Utmattingsberegninger for stlkonstruksjoner iht gjeldende regelverk og Eurokode 3, del 1-9

Introductio: Historical overview, examples of fatigue failures

Monday 8 november 2010, kl. 9.00 - 10.00
Prof. P J Haagensen NTNU Institutt for konstruksjonsteknikk Trondheim per.haagensen@ntnu.no

Utmatting - grunnlag Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010 Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen P J Haagensen

Fatigue - basics

Topics
Types of damage and failure Extent of fatigue problem Fatigue definition Causes of fatigue failures Example 1: Fatigue of machine components NSB axle shafts Example 2: Fatigue of welded structures Alexander L. Kielland accident

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Failure modes - How things go wrong

Depending on the operating conditions and the type of environment a component or structure may fail in many different modes:

Erika Dec. 99

Unstable fracture (brittle or ductile) Plastic collapse (overloading) Elastic instability (buckling) Stress corrosion cracking Hydrogen induced fracture Corrosion SSSchenectady, 1943
Fatigue and corrosion fatigue

Wear

Time dependent failures

Alexander L. Kielland 27 March 1980

Aloha Airlines, Flight 243, 1988

Fatigue how big is the problem?

Generally: 80-90% of all fractures are fatigue failures North Sea offshore structures:
30 24.7

25

%
Damage

20

1/4 of all structural damage requiring repair is caused by fatigue

15

10

0
ue ct lt lt n lt ct s lt e fa u s io au r ad au t ig pa au Ot he r

b je

nf

nf

io n

ti o

pg

Fa

r ro

im

do

si g

la t

ss

ca

nu

Co

Ve

op

br i

si g

t al

In s

Utmatting - grunnlag

Dr

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

Fa

De

P J Haagensen

Op

er a

De

pe

ti n

el

gf

Fatigue problems - aircraft structures

Causes of major damage in aircraft structures
(Royal Aerospace Establishment, UK)

Almost 60 % of total damage is caused by fatigue and corrosion fatigue

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Causes of failures in components and structures

Design
- Wrong

Fabrication
- Wrong materials - Poor fabrication quality - Inadequate inspection

material properties - Wrong design life - Wrong design method - Missed failure modes

Failure

Operation
- Unknown environment

- Unknown fatigue loads - Improper use - Poor inspection

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Fatigue problems pressure equipment

UK 1998 - 2000: 3500 failures, about 25% caused by fatigue
Types of equipment for which fatigue damage or failure was found Unknown Piping Heat exchanger Pressure vessel Water tube Shell boiler 0 10 20 30 Percent 40 50 60

Data from: Pressure Equipment Directive (PED)

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Why is fatigue assessment difficult to perform?

European Pressure Equipment Research Council survey in 2000

Utmatting - grunnlag

Number of replies

Main difficulties encountered in applying fatigue assessment

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Fatigue what is it?

Fatigue - the process of progressive and localized permanent structural change occurring in a material subjected to conditions that produce fluctuating stresses and strains at some point or points and that may culminate in cracks or complete fracture after a sufficient number of fluctuations.
(Am. Soc. for Testing and Materials (ASTM) definition)
Damage (crack length)

Stress

Fracture

Cycles, N Time

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Fatigue fracture surfaces

Three characteristic features of fatigue fractures: 1. Initiation point or points 2. Crack growth area Beach 3. Final fracture
Beach marks are lines visible to the naked eye, indicating changes in loading or corrosion conditions. Striations indicate start-stop positions of the
crack tip. The presence of beach marks and striations proves that fatigue caused the fracture.
Crack growth direction
marks Striations

Crack initiation 10
Utmatting - grunnlag Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010 P J Haagensen

10 mm

10 m

Three stages in fatigue process

1. Initiation of fatigue crack 2. Crack propagation 3. Final fracture Total life:
N = Ni + Np
No. of cycles to crack initiation Cycles of crack propagation to failure

11

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Primary factors influencing fatigue strength Primary factors affecting fatigue

Material Type of loading tension, bending, shear, combinations Mean stress Geometry, notches, defects Size Surface condition roughness, material condition Residual stresses Environment temperature, corrosion Note: There are significant differences between welded and unwelded components regarding what factors have the strongest influence on fatigue life.
12
Utmatting - grunnlag Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010 P J Haagensen

Fatigue
Influential Factors
Load History
Nature of loading (frequency, Spectrum)

Load history

Geometry of Detail
Local geometry Influence of Stress Concentration

Geometry

Presence of Defects
Weld defects Surface Flaws
Defects at weld toe

13

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

S-N curves
Failures occur when: 1. Service loads are higher than assumed in design 2. Fatigue resistance is lower than assumed in design 3. Combinations of 1 & 2 Load
Applied load too high Applied load OK

Reduction due to e.g. corrosion S-N curve too low

Infinite life when S-N curve and loads are OK

Life N, cycles
14
Utmatting - grunnlag Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010 P J Haagensen

When do we get fatigue failures

Failures occur when: 1. Service loads are higher than assumed in design 2. Fatigue resistance is lower than assumed in design 3. Combinations of 1 & 2 Load
Applied load too high Applied load OK

Reduction due to e.g. corrosion S-N curve too low

Infinite life when S-N curve and loads are OK

Life N, cycles
15
Utmatting - grunnlag Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010 P J Haagensen

Example 1: Failure in mechnical components NSB train axle failures

Final fracture Crack initiation

Beach marks

NSB Signature Train axle fractures Summer 2002

16

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

NSB train axle failures

Main contributing factors DNV failure investigation
Load history: High loads in short radius turns Presence of defects: Corrosion pits Geometry of detail: Cracking in areas of high stress concentrations Material: High strength, notch sensitive material, UTS = 1000 MPa

Corrosion and cracks in axle fillet

Rubber band prevented moisture from drying out in fillet

17

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Fatigue design of axles

The endurance limit is used as a design criterion for axles that endure a large number of cycles, e.g. N = 2x108 during 500 000 km, i.e. the maximum load cycle in the load spectrum must be lower than the fatigue limit:

max
106 107 108

max E
N, cycles to failure

18

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Effect of corrosion on the fatigue limit

MPa

Fatigue limit

The drop in fatigue strength due to corrosion is higher for a high strength steel than for a mild steel

Corroding specimens

Ultimate tensile strength, ksi

19

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

NSB train axle failures

Conclusions:
Corrosion damage caused early crack initiation High strength material resulted in large loss of fatigue strength High local stresses caused short crack growth stage

20

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Example 2 Failure of a welded structure

The Alexander L. Kielland accident

Place: Ekofisk field Time: 27 March, 1980, 18.30 hrs Persons killed: 123 Survivors: 89
10 similar platforms built ALK platform delivered in 1976 Time from first failure in brace D6 to capsize: 20 min

21

Utmatting - grunnlag Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010 Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen P J Haagensen

The accident

22

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

ALK structural arrangement

Pentagone design

1st fracture
D

23

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Brace D6 and hydrophone support tube

Column D

Brace D6

Hydrophone support

24

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Fracture in Brace D6

Area of final fracture

Lamellar tear crack

25
Utmatting - grunnlag Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010 P J Haagensen

Crack initiation in D6 at support pipe

When the weld around the support pipe is uncracked, the stress concentration factor at the weld is 1.6 When the weld around the support pipe is cracked, the stress concentration factor at the weld is 3.0, i.e. stress is almost doubled
Fatigue crack

Fatigue crack

Weld intact: SCF= 1.6

26
Utmatting - grunnlag Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

Weld fractured: SCF = 3.0

P J Haagensen

Lamellar tear cracking

D6

Support pipe

Small penetration

Lamellar tear crack

27

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Crack initiation in D6 at support pipe

Crack initiation

Crack growth direction

Beach marks

Beach marks are lines visible to the naked eye, indicating changes in loading or corrosion conditions. Striations indicate start-stop positions of the crack tip. The presence of beach marks and striations proves that fatigue caused the fracture.
28
Utmatting - grunnlag Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

10 mm

10 m

Striations

P J Haagensen

Materials
Structural steel used in platform:
Standard C-Mn steel with C = 0.18% max, YS = 350 MPa, UTS = 512 MPa, ductility 30%

Steel in support pipe:

Standard C-Mn steel with C = 0.18% max, YS = 355 MPa, UTS = 500 MPa, ductility 4.8 % in thickness direction

Microstructure of support pipe:

Fine grain banded ferrite and pearlite, indicating low strength in thickness direction

29

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Stresses in brace D6
Max nominal stresses in brace D6 at accident:
141 to 173 MPa or 40 to 50% of yield stress, giving very high local stresses at the hydrophone support pipe

Fatigue life predictions, brace D6

Miner-Palmgren summation:
- Using the F2 design curve a life of 0.7 to 5 years was calculated, assuming various uncertainties in load spectrum

30

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Conclusions, ALK accident Main causes

1. Design fault 1: Lack of redundancy, i.e. all braces attached to column D failed by overloading when brace D6 fractured 2. Design fault 2: Too high operating stresses in D6; platform not designed against fatigue 3. Poor materials: Low strength in thickness direction in hydrophone tube gave lamellar tearing, which in turn increased local stresses in brace D6 at weld 5. Poor fabrication: Too small penetration in weld joining support pipe to brace D6

31

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Summary
Fatigue of unwelded components
Fatigue strength is closely related to base materials strength for parts with smooth surfaces, but corrosion and surface damage gives large reduction in fatigue strength Fatigue strength depends on mean stress

32

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen

Summary
Fatigue of welded components
Fatigue strength is independent of base material strength Fatigue strength is independent of applied mean stress Fatigue strength is strongly reduced by corrosion

33

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 8-9 Nov. 2010

P J Haagensen