Rolf A.

Jakobsen, Yong Bai") and Ivar Langen Stavanger University College, *) JP Kenny NS Stavanger, Norway

ABSTRACT Circumferential failure may occur in defective girth weld when it is under high longitudinal tension. This paper presents methodology and design criteria for assessment of pipeline girth weld defects (circumferential failure). For limit state design, the paper covers major failure modes such as plastic collapse and fracture. Both Corrosion defects and cracklike defects are considered. Strength equations are reviewed and compared. Keywords: Pipeline, girth weld, corrosion, plastic collapse, fracture. INTRODUCTION Circumferential failure may occur in defective girth weld when it is under high longitudinal tension (Rosenfeld and Kiefner, 1995). The defects in girth welds may be corrosion defects or due to lack of fusion in welding process. Internal corrosion defects are primarily confmed to the lower part of the pipe, e.g. from 0400 to 0800 o'clock, and longitudinal failure under internal pressure may be assessed using B31G (ASME 1993) or its modified version (Bai et al 1997). However, B31 G are not suitable for evaluating whether circumferential failure will occur. The purpose of this paper is to develop methods of assessing girth weld defects.

a AX = 1- P(l-7]J + 2 sin oJ [0.5(1-7] )sin P] ajlaw Jr

(2)

Chell Method A conservative. method for estimating the strength of pipe circumferential corrosion is the Chell method (Chell 19i9). minimum longitudinal tensile stress to cause failure is calculated as aAX --a jlow

'With The

7]

1- (1-7])/f

f=~1+(W~/

(4)

W = circumferential width of defect Miller (1988) compared capacity equations with experimental data for pipe containing circumferential girth weld defects. His conclusion is that Kastner's equation agreed well with experimental data

Kastner's Local Collapse Criterion The plastic collapse behaviour of girth weld corrosion can be predicted using a failure criterion proposed by Kastner et al (1981):

a jlow

7][1l - p(l-7])] 7]Jr + 2 (1 -7]) sin

P
length

where

d defect depth t = wall-thickness

11=I-d!t
c = half defect (circumferential) R = pipe radius cIR (in radians)

~=

allow

= flow

and in which

a AX

stress denotes the total axial stress. The above collapse equations consider axial tension alone. For plastic collapse of pipes under combined loads, reference is made to Bai and Hauch (1998).

Schulze's Global Collapse Criterion Schulze et al (1980) proposed a net-section collapse):

collapse

formula

(global

Possible Cracks in Girth Weld Various types of imperfection are known to occur in girth welds. The most damaging types are cracks, inadequate penetration of the root bead, and lack of fusion. The imperfections are particularly damaging if they occur in a weld that undermatches the yield strength of the base material. The most frequent type of planar/crack like defects in one-sided Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) is lack-of-fusion defects. Such defects can be located near the surface or be surface breaking and may have gone undetected following NDT procedures according to API 1104. Based on these observations it is reasonable to assume that some defects, typically y,ith a height equal to one weld pass, i.e. 3-4 mm and length between 50 and 150 mm, may exist in the pipeline. These cracks will be assumed to be surface breaking or becoming surface breaking due to preferential corrosion of the root area of the girth weld.

Three alternative criteria that are recognized by their respective national regulating agencies and that are often cited elsewhere are the appendix to API Standard 1104, Appendix K to CSA-ZI84, and BSI PD-6493 (pD6493 Level I is comparable to what is referred to herein as Level 2.). All three standards are based on the CTOD Design Curve approach developed by The Welding Institute, which extends Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics (LEFM) concepts into the elastic-plastic regime. In spite of their common origins, they differ in their treatment of residual stresses, summation of stress components, minimum toughness level, and factors of safety. Level 3 Assessment - Detailed Analysis Flaws that are not pennitted by Level 2 assessment may be evaluated by detailed fracture mechanics analysis. PD 6493 provides an appropriate Level 3 procedure based on R-6 FAD methodology. PD 6493 Level 2 and Level 3 are both comparable to what is referred to herein as Level 3. In case accurate information about the whole stress-strain relationship for the weld material is lacking, the default Failure Assessment Diagram (FAD) specified in PD6493, based on yield stress and tensile stress of weld material, is applied to model the acceptance criteria against UFPc. The default FAD for level 3 is generally conservative. The internal pressure v.ill have negligible influence on the UFPC capacity of transverse cracks, and is not accounted for in the analysis. In the assessment of the UFPC capacity of the weld due to longitudinal strain of the pipe, it is assumed that there exist a semi-elliptical surface weld defect of depth a and total length 2c. In the determination of the stress intensity at the crack tip, established empirical expressions are applied to describe the stress distribution over the weld defect (geometry functions) for both the membrane and bending stress distribution (Newman and Raju 1981). The critical stress levels with respect to UFPC failure can be obtained from FAr? analysis, for the different pipelines as a function of the degree of corrosion wall-thickness reduction. The corresponding critical strain level is estimated using Ramberg-Osgood curve for the stress-strain relationship.

General Longitudinal tensile strain in the pipelines may be induced by the subsidence of an oil field (or soil movement). This strain can, combined v.ith a possible initial weld defect in the weld-zone, be of a critical level \lith respect to the Unstable Fracture and Plastic Collapse (UFPC) failure modes. Defects in girth weld can be addressed on one of three levels, depending upon the quality of affected welds, the availability of certain material data, and the difficulty of making repairs. Level] Assessment - Worhnanship Standards Pipeline welding codes establish minimum weld quality standards based on inspection of a welder's workmanship. The flaw acceptance criteria evolved through industry experience. Hence, most workmanship standarrls are similar, though not identical, in terms of allowable imp.:n'.xtion types and sizes. The advantage of workmanship standards is thar they are time-tested, they are compatible with normal levels of l\'DE quality, they do not require material strength and toughness property data, and they are easy to apply. However, it has been recognized that some rejectable flaws may not necessary pose a real threat to pipeline integrity. A flawed girth weld that would be extremely costly to repair or replace should not be rejected solely on the basis of workmanship standards. A workmanship standard that is presently recognized by gas pipeline regulations is that contained in API Standard I 104 (API 1988). Level 2 Assessment - Alternative Acceptance Starufards Alternative acceptance standards were developed to facilitate acceptance of flaws that do not meet workmanship standards. Incentives for alternative standards are usually economic, arising due to the inaccessibility or quantity of welds that would otheIWise be repaired. Alternative standards recognize that the true severity of a flaw is dependent on material toughness and applied stress levels, and can only be determined using fracture mechanics principles. In pipeline industry the crack-tip opening displacement (CTOD) is most commonly used as the toughness measurement of welds, CTOD is established from destructive tests performed on weldments. If the pipeline is yet to be constructed, CTOD tests can be performed as part of the welding procedure qualification. If the pipeline is already in service and CTOD data are pot available, the welding procedures, consumable, and base materials used in construction may be used to duplicate welds for the purpose of CTOD testing. If anyone of these elements is no lonuer available, it ",ill be nccessary to obtain a representative weld for testing."

Fracture of Corroded and Cracked Girth Welds Corrosion of the weld material will lead to an increase in the stress level over the weld zone due to reduced local thickness and stress concentration when the pipeline is exposed to longitudinal tensile strain. In a UFPC capacity modeling of the corroded weld due to longitudinal tension, it is assumed that the weld defect is present together with the reduced wall-thickness of the weld due to corrosion. Due to the high number of welds (weld lengths) being exposed to a similar high strain level, the combined effect of having a surface weld defect and a reduced weld thickness due to corrosion is considered realistic. The thickness reduction due to corrosion is assumed only to affect the weld material, and not the base material, causing a high stress concentration. The corrosion reduction of the weld material will probably affect the weld only within the lower circumference of the pipe, but is for simplicity in the modeling assumed to be evenly distributed around the pipe circumference. It is further assumed that the weld defect is a semielliptical surface crack (defect depth a, total defect length 2c) located at the worst possible location with respect to the stress concentration, independently of the degree of corrosion. The corrosion results in a material reduction in the weld zone and thereby a stress concentration in the weld zone under longitudinal tension. To account for the stress concentration in the UFPC analysis, a fInite element analysis is carried out in order to determine the stress distribution over the weld thickness.

The stress distribution over the weld obtained from the finite element analysis is represented through a combined membrane and bending stress distribution over the weld thickness. The critical stress levels with respect to UFPC failure can be obtained from FAD analysis, for the different pipelines as a function of the degree of corrosion defect depth. The corresponding critical strain level is estimated using Ramberg-Osgood curve for the stress-strain relationship. The UFPC analysis can be carried out considering parameters: stress-strain relationship of the pipeline material yield and tensile strength of the weld material crOD value of the weld material depth of weld defect length of the weld defect residual stress the following

Schelze H.D., Togler G. and Bodmann E. (1980): "Fracture Mechanics Analysis on the Initia~on and Propagation of Circumferential and Longitudinal Defects in Straight Pipes and Pipe Bends," Xuclear Engineering and Design, Yo1.58, pp.l9-31.

OQeHlca

AecI>eKTOB B oKpynalhIx

CBapHhlX

ffiBax

Tpy6onpOBOAa. TIepH4Jepll'leCKOe pll3pymeHHe MOlKCTB03HHKHYI"L ,lletPel"'1f1lHOH B oKp)'"A<Holi cBapKe, KOr,lla Tpy6a HaxO,llHTCll nOli BLlCOKIDlH npolloJ1LHLIMH HarpYJKllMH (Rosenfeld and Kiefner, 1995). TIpIl'lHHa\lH TaKHX lle.<lJeKTOB MOIyr 6mL KOp03Hl1 IUH HellOCTaTO'lHOe nllaBlleHHe npH CBapKe. J{e<lJeKTl>!,B!>I3BaHH!>Ie Kop03HeH CJIy'lalOTCllnpeHMymeCTBeHHo B HHlKHeH 'lacru TpyOLI, B OCHOBHOM 04 110 08. TIpollolILHoe pll3pymeHHe nOli B03.:leilCTBHe~1 OT BHyrpeHHero llaBlleHHlI MOlKCT6LlTL Ol\eHeHO C HcnO.1L30BaHHe~1 KpHTepHll B31G (ASNIE 1993), HIIH ero MOllH<lJHlIHPOBaHHOH BCpCHH (Bai et al 1997). OllHaKO, k"pHTepHil B31G HenpHrOJIeH .J.1JIOUCHKH B03MOlKHOCTH B03HHKHOBeHHlI nepH<lJepll'leCKOrOP33pymcHlIJI. B cry'lae Limit State Design, B CTane paccMaTpHB3IOTcll ~IO.Je.1H OCHOBHLlX nOB pll3pymeHHH, TaKHXKaK nllaCTH'leCKoe p33pymcHHe m H TpelllHHa. PaccMoTpllB3IOTClI 06a BH,lla,- KOP03HollHLleiletPckThI H lle<lJeKTl>!, CB1I3aHIlLle C TpelllIlHa.',{II. P33pymeHIIJI, BLI3BaHHLIC MeCTHLP.>IH .ne<lJOpM3l\HJIMH paccMoTpeliLl B "Bal and Hauch" (1998). J{IIJI c'1)"l3JI nllaCTll'leCKOrO p33pymeHllJI .ne<lJeJ(TIlBHOil pyoLl B T HanpJllKeHHOM COCTOlllIlIH npellCTaBlleHLI c.lell)'IO!IUle Tpll allLTepHaTllBllLlXBLlp3lKeHHlI: KpHTepllil KaCTHepa JI,1JI cJIy'l3JI MeCTHoro p33pymcHHlI (Kastner's Local Collapse Criterion); KpHTepHH lllYIILua 1l1!Jl cJIy'l3JI rll06aHLHoro p33pymeHlIJI (Schulze's Global Collapse Criterion); . Chell Method. MII,l.lep (1988) peKOMell,lryCTIICnOIlL30BaHlle BLlp3lKeHHlIKaCTllepa, KOTopoe XOpOllJOcorHacyeTClI C)KCnepl~leHTaJILHLl~IHPe3y:u.TaTa\IlI. PaCC~laTpeHLI TpH YPOBHlI MCTO.!lOBllJlJl oueHKH TpeWlIH, B03HIIK3IOll\HX113-3a 113110MOB oKp)'"A<HoilcBapKe, a 1l\leHHO: B CTaH.JapTLi no Ka'leCTBY BLlTIOIIHeHHlI, pHTepHII a.1LTepllaTllBHOrO K npHHJlTHJlII lleTa.TLHLIH aHaJIII3MeXaHlIKH TpelllHH. TpelllHHLI B plKaBLlX II TpecHYTLlX P3llHiL1bHLIX cBapHLlX illaax Ol\eHIIBaIOTClI COOTBeTCTBHH CTaHl\apTOM no MeXaHllKeTpClllHH B co BSIIPD6493, npllHHM3IOlllHM TalOKe BO BHHMalllle KOHuellTp3l.lHlO HanplllKeHllli, BLI3BaHH)"IO KOP03110HHLL\l1I.netPeKTa\lH. O;rHaKo B03MOlKHO, 'ITO nOT MeTOll lIBl!JleTCJI CJIlIllJKOM TlJYObN, T.K. npe;mo.laraCT HamcYllLllJee CO'lCTaHlle KOPP03110HHLlX;retPe""TOB, TpemllH H Harpy30K. KIIIO'leBLle CIIOBa: Tpy6onpoBOll, OKpYlKH3JI cBapKa, KOpp03Hl1, nepeoueHKa, nllaCTH'lCCKOe p33pyuleHHe, TpelllllHa.

This method could, however, be over-conservative, because it assumes worst combination of corrosion defect, crack and loads.

The paper presented criteria for assessment of circumefrential failure of girth weld, considering failure modes of plastic collapse and fracture. For plastic collapse, three alternative equations are presented and Kantner's equation is recommended. For girth weld cracks, both cracks and combined cracks and corrosion defects are considered.

API Il04 (1988); "Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities," API ]J 04, 17th Ed., Sept. 1988. ASME B&PY Code, Section VIII, Division I, Article UW-51, Radiographic Examination of Welded Joint; Appendix 4, Acceptance Standards for Radiographically Deternuned Rounded Indications in Welds; and Appendix 12, Ultrasonic Examination of Welds (UT). AS ME B31G (1993), "Manual for Determining the Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipes", American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1993. Bai, Y., Xu, T. and Bea, R., (1997) "Reliability-based Requalification Criteria for Longitudinally Corroded
ISOPE'97.

Design Pipes",

Bai, Y. and Hauch, S. (1998). "Analytical Collapse Capacity of Corroded Pipes," Proc. of ISOPE'98. BSI (1991); Acceptability "PD6493 - Guidance on Methods for Assessing the of Flaws in Fusion Welded Structures," Published

Documents by British Standards Institute.

Chell, G.G. (1979): "Elastic-plastic Fracture mechanics," De:velopment in Fracture Mechanics- I, Edited by Chell G.G. Kastner E., Roehrich E., Schmitt W. and Steinbuch E. (198 I): "Critical Crack Sizes in Ductile Piping," Int. J Pres. Yes. and Piping, Yo1.9, pp.l97-219 Miller A.G. (1988): "Review of Limit Loads of Structures Containing Defects," Int. J Pres. Yes. & Piping, 32, pp.l97-327. Newman J. and Raju 1. (1981): "An Empirical Stress-Intensity Factor for the Surface Crack," Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 22(6), pp.185-192.