Application of Constraint

Corrected J-R Curves to Fracture

Xian-Kui Zhu
e-mail: zhux@battelle.org
Brian N. Leis
Battelle Memorial Institute,
505 King Avenue,
Columbus, OH 43201
Analysis of Pipelines
Fracture properties of an API X80 pipeline steel have been developed using a set of
single edge notched bend (SENB) and single edge notched tension (SENT) specimens
with shallow and deep cracks to generate different crack-tip constraint levels. The test
data show that the J-R curves for the X80 pipeline steel are strongly constraint depen-
dent. To facilitate transfer of the experimental J-R curves to those for actual cracked
components, like flawed pipeline, constraint corrected J-R curves are developed. The
two-parameter J-A2 formulation is adopted to quantify constraint effect on the crack-tip
fields and the J-R curves. The constraint parameter A2 is extracted by matching the J-A2
solution with finite element results for a specific crack configuration. A constraint cor-
rected J-R curve is then formulated as a function of the constraint parameter A2 and
crack extension ⌬a. A general method and procedure to transfer the experimentalJ-R
curves from laboratory to actual cracked components are proposed. Using the test data of
J-R curves for the SENB specimens, a mathematical expression representing a family of
the J-R curves is constructed for the X80. It is shown that the predicted J-R curves
developed in this paper agree well with experimental data for both SENB and SENT
specimens. To demonstrate its application in assessing flaw instability, a pipeline with an
axial surface crack is considered. For a crack depth of 50% of the wall thickness, the
predicted J-R curve is found to be higher than that for the SENB specimen with the same
crack length to width ratio. From this predicted J-R curve and crack driving force
obtained by finite element analysis, the failure pressures of the pipeline at the crack
initiation and instability are determined and discussed. 关DOI: 10.1115/1.2349571兴

Keywords: crack-tip constraint, J-R curve, SENB, SENT, X80, J-A2 solution

Introduction
Extensive experiments 关1–3兴 have indicated that the fracture
resistance curves against ductile crack growth, i.e., the J-R curves,
depend on constraint levels at the crack tip. Fracture constraint
develops because of differences in loading and geometry configu-
rations. The constraint dependence of J-R curves is an issue for
transferability of the experimental J-R curves measured using
standard laboratory specimens to actual cracked components.
Standard specimens for fracture toughness testing, such as the
single edge notched bend 共SENB兲 and compact tension 共CT兲
specimens with deep cracks as specified in ASTM E 1820-01 关4兴,
have strict size requirements to ensure high constraint levels at the
crack tip, while the nonstandard specimens or real flawed compo-
nents with surface cracks usually involve low constraint levels. In
general, the application of J-R curves from high-constraint speci-
mens to low-constraint geometry introduces a degree of conserva-
tism into design analysis. Conversely, for some special cases, frac-
ture toughness data are obtained from relatively low constraint
specimens and used in high constraint applications, which could
result in a nonconservative design. A more detailed review on this
subject can be found in Chao and Zhu 关5兴.
In recent years, the study of constraint effect on fracture resis-
tances for pipeline steels has attracted much attention. Pisarski
and Wignall 关6兴 presented experimental data as CTOD fracture
toughness resistance curves and showed the constraint effect on
Contributed by the Pressure Vessels and Piping Division of ASME for publication
in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received July 26, 2005;
final manuscript received December 6, 2005. Review conducted by Kenneth K.
Yoon. Paper presented at the 2005 ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference
共PVP2005 “Outstanding Technical Paper”兲, July 17–21, 2005, Denver, Colorado,
USA.
the CTOD resistance curves for X52 pipeline steel. Hippert et al.
关7兴 reported experimental data of J-R curves and indicated the
constraint effect on the J-R curves for X70 pipeline steel. Most
recently, Shen et al. 关8兴 published the detailed experimental results
of J-R curves using a set of SENB and SENT specimens and
demonstrated significant constraint effect on the J-R curves for
X80 and X100 pipeline steels. Pavankumar et al. 关9兴 performed
full-scale fracture testing of J-R curves for cracked pipes with
different circumferential through wall cracks in four point bending
load, and their experimental results are also geometry dependent.
Structural integrity assessment of pipelines is a key issue for the
design and operation of onshore and offshore oil and gas facilities.
Conventional failure assessment procedures applicable to pipe-
lines containing service-induced defects generally employ simpli-
fied failure criteria that were empirically derived from experimen-
tal analysis. Material failure 共leakage or sudden rupture兲 in a
flawed pipeline is preceded in ductile steels by large amounts of
slow stable crack growth until a critical crack size is reached.
Under sustained ductile tearing of a crack, a large increase in the
loading-carrying capacity of pipeline steels, as characterized by J-
R curves, is possible beyond the limits by the conventional analy-
sis 关7兴. Realistic elastic-plastic fracture assessments of pipelines
rely on the direct application of J-R curves measured with small
laboratory specimens. Therefore, the constraint dependence of J-R
curves needs to be understood, and a viable procedure needs to be
developed to transfer the fracture resistance data measured with
small laboratory specimens to those for actual components and
structures.
Much theoretical and numerical work has been done to quantify
fracture constraint at the crack tip in both two- and three-
dimensional specimens and structural configurations 关10–15兴. Due
to the loss of single-parameter J dominance, several two-

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology Copyright © 2006 by ASME NOVEMBER 2006, Vol. 128 / 581

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jpvtas/28473/ on 02/28/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

 Fig. 1 True stress-strain curve of X80 pipeline steel
parameter fracture theories have been proposed. One is the J-Q
theory proposed by O’Dowd and Shih 关10,11兴, the other is the
J-A2 three-term solution proposed by Yang and Chao 关12,13兴,
where Q and A2 are constraint parameters. The comparisons of
these two solutions can be found in Chao and Zhu 关14兴 and Kim et
al. 关15兴. Based on experimental data, finite element analysis
共FEA兲 results, and the J-A2 solution, a new methodology has been
developed by Chao and Zhu 关5,16兴 for constructing a constraint
corrected J-R curve for ductile crack growth, using A2 as the
constraint parameter. Recently, Lam et al. 关17兴 have applied this
methodology to characterize the constraint effect on the fracture
resistance curves for carbon steel A285. This paper further ex-
tends this methodology to determine a constraint corrected J-R
curve for an X80 pipeline steel.
Based on J-R curves measured for the X80 pipeline steel by a
set of SENB specimens, the fracture initiation toughness at the
crack extension of 0.2 mm and the J-integral values at the crack
extension of 1.0 mm have been determined. The values of con-
straint parameter A2 have been obtained by matching the J-A2
solution with the FEA results for each specimen. 共Note that the
modified J-A2 four-term solution 关18兴 should be used for bending
specimens with deep cracks.兲 Using the power-law relationship
suggested by ASTM E 1820, a constraint corrected J-R curve has
been formulated for the specific X80 steel considered as a func-
tion of the constraint parameter A2 and crack extension ⌬a. Cor-
respondence between the predicted J-R curves and the experimen-
tal data will be evaluated for both SENB and SENT specimens.
Application of this method then will be demonstrated in reference
to a pipeline with a deep axial surface crack. From the predicted
J-R curve and crack drive force obtained by FEA, the failure
pressures of the pipeline at crack initiation and instability are de-
termined, and compared with those obtained from plastic collapse
analysis.
Experimental Results
Material Properties. The material considered was a high
strength pipeline steel, API X80, i.e., N550 supplied by
TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. 共TCPL兲 as detailed in Ref. 关8兴. As
detailed therein, all specimens were cut and machined from a pipe
section with outside diameter of 1219 mm 共48 in. 兲 and wall
thickness of 12.7 mm 共0.5 in. 兲 The tensile properties were mea-
sured using full-section 共25⫻ 11.5 mm2兲 flattened samples ori-
ented in the longitudinal direction. The true stress-strain curve is
illustrated in Fig. 1. The tensile test results show that the 0.2%
offset yield stress of the X80 is 570 MPa, the 0.5% total yield
stress is 576 MPa, the ultimate tensile stress is 675 MPa, the elon-
gation for the 1 in. 共25 mm兲 gage length is 42.2%, and the final
582 / Vol. 128, NOVEMBER 2006
Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jpvtas/28473/ on 02/28/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
Fig. 2 Experimental J-R curves for SENB specimens
reduction of area is 68.3%. In the elastic-plastic fracture analysis,
it is usual to fit the true stress-strain curve in Fig. 1 by the form of
Ramberg-Osgood power-law relation:
冉 冊
␧ ␴ ␴ n
= +␣ 共1兲
␧0 ␴0 ␴0
where the reference stress ␴0 is taken as the 0.2% offset yield
stress, the reference strain ␧0 = ␴0 / E, and Young’s modulus E
= 207 GPa. As evident in Fig. 1, the use of the hardening param-
eter ␣ = 1.07 and n = 13 leads to a best fit of the test data.
Specimen Geometry. The SENB and SENT specimens were
cut from the pipe section in LC orientation and used to measure
J-R curves. Dimensions of the SENB specimens recommended by
ASTM E 1820 were used, except for the initial crack length,
which was varied to develop different levels of crack-tip con-
straint. All SENB specimens were loaded in three-point bending
with a span of 92 mm, after precracking by fatigue according to
the procedure in ASTM E 1820. Specimens were side grooved
using a Charpy cutter to a total thickness reduction of 20%, in an
attempt to develop plane strain conditions along the crack front.
The specimen width W was 23 mm with initial crack length a
varied producing ratios of a / W between 0.24 and 0.64. This in-
terval represents shallow to deep cracks and simulates different
fracture constraint levels at the crack tip. The uncracked ligament
length b = W − a and specimen thickness B = W / 2 = 11.5 mm. All
specimens were tested at room temperature 共about 20° C兲.
Experimental J-R Curves. The J-R curves of the X80 pipeline
steel were measured by Shen et al. 关8兴 for both SENB and SENT
specimens. For the SENB specimens, determinations of J-R
curves follow the standard procedures of ASTM standard E 1820.
After testing, the specimens were heat tinted and then broken in
liquid nitrogen. The initial and final crack lengths were measured
on the fracture surface by the nine-point technique as described in
ASTM E 1820. The criterion for uniform crack extension given in
ASTM E 1820 共which requires that none of the nine physical
measurements differ by more than 5% from the average physical
crack size兲 was not met for the final crack length, primarily be-
cause splitting occurred during the tests. For some specimens with
severe splitting, the difference among the nine physical measure-
ments for the final crack length was as high as 40%. However,
splitting was not observed for crack extension ⌬a ⱕ 0.2 mm. Fig-
ure 2 shows the experimental J-R curves for the X80 SENB
specimens.
The initiation toughness 共Ji兲 used to characterize fracture resis-
tance at the onset of stable ductile crack growth can be defined on
the J-R curve at the critical stretch zone width 共⌬ai兲, which can be
measured on the fracture surface using a scanning electron micro-
Transactions of the ASME
 Fig. 3 Experimental J-R curves for SENT specimens

scope 共SEM兲. It has been shown that Ji is not dependent on stress

triaxiality or crack-tip constraint and can be treated as a material
property 关9兴. It was reported that ⌬ai ⬇ 0.2 mm for XCrNi1811
structural steel 关19兴 and for SA333 Gr6 pressure vessel steel 关9兴.
Accordingly, the crack extension of ⌬a = 0.2 mm is used to define
approximate fracture initiation in this work. From Fig. 2, the val-
ues of the fracture initiation toughness of X80 pipeline steel at the
crack extension of ⌬a = 0.2 mm are obtained as 420, 407, 290,
370, 250, and 287 kJ/ m2 for a / W = 0.24, 0.25, 0.42, 0.43, 0.63,
and 0.64, respectively. On the other hand, as specified in ASTM E
1820, the fracture initiation toughness is defined as the intersec-
tion of the measured J-R curve and the 0.2 mm offset line, which
is parallel to the construction or blunting line. For this X80 steel,
the 0.2 mm offset line is J = 1868共⌬a − 0.2兲, which is included in
Fig. 2. It is seen that the 0.2 offset fracture toughness varies from
400 to 1010 kJ/ m2, which is a much larger range than the initia-
tion toughness defined at a crack extension of 0.2 mm.
For the SENT specimens, a standardized procedure to calculate
the J resistance is not available. Based on an estimation method,
Shen et al. 关8兴 obtained the experimental J-R curves for SENT
specimens, as shown in Fig. 3. These experimental results of the
J-R curves will be used to validate the predicted J-R curves later,
which are formulated using the test data for the SENB specimens.
Numerical Calculations and Constraint Analyses
Finite Element Modeling. Plane strain elastic-plastic FEA has
been performed using the general purposed FEA software pack-
age, ABAQUS 关20兴, to calculate the crack-tip stress and strain
fields and to determine fracture parameters for the test specimens.
The constraint parameter A2 is extracted from the crack opening
stress distribution at the crack tip when the specimen loading
reaches the initiation toughness, where the deformation involves
the large scale yielding 共LSY兲 and so A2 attains a nearly constant
value.
Due to symmetry, only one half of each specimen was modeled
with two-dimensional FEA using the typical FEA mesh illustrated
in Fig. 4. A fine mesh was used with the smallest element size of
0.002 mm focused on the crack tip, and an increasingly coarse
mesh was generated elsewhere. The FEA mesh consisted of 1925
nodes and 604 eight-node plane strain isoparametric elements
with reduced integration. The local mesh encircling the crack tip
contained 23 rings of elements with each ring having 18 elements.
The same number of elements and nodes were used for all test
specimens. For the SENB specimens, a concentrated load was
applied on the top of ligament. For the SENT specimens, a uni-
form distributed load was applied on the end.
Fig. 4 Typical finite element mesh for test specimens
In the FEA simulation, the stress-strain relation follows the
usual nonlinear elastic constitutive equation in the three-
dimensional form of:
␧ij
␧0
␴ij ␴kk 3 ␴e
= 共1 + ␯兲 − ␯ ␦ij + ␣
␴0 ␴0 2 ␴0
冉 冊 n−1
sij
␴0
共2兲
where ␴0 is the initial yield stress, ␧0 is defined as ␴0 / E, ␯ is the
Poisson ratio, n is the strain-hardening exponent, and ␣ is a hard-
ening constant. sij = ␴ij − ␴kk␦ij / 3 is the deviatoric stress, and ␴e
= 共3sijsij / 2兲1/2 is the Mises effective stress. For the stress-strain
curve of the X80 pipeline steel shown in Fig. 1, the material
constants are ␴0 = 570 MPa, E = 207 GPa, ␯ = 0.3, n = 13, and ␣
= 1.07.
Figure 5 shows distributions of the crack opening stress, ␴␪␪,
obtained from the FEA at different deformation levels as a func-
tion of distance from the crack tip for the SENB specimens with
a / W ⫽ 0.24 and 0.42, respectively. The results in this figure in-
dicate that the opening stress near the crack tip decreases as load-
ing increases for normalized distance r. Under LSY, the linear
distribution of ␴␪␪ for large r shows the influence of global bend-
ing stress on the crack-tip stress fields.
The J-A2 Solution. The J-A2 three-term solution proposed by
Yang et al. 关12兴 and Chao et al. 关13兴 is used to characterize the
crack-tip fields and quantify constraint levels for all specimens
considered. Under plane strain conditions, the asymptotic stress
field near the crack tip for a power-law material can be expressed
as

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology NOVEMBER 2006, Vol. 128 / 583

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jpvtas/28473/ on 02/28/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

 Fig. 5 Distribution of opening stress ␴␪␪ along the distance Fig. 6 Variation of A2 with J for SENB specimens by „a… the
from the crack tip. Symbols are FEA results, lines are J-A2 solution and „b… the modified J-A2 solution
asymptotic solutions. „a… a / W = 0.24, „b… a / W = 0.42.

the global bending stress on the asymptotic crack-tip stress field,

␴ij
␴0
= A1 冋冉 冊
r
L
s1
˜␴ij共1兲共␪兲 + A2 冉冊
r
L
s2
˜␴ij共2兲共␪兲 + A22 冉冊
r
L
s3
˜␴ij共3兲共␪兲 册 Chao et al. 关18兴 recently developed a modification of the J-A2
solution for the crack opening stress ahead of the crack tip, i.e., at
␪ = 0°, in bending specimens as follows:

共k兲
where the stress angular functions ˜␴ij 共␪兲 共k = 1, 2, 3兲 and the
共3兲 ␴␪␪共0兲
␴0
= A1 冋冉 冊r
L
s1
共1兲
˜␴␪␪ 共0兲 + A2 冉冊
r
L
s2
共2兲
˜␴␪␪ 共0兲 + A22 冉冊
r
L
s3
共3兲
˜␴␪␪ 共0兲 册
stress power exponents sk 共s1 ⬍ s2 ⬍ s3兲 depend only on the strain
6Mr
hardening exponent n and are independent of the other material − 共5兲
constants 共i.e., ␣, ␴0, and ␧0兲 or the parameter A2. The values of ␴ 0b 3
˜␴共k兲
ij 共␪兲 and sk are tabulated in Ref. 关21兴. In Eq. 共3兲, L is a charac- where M is the global bending moment. The modified J-A2 solu-
teristic length parameter, with L = 1 mm being adopted in this tion still only involves the two parameters, namely the applied
work. The parameters A1 and s1 are related to the HRR singularity load 共J and M兲 and constraint parameter 共A2兲.
field 关22,23兴 by

冉 冊
Determination of Constraint Parameter A2. The constraint
−s1
J 1 parameter A2 is usually determined by matching the opening
A1 = , s1 = − 共4兲
␣ ␧ 0␴ 0I nL n+1 stress, ␴␪␪, from the J-A2 solution with the FEA result at ␪ = 0ⴰ and
r / 共J / ␴0兲 ⬇ 2. Figure 6 depicts the variations of the constraint pa-
and s3 = 2s2 − s1 for n ⱖ 3. The constraint parameter A2 is an un-
known constant and can be determined by matching the opening rameter A2 with the applied loading J for the SENB specimens
stress from the J-A2 solution with the FEA result at r / 共J / ␴0兲 with a / W = 0.24, 0.42, and 0.64. The parameter A2 in Fig. 6共a兲 is
determined by the J-A2 solution or Eq. 共3兲, while the parameter A2
= 1 – 2, for example.
in Fig. 6共b兲 for the modified solution is determined by the modi-
The Modified J-A2 Solution. For deep crack bending speci- fied J-A2 solution or Eq. 共5兲. Comparison shows that the A2 values
mens under LSY or fully plastic deformation, it has been shown determined using Eqs. 共3兲 and 共5兲 are almost the same and con-
that the global bending stress significantly affects the crack-tip stant for all loading for the shallow crack 共a / W = 0.24兲, but are
field. As a result, the J-A2 three-term solution, i.e., Eq. 共3兲, fails to different for the two deeper cracks under LSY. Without the global
correctly describe the crack-tip field. To eliminate the influence of bending influence, A2 is theoretically a constant independent of

584 / Vol. 128, NOVEMBER 2006 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jpvtas/28473/ on 02/28/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

 loading at LSY 关5兴. This implies that the global bending stress has
significant influence on the crack tip fields for the deep cracks
under LSY, but has no significant effect for the shallow cracks or
the deep cracks under small scale yielding 共SSY兲. After having
considered the global bending influence, Fig. 6共b兲 indicates that
A2 determined by Eq. 共5兲 is a nearly load-independent constant for
the three specimens. Specifically, A2 ⬇ −0.27, −0.23, and −0.18,
respectively, for a / W = 0.24, 0.42, and 0.64. These results indicate
that it is reasonable to use the load-independent parameter A2 to
quantify the constraint level of a J-R curve for a specific
geometry.
With the value of A2 determined as just discussed, the crack-tip
stress field can be determined from the 共modified兲 J-A2 solution
for a given loading of J 共and M兲. Figure 5共a兲 shows distributions
of the opening stress determined from the J-A2 solution at five
deformation levels from SSY to LSY for the SENB specimen with
shallow crack of a / W = 0.24. 共Note that for the fully plastic defor-
mation of b␴0 / J = 6 in Fig. 5共a兲, the modified J-A2 solution is
used.兲 Figure 5共b兲 shows the opening stress determined from the Fig. 7 Variations of J0.2 mm and J1.0 mm with constraint param-
modified J-A2 solution at five deformation levels for the SENB eter A2 for SENB specimens
specimen with deep crack of a / W = 0.42. Both figures include the
HRR solution. This indicates that the 共modified兲 J-A2 solution
matches well with the FEA results at all deformation levels. Ac-
cordingly, the 共modified兲 J-A2 solution should be used to charac- other point can be chosen at crack extension ⌬a2, where the crack
terize the crack-tip field and quantify the constraint level at the has extended beyond initiation. The J integrals at the two points
crack tip for X80 pipeline steel. are denoted by
J兩⌬a1 = J⌬a1共A2兲
Constraint Correction of J-R Curves for Ductile Crack 共7兲
J兩⌬a2 = J⌬a2共A2兲
Growth
where J⌬a1共A2兲 and J⌬a1共A2兲 are two known functions of A2, and
General Methodology. Following the concept of J-controlled
determined by best-fitting test data extracted from at least three
crack growth, Chao and Zhu 关5,16兴 proposed the concept of J-A2
experimental J-R curves. In principle, if ⌬ai共i = 1–2兲 is chosen
controlled crack growth by extending the J-A2 two-parameter de-
scription for stationary cracks to growing cracks with small crack between 0.2 mm and 2 mm, it automatically satisfies the ASTM E
1820 criterion for acceptable data. However, if a specimen exhib-
extension. They applied the J-A2 description to analyze ductile
crack growth and developed an engineering method to quantify its much longer crack extension 共⌬a ⬎ 2 mm兲, choosing ⌬a2 out-
the constraint effect on the J-R curves. side of that range may yield a better overall fit for the J-R curves
As demonstrated above for the X80, the constraint parameter A2 关17兴.
is nearly load-independent, and thus the A2 determined at the Substituting Eqs. 共7兲 into 共6兲, one obtains the following set of
crack initiation load remains constant for subsequent stable crack simultaneous equations:
growth. Therefore, when small crack extension occurs within the C1共A2兲共⌬a1/k兲C2共A2兲 = J⌬a1共A2兲
J-A2 dominant region, A2 can be considered as a constant. Under
J-A2 controlled crack growth, the curve of J-integral resistance 共8兲
versus crack extension, ⌬a, can be expressed by a power-law C1共A2兲共⌬a2/k兲C2共A2兲 = J⌬a2共A2兲
relationship, as suggested in ASTM E 1820: Equations 共8兲 can be used to determine the functions C1 and C2 of

冉 冊 C2共A2兲
⌬a
J共⌬a,A2兲 = C1共A2兲 共6兲
k C1 and C2 for a series of A2 values within this range provides the
where k = 1 mm and the coefficients C1共A2兲 and C2共A2兲 are unde-
termined functions of A2. It should be noted that C1 and C2 are
constants in the original ASTM E 1820 formulation. Equation 共6兲
extends the current ASTM J-R curve concept, J共⌬a兲, to a con-
straint corrected J-R curve, J共⌬a , A2兲. This requires determining
the functional dependencies of C1 and C2 on the constraint param-
eter A2. Once the functional forms of C1共A2兲 and C2共A2兲 are ob-
tained, a family of constraint-corrected J-R curves is completely
determined.
As indicated above, Eq. 共6兲 contains two unknown variables, C1
and C2 for a given A2; consequently, two equations are needed to
solve for these values. Chao and Zhu 关5兴 proposed a procedure to
determine the functions C1 and C2 in reference to the initiation
toughness and the ductile tearing modulus defined in ASTM E
1820. A more general approach is developed here. Basically, the
two equations can be established at any two points of crack ex-
tension for the experimental J-R curves. The first point can be
chosen at crack extension ⌬a1, where the crack initiates, and the
A2. The valid range of A2, based on past studies, is between −1
and 0, as the crack tip constraint varies from low to high. Solving
functional dependencies of C1 and C2 with respect to A2. Finally,
least-squares regression analysis provides the desired functional
forms of C1 and C2 in terms of the constraint parameter A2.
For a given material, once the expression for the constraint-
corrected J-R curve, or Eq. 共6兲, is obtained, the J-R curve can be
accurately predicted for any specific cracked geometry 共e.g., non-
standard specimens or actual structural components兲, provided
that the constraint parameter A2 is known for that cracked geom-
etry.
Construction of Constraint-Corrected J-R Curve. Using the
SENB test data shown in Fig. 2 and the method described above,
a constraint corrected J-R curve in terms of A2 can be constructed
for X80 pipeline steel. Two equations are set up to solve for C1
and C2 at J = J0.2 mm and J = J1.0 mm. Using the 共modified兲 J-A2
solution at J0.2 mm, the value of A2 for each SENB specimen is
determined. Figure 7 plots the J0.2 mm versus A2 and J1.0 mm ver-
sus A2 relations. From this figure, two linear equations between
J0.2 mm and A2, and J1.0 mm and A2, are fitted as follows:

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology NOVEMBER 2006, Vol. 128 / 585

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jpvtas/28473/ on 02/28/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

 Fig. 8 Comparison of predicted and experimental J-R curves
for SENB specimens
J0.2 mm = − 1505.4A2
共9兲
J1.0 mm = − 4417.1A2
where the J integral has unit in kJ/ m2. It is noted that a constant
J0.2 mm = 337.3 kJ/ m2 was used in our preliminary work 关24兴.
Substitution of Eq. 共9兲 into Eq. 共8兲 leads to:
C10 . 2C2 = − 1505.4A2
共10兲
C11 . 0C2 = − 4417.1A2
From Eq. 共10兲, the functions of C1共A2兲 and C2共A2兲 can be ap-
proximated as
C1共A2兲 = − 4417.1A2
共11兲
C2共A2兲 = 0.668
Finally, substituting Eq. 共11兲 into Eq. 共6兲, we obtain the constraint-
corrected J-R curve for X80 pipeline steel as follows:
J共⌬a,A2兲 = − 4417.1A2 冉 冊⌬a
1 mm
0.668
, 共12兲
where the J integral has unit of kJ/ m2. Equation 共12兲 indicates
that the constraint corrected J-R curve is a function of A2 and ⌬a.
If A2 is known for a specific geometry, the J-R curve can be easily
predicted from Eq. 共12兲.
Validation of Predicted J-R curves. For the SENB specimens
with a / W = 0.24, 0.42, and 0.64, the A2 is determined at J0.2 mm
= 337.3 kJ/ m2 as −0.27, −0.23, and −0.18, respectively. Thereaf-
ter, the J-R curve can be predicted from Eq. 共12兲. Figure 8 com-
pares the predicted J-R curves with the experimental J-R curves
for these three SENB specimens. Likewise, Fig. 9 compares the
predicted J-R curves with the experimental J-R curves for the
SENT specimens with a / W = 0.25, 0.41, and 0.57, respectively.
Comparisons show that the predicted J-R curves from Eq. 共12兲
match well with the experimental data for both SENB and SENT
specimens and provide better predictions than the constraint-
corrected J-R curves using a constant value of J0.2 mm in our pre-
liminary work 关24兴. Therefore, the constraint-corrected J-R curve
or Eq. 共12兲 can be effectively used to predict the J-R curve for any
specimen or actual component, provided that the material is the
considered X80 pipeline steel and the constraint parameter A2 is
known a priori.
586 / Vol. 128, NOVEMBER 2006
Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jpvtas/28473/ on 02/28/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
Fig. 9 Comparison of predicted and experimental J-R curves
for SENT specimens
Application to Failure Predictions of Cracked Pipeline
FEA Simulation and Constraint Analysis. A pipeline with an
outside diameter 762 mm and a thickness 23 mm under internal
pressure is considered. For purposes of analysis, it is assumed that
the pipeline contains a very long axial surface crack on its exterior
with the crack depth being 50% of the wall thickness. Since the
crack is very long, plane strain deformation can be reasonably
assumed for the cracked pipe. As a result and in light of symme-
try, one half of the circular cross-section is modeled using the
FEA mesh shown in Fig. 10. In this FEA model, a very fine mesh
is generated near the crack tip with the smallest element size of
0.003 mm, with coarse mesh used elsewhere. The mesh involves
3107 nodes and 944 eight-node plane strain isoparametric ele-
ments with reduced integration. The boundary conditions reflect
symmetry and the only applied load is internal pressure.
Figure 11 shows the distribution of crack opening stress deter-
mined from the FEA calculation and the J-A2 solution 共Eq. 共3兲兲
along the distance from the crack tip at different deformation lev-
els from SSY to LSY for the X80 pipe with a surface crack of
a / t = 0.5, where the constraint parameter A2 is taken as −0.25 for
all loading. Note that the HRR solution is also included in Fig. 11.
It is apparent that the global bending stress has insignificant influ-
ence on the crack tip, and the J-A2 three-term solution agrees with
the FEA results at all deformation levels, whereas the HRR field
does not fit the FEA results even under SSY. This indicates that
the J-A2 solution can be used to characterize the crack tip field for
the surface crack in this X80 pipeline.
Predicted J-R Curve of Cracked Pipe. Replacing the value of
−0.25 for A2 in Eq. 共12兲 of the constraint-corrected J-R curve
yields the predicted J-R curve for the X80 pipe with a long axial
surface crack of a / t = 0.5 as follows:
冉 冊
⌬a 0.668
J共⌬a兲 = 1104.25 共13兲
1 mm
where the J integral is in kJ/ m2. This J-R curve is plotted in Fig.
12 and compared with those for the SENB specimens.
It indicates that the J-R curve for the cracked pipe is much
higher than that for the ASTM standard SENB specimen with
a / W = 0.64 or 0.5, and may coincide with that for the SENB speci-
men with a / W = 0.35. Therefore, using the J-R curve from the
ASTM standard specimen could overly underestimate the fracture
resistance and the limit load of the X80 pipeline with surface
cracks.
Transactions of the ASME
 Fig. 10 Finite element mesh for 762Ã 23 mm2 pipe with an axial surface crack of a / t = 0.5

Prediction of Failure Pressure

Plastic Collapse Failure. For a pipe containing a longitudinal
pd = ␴uts
D
冉 冊
2t
1−
d
t
共15兲

surface defect under internal pressure, the burst pressure Pd at the

For the cracked X80 pipe, ␴uts = 675 MPa, D = 739 mm, and t
plastic collapse can be predicted by the PCORRC criterion 关25兴
= 23 mm with d / t = 0.5 for the example considered. For these con-

再 冋 冉 冊册冎
for blunt defects using the following equation:
ditions, Eq. 共15兲 predicts the burst pressure as pd = 21 MPa at plas-
2t d L tic collapse. Under LSY conditions in ductile steels, initially crack
pd = ␴uts 1− 1 − exp − 0.157 共14兲
D t 冑R共t − d兲 tips blunt, so Eq. 共15兲 should provide a reasonable estimate of the
limit pressure at plastic collapse for the X80 pipeline under con-
where ␴uts is the ultimate tensile stress, D ⫽ 2R is the average sideration. The next paragraphs assess the consistency between
diameter of the pipe, t is the wall thickness, d is the defect depth, this “macro” model and the behavior characterized by fracture
and L is the defect length. PCORRC is the ultimate tensile stress mechanics.
共UTS兲 based plastic collapse criterion for blunt defects derived
independent of fracture mechanics analysis. Therefore, the limit Elastic-Plastic Fracture Failure. In the elastic-plastic fracture
pressure determined by Eq. 共14兲 is a plastic collapse failure load. mechanics, the failure criterion for a crack is crack driving force J
For very long defects, Eq. 共14兲 is simplified as reaches its fracture resistance JR, namely,

J = JR 共16兲

Fig. 11 Distribution of the opening stress determined from the Fig. 12 Predicted J-R curve for X80 pipe with a surface crack
FEA and J-A2 solution along the distance from the crack tip and compared with those for SENB specimens

Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology NOVEMBER 2006, Vol. 128 / 587

Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jpvtas/28473/ on 02/28/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a


Fig. 13 Variation of J integral with internal pressure for the
cracked pipe
From the J-R curve as shown in Fig. 12 for the cracked pipe-
line, the crack initiation toughness at crack extension of 0.2 mm
and the 0.2 offset toughness are determined as 377 and
828 kJ/ m2, respectively. For the cracked X80 pipe, the crack driv-
ing force, i.e., variation of the J integral with the internal pressure
P, is obtained in the FEA simulation and is shown in Fig. 13.
From Eq. 共16兲 and using this figure, the failure pressures corre-
sponding to the 0.2 mm toughnesses and the 0.2 offset toughness
are approximately determined as 19.3 and 22.6 MPa. These values
are very close to and bound the plastic collapse pressure of
21 MPa, indicating that ductile crack initiation and instability are
close to plastic collapse for such a thin wall pipe. The crack depth
for this case is 50% through wall, consistent with the case con-
sidered in the above plastic collapse analysis. Therefore, at least
for this case, the fracture failure pressure of deeply cracked pipe-
lines at the crack initiation and instability can be bounded by
pressures corresponding to the 0.2 mm toughness and 0.2 mm off-
set toughness, respectively.
Summary and Conclusions
The constraint effect on the J-R curves for a specific X80 pipe-
line steel was examined in this paper. Based on the experimental
data, the FEA calculation, and the J-A2 fracture theory, a method
for determining a constraint corrected J-R curve was developed,
and its application to cracked pipeline was demonstrated. The pri-
mary results are summarized as follows:
1. A set of SENB and SENT specimens with various crack
lengths were tested for the fracture resistance curves for
the X80 steel. Experiments show that the J-R curves are
strongly geometry or constraint dependent.
2. The J-A2 three-term solution can be used to correctly
quantify the constraint effect on the crack-tip fields and
J-R curves. However, for deeply cracked bending speci-
mens under LSY, the modified J-A2 four-term solution
should be used to consider the influence of the global
bending stress.
3. A mathematical expression representing a family of the
constraint corrected J-R curves is formulated as a func-
tion of the load-independent constraint parameter A2 and
crack extension ⌬a, and constructed specifically for the
X80 steel using the test data for SENB specimens. The
predicted J-R curves are validated by comparing with
experimental J-R curves for SENT specimens.
4. A pipeline containing a long axial surface crack of 50%
of the wall thickness was analyzed to demonstrate the
application of the proposed constraint corrected J-R
curves to fracture analysis of structures. After the con-
588 / Vol. 128, NOVEMBER 2006
Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jpvtas/28473/ on 02/28/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
straint parameter A2 was determined in FEA simulations,
the J-R curve for the cracked X80 pipe was obtained
from the general formula of constraint corrected J-
Rcurves developed in this work for the X80. The results
showed that ASTM standard specimens may underesti-
mate the fracture resistance for this deeply cracked X80
pipe.
5. Based on the predicted J-R curve for the cracked X80
pipe, fracture initiation toughnesses were determined as
377 and 828 kJ/ m2 at crack extension of 0.2 mm and at
the 0.2 mm offset line. With the crack driving force ob-
tained from the finite element analysis, the failure pres-
sures corresponding to these two initiation toughness
were predicted.
6. Based on the plastic collapse criterion, PCORRC, a fail-
ure pressure at plastic collapse for the cracked X80 pipe
was also determined. Comparison has showed that the
failure pressure at crack initiation or instability deter-
mined using the J-R curve fracture mechanics method
was close to that determined by plastic collapse criterion
for the surface cracked X80 pipeline. This has demon-
strated the consistency of fracture analysis with plastic-
collapse analysis for a surface cracked thin wall pipe and
proven the proposed constraint corrected J-R curves vi-
able in fracture analysis and integrity assessments of
flawed pipelines.
It should be noted that this paper targets constraint and does not
directly address the effects of anisotropy on the fracture toughness
of the material properties of line pipe steels. The effect of aniso-
tropy effect could be separately accounted for, and for some
grades and processing schemes could have a major larger effect on
toughness. For a surface crack in a pipeline there is the combined
effect of anisotropy and constraint. The example in this paper
isolates the effect of constraint for the constraint corrected J-R
curve specific to the specific X80 pipeline steel considered and is
not representative of all X80 steels. However, the principles in this
work can be applied to develop constraint correct J-R curves and
perform fracture analysis for other X80 steels and other ductile
materials.
Acknowledgment
The authors gratefully acknowledge Dr. Bill Tyson and Dr.
Guowu Shen at the Material Technology Laboratory, Natural Re-
source Canada for their support in providing the original experi-
mental data used in this work. The support of the US Department
of Transportation through Broad-Agency Announcement funding
is gratefully acknowledged, as is the support of Battelle’s Pipeline
Technology Center.
References
关1兴 Joyce, J. A., and Link, R. E., 1995, “Effects of Constraint on Upper Shelf
Fracture Toughness,” Fracture Mechanics: 26th Volume, ASTM STP 1256,
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, pp. 142–177.
关2兴 Joyce, J. A., and Link, R. E., 1997, “Application of Two Parameter Elastic-
Plastic Fracture Mechanics to Analysis of Structures,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 57,
pp. 431–446.
关3兴 Neimitz, A., Dzioba, I., Galkiewicz, J., and Molasy, R., 2004, “A Study of
Stable Crack Growth Using Experimental Methods, Finite Elements and Frac-
tography,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 71, pp. 1325–1355.
关4兴 ASTM E 1820-01, 2004, “Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fracture
Toughness,” American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken,
PA.
关5兴 Chao, Y. J., and Zhu, X. K., 2000, “Constraint-Modified J-R Curves and Its
Applications to Ductile Crack Growth,” Int. J. Fract., 106, pp. 135–160.
关6兴 Pisarksi, H. G., and Wifnall, C. M., 2002, “Fracture Toughness Estimation for
Pipeline Girth Welds,” Proceedings of the 4th International Pipeline Confer-
ence, Sept. 29–Oct. 3, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
关7兴 Hippert, E., Dotta, F., and Ruggieri, C., 2002, “Structural Integrity Assessment
of Pipelines Using Crack Growth Resistance Curves,” Proceedings of the 4th
International Pipeline Conference, Sept. 29–Oct. 3, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
关8兴 Shen, G., Tyson, W. R., Glover, A., and Horsley, D., 2004, “Constraint Effects
On Linepipe Toughness,” Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on
Transactions of the ASME
 Pipeline Technology, Vol. 2, May 9–13, Ostend, Belgium, pp. 703–720.
关9兴 Pavankumar, T. V., Chattopadhyay, J., Dutta, B. K., and Kushwaha, H. S.,
2002, “Transferability of Specimen J-R Curve to Straight Pipes with Through
wall Circumferential Flaws,” Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping, 79, pp. 127–134.
关10兴 O’Dowd, N. P., and Shih, C. F., 1991, “Family of Crack-Tip Fields Character-
ized by a Triaxiality Parameter—I. Structure of Fields,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids,
39, pp. 989–1015.
关11兴 O’Dowd, N. P., and Shih, C. F., 1992, “Family of Crack-Tip Fields Character-
ized by a Triaxiality Parameter–II. Fracture Applications,” J. Mech. Phys. Sol-
ids, 40, pp. 939–963.
关12兴 Yang, S., Chao, Y. J., and Sutton, M. A., 1993, “Higher-Order Asymptotic
Fields in a Power-Law Hardening Material,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 45, pp. 1–20.
关13兴 Chao, Y. J., Yang, S., and Sutton, M. A., 1994, “On the Fracture of Solids
Characterized by One or Two Parameters: Theory and Practice,” J. Mech.
Phys. Solids, 42, pp. 629–647.
关14兴 Chao, Y. J., and Zhu, X. K., 1998, “J-A2 Characterization of Crack-Tip Fields:
Extent of J-A2 Dominance and Size Requirements,” Int. J. Fract., 89, pp.
285–307.
关15兴 Kim, Y., Zhu, X. K., and Chao, Y. J., 2001, “Quantification of Constraint
Effect on Elastic-Plastic 3D Crack Front Fields by the J-A2 Three-Term Solu-
tion,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 68, pp. 895–914.
关16兴 Chao, Y. J., Zhu, X. K., Lam, P. S., Louthen, M. R., and Iyer, N. C., 2000,
“Application of the Two-Parameter J-A2 Description to Ductile Crack
Growth,” ASTM STP 1389, G.R. Halford and J.P. Gallagher 共eds.兲, American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, pp. 165–182.
关17兴 Lam, P. S., Chao, Y. J., Zhu, X. K., Kim, Y., and Sindelar, R. L., 2003,
Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology
Downloaded From: http://pressurevesseltech.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jpvtas/28473/ on 02/28/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
“Determination of Constraint-Modified J-R Curves For Carbon Steel Storage
Tanks,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 125, pp. 136–142.
关18兴 Chao, Y. J., Zhu, X. K., Kim, Y., Lam, P. S., Pechersky, M. J., and Morgan, M.
J., 2004, “Characterization of Crack-Tip Fields and Constraints for Bending
Specimens under Large-Scale Yielding,” Int. J. Fract., 127, pp. 283–302.
关19兴 Schwalbe, K. H., Cornec, A., and Baustian, K., 1996, “Application of Fracture
Mechanics Principles to Austenitic Steels,” Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping, 65,
pp. 193–207.
关20兴 ABAQUS Standard User’s Manual 共version 6.4兲, 2004, Hibbitt, Karlsson and
Sorensen, Inc., Pawtucket, RI.
关21兴 Chao, Y. J., and Zhang, L., 1997, “Tables of Plane Strain Crack Tip Fields:
HRR and Higher Order Terms,” Me-Report, 97-1, Department of Mechanical
Engineering, University of South Carolina.
关22兴 Hutchinson, J. W., 1968, “Singular Behavior at the End of a Tensile Crack in
a Hardening Material,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 16, pp. 13–31.
关23兴 Rice, J. R., and Rosengren, G. F., 1968, “Plane Strain Deformation Near a
Crack Tip in a Power Law Hardening Material,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 16, pp.
1–12.
关24兴 Zhu, X. K., and Leis, B. N., 2005, “Application of Constraint Corrected J-R
Curves to Fracture Analysis of Pipelines,” Proceedings of ASME Pressure
Vessel and Piping Conference, July-21, Denver, CO.
关25兴 Stephens, D. R., and Leis, B. N., 2000, “Development of an Alternative Cri-
terion for Residual Strength of Corrosion Defects in Moderate- to High-
Toughness Pipe,” Proceedings of the 3rd International Pipeline Conference,
Oct. 1–5, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
NOVEMBER 2006, Vol. 128 / 589