting of four low-carbon steel pressur-
ized 90 deg pipe bend specimens subjected to cyclic reversed
in-plane bending forces. A shakedown boundary was proposed by
Chen et al. 关18兴 through employing a modified form of the Ohno–
Wang nonlinear KH rule. Abdalla et al. 关19兴 applied the simplified
technique on one of the pipe bend specimens of Chen et al. 关18兴
and generated both limit and shakedown domains for the steady
internal pressure spectrum analyzed by Chen et al. 关18兴. The out-
comes of the simplified technique correlated very well with test
results of Chen et al. 关18兴 regarding locations of maximum ratchet
strains around the bend circumference. The simplified technique
also showed very good correlation with Chen et al. 关18兴 predicted
shakedown boundary for the medium to high steady internal pres-
sure spectrum.
3 The Simplified Technique
The simplified technique utilizes the FE method and employs
the small displacement formulation to determine the shakedown
limit moments of the scheduled 90 deg pipe bends analyzed. An
idealized elastic-linear strain hardening material stress-strain
curve is employed, as shown in Fig. 1.
Two finite element analyses are performed. The first is an elas-
tic analysis performed only once and its output is stored. In the
elastic analysis, no steady load 共internal pressure兲 is applied.
However, the elastic analysis consists of a single analysis step
achieved in one solution increment where the bending moment
load 共the cyclic load兲 is applied. The cyclic load 共moment兲,
termed the reference moment 共M ref兲, is monotonically applied and
elastically deforms the pipe bend structure. The second analysis is
an elastic-plastic analysis, which involves the application of both
the steady and the cyclic load types in two consecutive analysis
steps. The steady load 共internal pressure兲 is applied in the first
analysis step and causes only elastic stresses within the pipe bend
structures. The cyclic load 共moment兲 is then applied monotoni-
cally in the second analysis step in an increasing ramp pattern
resulting in structural strains exceeding the material initial yield
strain 共␧0兲. Hence, the moment is incrementally applied and the
elastic-plastic solution is obtained in several increments.
The residual stress 共␴r兲, scaled to the applied moment incre-
ment 共M i兲, is calculated according to Eq. 共1兲 by subtracting the
elastic stress components 共␴E兲 共representing unloading兲 from the
elastic-plastic stress 共␴ELPL兲 components 共representing loading兲 at
Transactions of the ASME
 every elastic-plastic solution increment 共i兲. It is important to men-
tion that the elastic 共␴E兲 and the elastic-plastic 共␴ELPL兲 stress com-
ponents are outputted at all the integration points within all the
elements meshing the pipe bend structure.
Mi
␴ri = ␴ELPLi − ␴E 共1兲
M ref
Consequently, a residual stress corresponding to every stress
component is calculated 共i.e., ␴rx , ␴ry , ␴rz , and ␶rxy 兲. Then, an
i i i i
equivalent residual stress 共␴req 兲 is calculated using the von Mises Fig. 2 Cyclic moment loading pattern employed in the full
i
yield criterion. Since KH involves translation of the yield surface elastic-plastic cyclic loading finite element simulations
preserving its initial size, the corresponding yield criterion should
be a function of both the state of stress and the coordinates of the
yield surface current center. Therefore, the equivalent residual limit moment of the pipe bend since its corresponding calculated
stress 共␴req 兲 is expressed as follows: equivalent residual stress 共␴req 兲 is either equal to or slightly less
i i
than the material initial yield strength 共Y 0兲.
1
␴req =
冑2 兵关共␴rx − ␣xi兲 − 共␴ry − ␣yi兲兴 + 关共␴ry − ␣yi兲 − 共␴rz − ␣zi兲兴2
2 The elastic limit moment is determined through the elastic-
i i i i i
plastic analysis only 共representing loading兲. The program searches
+ 关共␴rz − ␣zi兲 − 共␴rx − ␣xi兲兴2 + 6关共␶rxy − ␣xyi兲2 + 共␶ryz − ␣yzi兲2 for the minimum moment increment at which its corresponding
i i i i equivalent strain 共␧eqi兲 slightly exceeds the material initial yield
+ 共␶rzx − ␣zxi兲2兴其1/2 共2兲 strain 共␧0兲. Hence, the preceding moment increment is the elastic
i
limit moment of the pipe bend since its equivalent stress 共␴eqi兲,
The terms ␴rx , ␴ry , ␴rz , ␶rxy , ␶ryz , and ␶rzx are the residual during loading, is either equal to or slightly less than the material
i i i i i i
stress components calculated using Eq. 共1兲. The terms ␣xi, ␣yi, ␣zi, initial yield strength 共Y 0兲.
␣xyi, ␣yzi, and ␣zxi are the back stress components, determined In order to gain confidence in the simplified technique employ-
from the KH shift tensor, responsible for translation of the yield ing the KH rule, full elastic-plastic cyclic loading finite element
surface center obeying Ziegler’s linear KH rule. It is assumed simulations are performed using the output shakedown limit mo-
beforehand that the pipe bend analyzed is free from any induced ments 共M i−1兲 to check for shakedown response of the output criti-
residual stresses resulting from fabrication. Hence, the residual cal integration points within the pipe bend structure. The full
stresses calculated using Eqs. 共1兲 and 共2兲 are solely due to the elastic-plastic cyclic loading FE simulations employ the simple
applied cyclic loading conditions during service of the pipe bend. cyclic moment loading pattern shown in Fig. 2 for IPC, IPO, and
A computer program is developed to read the output of the OP bending of the pipe bends. Furthermore, full elastic-plastic
elastic and the elastic-plastic analyses and calculate the residual cyclic moment loading simulations are also performed but using
stress components using Eq. 共1兲 for all integration points within the moment increments 共M i兲 just exceeding the output shakedown
all the elements meshing the pipe bend 共including integration sec- limit moments to check for reversed plasticity or ratchetting re-
tion points through element thickness provided a shell element sponses of the pipe bends.
type is used兲 at all elastic-plastic solution increments. The pro-
gram then calculates equivalent residual stresses 共␴req 兲 at all the 4 Finite Element Modeling
i
integration points of all elements meshing the pipe bend structure Figure 3共a兲 shows a schematic of a long radius 90 deg pipe
using Eq. 共2兲 and searches for the minimum moment increment bend with two straight pipes connected at each end. Figure 3共b兲
共M i兲 at which its corresponding calculated equivalent residual shows half the geometric model of Fig. 3共a兲 used in analyzing IPC
stress 共␴req 兲 violates the applied von Mises yield criterion. There- and IPO bending loadings of the pipe bend due to the existence of
i
fore, the preceding moment increment 共M i−1兲 is the shakedown both geometric and loading symmetry about the xy-plane. Con-

Fig. 3 Schematic diagram of the connected pipe bend for „a… full geometric model
and „b… half geometric model

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology JUNE 2011, Vol. 133 / 031207-3

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 1 Geometric parameters of the 90 degree scheduled pipe bends and the connected
straight pipes
NPS do di
共1 in.⫽25.4 mm兲 Schedule 共mm兲 共mm兲
10 20 273.0 260.35
10 40 STD 273.0 254.51
10 80 273.0 242.87
versely, the whole geometric model of Fig. 3共a兲 is used in analyz-
ing the OP bending loading of the pipe bend due to the absence of
bending loading symmetry. Table 1 lists the geometric parameters
of the 90 deg scheduled pipe bends and the two straight pipes
connected at each end, as shown in Fig. 3.
The general purpose nonlinear finite element code ABAQUS/
STANDARD 关20兴 is used in analyzing the pipe bends considered
within the present study. It is assumed that the analyzed long radii
90 deg scheduled pipe bends initially acquire uniform thickness
distribution throughout their entire geometries.
4.1 Meshing. The geometric models of the 90 deg pipe bend
and the connected straight pipes shown in Figs. 3共a兲 and 3共b兲 are
meshed using the four-noded reduced integration shell elements
共S4R兲. The S4R element has one integration point located at its
centroid with five integration section points through its thickness
关20兴. Since shell elements are used to mesh the 90 deg pipe bend
and the connected straight pipes of Fig. 3, the ␴rz , ␶ryz , ␶rzx , ␣zi,
i i i
␣yzi, and ␣zxi terms will vanish from Eq. 共2兲. Upon conducting
several mesh convergence checks, it was found that meshing the
half pipe bend geometry of Fig. 3共b兲 with 1200 elements provided
satisfactory results where 30 elements mesh the pipe bend circum-
ference, whereas 40 elements mesh the pipe bend radius along its
curved longitudinal direction. On the other hand, the full pipe
bend geometry of Fig. 3共a兲, dedicated for OP bending loadings, is
meshed with 2400 elements, twice the number of elements mesh-
ing the half pipe bend geometry of Fig. 3共b兲.
4.2 Boundary Conditions. Displacement boundary condi-
tions include fully constraining the nodes lying on edges 共A兲
shown in Figs. 3共a兲 and 3共b兲 in the six degrees of freedom. The
nodes lying on edges 共B兲 of pipe-2 follow the motion of a refer-
ence node 共E兲. This is achieved by invoking the “KINEMATIC
COUPLING” option in ABAQUS/STANDARD 关20兴, which relates the
degrees of freedom of all the nodes lying on edges 共B兲 to the
degrees of freedom of the reference node 共E兲 on which the mo-
ment load is applied. The nodes lying on edges 共C兲 and 共F兲 in Fig.
3共b兲 are restrained against translation in the z-direction and rota-
tion about both the x- and y-axes thereby imposing geometric
symmetry about the xy-plane.
Load boundary conditions include applying pressure load on
the inner faces of all the shell elements meshing the pipe bend and
the connected pipes. An axial force is applied on reference node
共E兲, in the x-direction, to simulate capping or closed end condition
at end 共B兲. Due to the geometric symmetry about the xy-plane,
half the axial force magnitude is applied on the reference node 共E兲
of the half geometric model, shown Fig. 3共b兲, while the whole
axial force magnitude is applied on reference node 共E兲 of the full
geometric model of Fig. 3共a兲. IPC bending of the pipe bend is
achieved by applying a clockwise moment about the z-axis on
reference node 共E兲 shown in Fig. 3共b兲. Conversely, a counter-
clockwise moment is applied about the z-axis on reference node
共E兲 to simulate pipe bend IPO. Due to loading symmetry, half the
moment magnitude is applied on reference node 共E兲. Pipe bend
OP bending is simulated by applying the full moment magnitude
either clockwise or counterclockwise about the y-axis on refer-
ence node 共E兲 shown in Fig. 3共a兲. In the current analysis, pipe
031207-4 / Vol. 133, JUNE 2011
Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
dm t R 关1.5 NPS兴 L 关5do兴
共mm兲 共mm兲 共mm兲 共mm兲
266.70 6.35 381.0 1365.25
263.78 9.27 381.0 1365.25
257.96 15.09 381.0 1365.25
bend OP bending is simulated by applying the moment load in a
clockwise sense about the y-axis on reference node 共E兲 shown in
Fig. 3共a兲.
4.3 Material Properties. The material assigned to the pipe
bend and the connected straight pipes is type 304 stainless steel. It
is assumed that the assigned material is homogenous, isotropic,
and follows the idealized stress-strain curve shown in Fig. 1. The
tangent modulus 共Et兲, shown in Fig. 1, is chosen to be 5.0% of the
material elastic modulus 共E兲. Table 2 lists the material properties,
measured at room temperature, of the stainless steel 304 reported
by Sobel and Newman 关21兴.
5 Results and Discussion
Figures 4–6 show the shakedown diagrams for the NPS 10 in.
Sch. 20 pipe bend employing both the EPP- and the KH-materials
for the IPC, IPO, and the OP bending loadings, respectively. The
reported moments are normalized by the fully plastic moment
共M P兲 of a straight pipe, expressed by Eq. 共3兲, having the same
material properties and dimensions 共Dm and t兲 of the NPS 10 in.
Schedule 20 pipe bend. The internal pressure spectrum is normal-
ized by the internal pressure to cause yielding 共PY 兲, which is the
collapse pressure of a straight pipe expressed by Eq. 共4兲.
2
M P = Y 0D m t 共3兲
2Y 0t
PY = 共4兲
Dm
The normalized limit moments and the normalized shakedown
limit moments of the NPS 10 in. schedules 20, 40 STD, and 80
pipe bends are determined for the 0 up to the 0.8PY steady internal
pressure spectrum in pressure increments of 0.2PY . Additionally,
the 0.3PY and the 0.5PY internal pressure cases are analyzed since
the transition from shakedown response to postshakedown re-
sponses 共i.e., either reversed plasticity or ratchetting responses兲
expectedly occurs within the aforementioned low to medium in-
ternal pressure range 共i.e., 0.3PY – 0.5PY 兲. Imposed on Figs. 4–6
are the respective normalized limit moments 共maximum moment
carrying capacity under monotonic moment loading conditions兲
determined using the twice-elastic-slope method adopted in Sec-
tion III Division I of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
关22兴. Additionally, the normalized elastic limit moments forming
the elastic region are, respectively, imposed.
At a given internal pressure magnitude, the simplified technique
outputs a list of elements with their corresponding integration sec-
tion points 共through element thickness兲 at which their calculated
equivalent residual stresses 共␴eqi兲, using Eq. 共2兲, are either equal
to or slightly less than the material initial yield strength 共Y 0兲.
Table 2 Material properties of stainless steel 304
E 共GPa兲 193.74
Y 0 共MPa兲 271.93
␯ 0.2642
Transactions of the ASME
 Fig. 4 Normalized limit, shakedown limit, and elastic limit moments of the NPS 10 in.
Sch. 20 pipe bend subjected to IPC bending loading employing the EPP- and the
KH-materials

Fig. 5 Normalized limit, shakedown limit, and elastic limit moments of the NPS 10 in.
Sch. 20 pipe bend subjected to IPO bending loading employing the EPP- and the
KH-materials

Fig. 6 Normalized limit, shakedown limit, and elastic limit moments of the NPS 10 in.
Sch. 20 pipe bend subjected to OP bending loading employing the EPP- and the
KH-materials

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology JUNE 2011, Vol. 133 / 031207-5

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 7 Normalized limit, shakedown limit, and elastic limit moments of the NPS 10 in.
Sch. 40 STD pipe bend subjected to IPC bending loading employing the EPP- and the
KH-materials

Fig. 8 Normalized limit, shakedown limit, and elastic limit moments of the NPS 10 in.
Sch. 40 STD pipe bend subjected to IPO bending loading employing the EPP- and the
KH- materials

Fig. 9 Normalized limit, shakedown limit, and elastic limit moments of the NPS 10 in.
Sch. 40 STD pipe bend subjected to OP bending loading employing the EPP- and the
KH- materials

031207-6 / Vol. 133, JUNE 2011 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 10 Normalized limit, shakedown limit, and elastic limit moments of the NPS 10
in. Sch. 80 pipe bend subjected to IPC bending loading employing the EPP- and the
KH- materials

Fig. 11 Normalized limit, shakedown limit, and elastic limit moments of the NPS 10
in. Sch. 80 pipe bend subjected to IPO bending loading employing the EPP- and the
KH- materials

Fig. 12 Normalized limit, shakedown limit, and elastic limit moments of the NPS 10
in. Sch. 80 pipe bend subjected to OP bending loading employing the EPP- and the
KH- materials

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology JUNE 2011, Vol. 133 / 031207-7

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 13 Loading-unloading path of the output critical integration section point of the
0.2PY case of the NPS 10 in. Sch. 40 STD pipe bend employing the KH-material show-
ing translation of the yield surface preserving its initial size „cyclic IPO bending mo-
ment loading…

Fig. 14 Loading-unloading path of the output critical integration section point of the
0.2PY case of the NPS 10 in. Sch. 40 STD pipe bend employing the EPP-material
showing fixed yield surface preserving its initial size „cyclic IPO bending moment
loading…

Fig. 15 Normalized shakedown limit moments of Sch. 20, Sch. 40 STD, and Sch. 80
pipe bends determined using the simplified technique employing the EPP-material
under IPC bending moment loading

031207-8 / Vol. 133, JUNE 2011 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 16 Normalized shakedown limit moments of Sch. 20, Sch. 40 STD, and Sch. 80
pipe bends determined using the simplified technique employing the EPP-material
under IPO bending moment loading

Fig. 17 Normalized shakedown limit moments of Sch. 20, Sch. 40 STD, and Sch. 80
pipe bends determined using the simplified technique employing the EPP-material
model under OP bending moment loading

Fig. 18 Normalized shakedown limit moments of Sch. 20, Sch. 40 STD, and Sch. 80
pipe bends determined using the simplified technique employing the KH-material
under IPC bending moment loading

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology JUNE 2011, Vol. 133 / 031207-9

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 19 Normalized shakedown limit moments of Sch. 20, Sch. 40 STD, and Sch. 80
pipe bends determined using the simplified technique employing the KH-material
under IPO bending moment loading

Fig. 20 Normalized shakedown limit moments of Sch. 20, Sch. 40 STD, and Sch. 80
pipe bends determined using the simplified technique employing the KH-material
under OP bending moment loading

Table 3 The NPS 10 in. Sch. 20 pipe bend postshakedown responses upon exceeding the
shakedown limit moments outputted by the simplified technique for both the EPP- and KH-
assigned materials under the three bending loading patterns

EPP-material KH-material
Internal pressure spectrum 共P / PY 兲 IPC IPO OP IPC IPO OP

0.0 RP RP RP RP RP RP
0.2 RP RP RP RP RP RP
0.3 RP RP RP RP RP RP
0.4 RP RP R RP RP RP
0.5 R R R R RP R
0.6 R R R R R R
0.8 R R R R R R

031207-10 / Vol. 133, JUNE 2011 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 4 The NPS 10 in. Sch. 40 STD pipe bend postshakedown responses upon exceeding the
shakedown limit moments outputted by the simplified technique for both the EPP- and KH-
assigned materials under the three bending loading patterns

EPP-material KH-material
Internal pressure spectrum 共P / PY 兲 IPC IPO OP IPC IPO OP

0.0 RP RP RP RP RP RP
0.2 RP RP RP RP RP RP
0.3 RP RP RP RP RP RP
0.4 RP RP R RP RP RP
0.5 R R R R R R
0.6 R R R R R R
0.8 R R R R R R

These integration section points are the most critical points within
a pipe bend structure since they control its shakedown response.
Exceeding the shakedown limit moment, these critical points ex-
perience reversed plasticity or ratchetting responses 共under cyclic
moment loading兲 depending on the magnitude of the applied in-
ternal pressure 共steady load兲.
Figures 7–9 show the shakedown diagrams for the NPS 10 in.
Sch. 40 STD pipe bend employing both EPP- and KH-materials
for IPC, IPO, and OP bending loadings, respectively.
Figures 10–12 show the shakedown diagrams for the NPS 10
in. Sch. 80 pipe bend employing both EPP- and KH-materials for
IPC, IPO, and OP bending loadings, respectively.
The limit moments of the pipe bends employing the KH-
material are higher than their corresponding limit loads obtained
employing the EPP-material by an average of 18.5% for Sch. 20
pipe bend, an average of 19.2% for Sch. 40 STD pipe bend, and
an average of 20.2% for Sch. 80 pipe bend approximately
throughout the 0 up to the 0.8PY steady internal pressure spectrum
for the IPC, IPO, and OP monotonic bending moment loadings.
As a general trend, it could be noticed from Figs. 4–12 that the
KH- and the EPP-materials result in almost equal shakedown limit
moments of the pipe bends for the 共0 – 0.3PY 兲 low internal pres-
sure range. On the other hand, the medium to high internal pres-
sure range is characterized by relatively higher shakedown limit
moments for the KH-material. Upon performing additional simu-
lations, it was found that increasing the tangent modulus 共Et兲 from
0 共EPP behavior兲 up to the employed Et = 5.0%, E or more has no
effect on the shakedown limit moments of the pipe bends for the
共0 – 0.3PY 兲 low internal pressure range for the three loading pat-
terns 共IPC, IPO, and OP bending兲. Also, upon performing addi-
tional simulations utilizing tangent moduli less than the employed
Et = 5.0%, E resulted in shakedown limit moments lying within the
KH and the EPP shakedown limit boundaries of Figs. 4–12.
Figure 13 shows the loading-unloading path of the output criti-
cal integration section point of the 0.2PY case of the NPS 10 in.
Sch. 40 STD pipe bend under full elastic-plastic cyclic IPO mo-
ment loading by plotting the normalized principal stresses of the
point inscribed within its normalized translated yield surface. De-
spite translation of the initial yield surface shown in Fig. 13, the
maximum change in stresses along the unloading path is almost
equal to the maximum change in stresses along the unloading path
of the same output critical integration section point inscribed
within its fixed yield surface shown in Fig. 14 for the same 0.2PY
case employing the EPP-material. This explains the almost equal
shakedown limit moments resulting from the KH- and the EPP-
assigned materials for the 共0 – 0.3PY 兲 low internal pressure range
共Figs. 4–12兲. The 0.2PY case of the NPS 10 in. Sch. 40 STD pipe
bend under full elastic-plastic cyclic IPO moment loading is used
a representative sample for the low internal pressure range
共0 – 0.3PY 兲 for which the KH- and the EPP-materials result in
almost equal normalized shakedown limit moments concerning all
the 90 deg scheduled pipe bends analyzed in the current study.
Figures 15–17 show a comparison between the normalized
shakedown limit moments of Sch. 20, Sch. 40 STD, and Sch. 80
pipe bends determined using the simplified technique employing
the EPP-material under IPC, IPO, and OP bending moment load-
ings, respectively.
Figures 18–20 show a comparison between the normalized
shakedown limit moments of Sch. 20, Sch. 40 STD, and Sch. 80
pipe bends determined using the simplified technique employing
the KH-material under IPC, IPO, and OP bending moment load-
ings, respectively.
It could be noticed from the normalized shakedown limit mo-
ment diagrams generated by the simplified technique employing
the EPP-material shown in Figs. 15–17 and the ones generated
employing the KH-material shown in Figs. 18–20 that the Sch. 80
pipe bend has the largest shakedown domain followed by the Sch.
40 STD pipe bend and finally the Sch. 20 pipe bend recording the
smallest shakedown domain. For the three pipe bend schedules
analyzed, despite equity of their pipe bend radii 共R = 381.0 mm兲
and relative closeness in their mean diameters 共dm兲, the wall thick-
ness 共t兲 is the major geometric parameter responsible for increas-
ing the pipe bend factor 共h, where h = 4Rt / dm 2
兲. Therefore, as the

Table 5 The NPS 10 in, Sch. 80 pipe bend postshakedown responses upon exceeding the
shakedown limit moments outputted by the simplified technique for both the EPP- and KH-
assigned materials under the three bending loading patterns

EPP-material KH-material
Internal pressure spectrum 共P / PY 兲 IPC IPO OP IPC IPO OP

0.0 RP RP RP RP RP RP
0.2 RP RP RP RP RP RP
0.3 RP RP RP RP RP RP
0.4 RP RP R RP RP RP
0.5 R R R RP R R
0.6 R R R R R R
0.8 R R R R R R

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology JUNE 2011, Vol. 133 / 031207-11

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 pipe bend wall thickness 共t兲 increases, both its limit load and its
shakedown limit load increase as well since more material is
available within the pipe bend geometry providing it with the
ability to bear higher applied bending loads whether monotonic or
cyclic. Tables 3–5 list the postshakedown responses 共RP and R兲
experienced by the NPS 10 in. Sch. 20, NPS 10 in. Sch. 40 STD,
and NPS 10 in. Sch. 80 pipe bends, respectively, upon exceeding
the shakedown limit moments outputted by the simplified tech-
nique for the 0 – 0.8PY steady internal pressure spectrum employ-
ing both the EPP- and the KH-materials under IPC, IPO, and OP
bending moment loadings.
6 Conclusion
Subsequent to analyzing the output results of Sec. 5, the fol-
lowing concluding remarks could be pinpointed:
共1兲 The effect of material hardening under monotonic bending
loading is clearly noticed through the considerably higher
recorded normalized limit moments of the pipe bends in
comparison to their corresponding recorded normalized
limit moments determined through the employed EPP-
material.
共2兲 It could be generally stated that for pipe bends having the
same NPS, bend radius 共R兲, and relatively close mean di-
ameters 共dm兲, the higher the bend factor 共h兲 the more in-
crease in its shakedown domain is expected due to the in-
crease in the pipe bend wall thickness 共t兲. Hence, the wall
thickness 共t兲 considered, in the current study, the major
geometric parameter responsible for increasing the pipe
bend shakedown domain under the three different bending
loading patterns analyzed 共i.e., IPC, IPO, and OP bending
moment loadings兲.
共3兲 For the currently analyzed pipe bends and the utilized ma-
terial models and properties, increasing the tangent modu-
lus 共Et兲 up to Et = 5.0%, E or higher for the 共0 – 0.3PY 兲 low
internal pressure range does not affect the shakedown limit
moments of the pipe bends analyzed. However, increasing
共Et兲 up to Et = 5.0% E for the medium to high internal pres-
sure range increases the shakedown limit moments of the
pipe bend.
7 Future Scope of Work
The iterative large displacement technique, developed by Ab-
dalla et al. 关16兴, incorporating large displacement formulation will
be applied on the analyzed scheduled pipe bends and the out-
comes will be compared against the simplified technique out-
comes presented in the current study. The iterative large displace-
ment technique accounts both for the geometric nonlinearity
owing to the ovality experienced by pipe bends within the plastic
domain and the stiffening effect expected to be caused by the
internal pressure loading, which is not accounted for by the sim-
plified technique.
Acknowledgment
The American University in Cairo is greatly acknowledged for
using its advanced computational facilities.
Nomenclature
E ⫽ modulus of elasticity
Et ⫽ tangent modulus
L ⫽ length of straight pipes
P ⫽ internal pressure
PY ⫽ internal pressure that causes yielding
R ⫽ pipe bend radius
031207-12 / Vol. 133, JUNE 2011
Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/28/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Y0⫽ material initial yield strength
⫽
i elastic-plastic solution increment
⫽
t pipe bend wall thickness
⫽
di pipe bend inner diameter
dm⫽ pipe bend mean diameter
do⫽ pipe bend outer diameter
␣⫽ kinematic hardening back stress
␯⫽ Poisson’s ratio
␴E⫽ elastic stress components
␴ELPL ⫽ elastic-plastic stress components
␴r ⫽ residual stress components
␧0 ⫽ material initial yield strain
References
关1兴 Melan, E., 1938, “Der Spannungszustand eines Mises-Henckyschen Kontinu-
ums bei veraenderlicher Belastung,” Sitzber. Akad. Wiss., 147, pp. 73–78.
关2兴 Melan, E., 1938, “Zur Plastizität des räumlichen Kontinuums,” Ing.-Arch., 9,
pp. 116–126.
关3兴 Abdalla, H. F., Younan, M. Y. A., and Megahed, M. M., 2007, “A Simplified
Technique for Shakedown Limit Load Determination of a Large Square Plate
With a Hole Under Cyclic Biaxial Loading,” Proceedings of the 19th Interna-
tional Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology 共SMiRT
19兲, Toronto, Canada.
关4兴 Abdalla, H. F., Younan, M. Y. A., and Megahed, M. M., 2007, “Shakedown
Limit Load Determination for a Kinematically Hardening 90-Degree Pipe
Bend Subjected to Constant Internal Pressure and Cyclic Bending,” ASME
Transactions, PVP Division Conference, San Antonio, TX, Jul.
关5兴 Leckie, F. A., and Penny, R. K., 1967, “Shakedown Pressure for Radial
Nozzles in Spherical Pressure Vessels,” Int. J. Solids Struct., 3, pp. 743–755.
关6兴 Bree, J., 1967, “Elastic-Plastic Behaviour of Thin Tubes Subjected to Internal
Pressure and Intermittent High Heat Fluxes With Application to Fast Nuclear
Reactor Fuel Elements,” J. Strain Anal., 2, pp. 226–238.
关7兴 Parkes, E. W., 1964, “Structural Effects of Repeated Thermal Loading,” Ther-
mal Stress, A. Benham, eds., Pitman, London.
关8兴 Marriott, D. L., 1988, “Evaluation of Deformation or Load Control of Stress
under Inelastic Conditions Using Finite Elements Stress Analysis,” ASME
Transactions, PVP Division Conference, Vol. 136, pp. 3–9.
关9兴 Dhalla, A. K., 1987, “A Simplified Procedure to Classify Stresses for Elevated
Temperature Service,” ASME Transactions, PVP Division Conference, Vol.
120, pp. 177–188.
关10兴 Seshadri, R., 1991, “The Generalized Local Stress Strain 共GLOSS兲 Analysis—
Theory and Applications,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 113, pp. 219–
227.
关11兴 Mackenzie, D., and Boyle, J. T., 1993, “A Simple Method for Estimating
Shakedown Load for Complex Structures,” PVP 共Am. Soc. Mech. Eng.兲 264,
pp. 89–94.
关12兴 Mohamed, A. I., Megahed, M. M., Bayoumi, L. S., and Younan, M. Y. A.,
1999, “Applications of Iterative Elastic Techniques for Elastic-Plastic Analysis
of Pressure Vessels,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 121, pp. 1–6.
关13兴 Muscat, M., and Mackenzie, D., 2003, “Elastic-Shakedown Analysis of Axi-
symmetric Nozzles,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 125, pp. 365–370.
关14兴 Abdalla, H. F., Younan, M. Y. A., and Megahed, M. M., 2007, “A Simplified
Technique for Shakedown Limit Load Determination,” Nuclear Engineering
and Design, 237, pp. 1231–1240.
关15兴 Megahed, M. M., 1981, “Influence of Hardening Rule on the Elasto-Plastic
Behaviour of a Simple Structure Under Cyclic Loading,” Int. J. Mech. Sci.,
23, pp. 169–182.
关16兴 Abdalla, H. F., Younan, M. Y. A., and Megahed, M. M., 2007, “Shakedown
Limits of a 90-Degree Pipe Bend Using Small and Large Displacement For-
mulations,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 129, pp. 287–295.
关17兴 Abdalla, H. F., Younan, M. Y. A., and Megahed, M. M., 2006, “Determination
of Shakedown Limit Load for a 90 Degree Pipe Bend Using a Simplified
Technique,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 128, pp. 618–624.
关18兴 Chen, X., Gao, B., and Chen, G., 2006, “Ratcheting Study of Pressurized
Elbows Subjected to Reversed In-Plane Bending,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel
Technol., 128, pp. 525–532.
关19兴 Abdalla, H. F., Megahed, M. M., and Younan, M. Y., 2009, “Comparison of
Pipe Bend Ratchetting/Shakedown Test Results With the Shakedown Bound-
ary Obtained via a Simplified Technique,” ASME Transactions, PVP Division
Conference, Prague, Czech Republic, Jul.
关20兴 SIMULIA-Dassault Systèmes, 2007, ABAQUS/STANDARD, Version 6.7-1, User
Documentation Manuals.
关21兴 Sobel, L. H., and Newman, S. Z., 1980, “Comparison of Experimental and
Simplified Analytical Results for the In-Plane Plastic Bending and Buckling of
an Elbow,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 102, pp. 400–409.
关22兴 2004, ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III Division I, NG-
3000.
Transactions of the ASME