International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 179 (2020) 103941

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpvp

Instability moment predictions for complex through-wall cracked pipes of T

low alloy steel
Yeji Kima, Young-Jin Ohb,∗, Yun-Jae Kimc, Jin-Weon Kimd, Heung-Bae Parkb
a
Korean Institute of Nuclear Safety, Republic of Korea
b
Power Engineering Research Institute, KEPCO E&C Co., Ltd., Republic of Korea
c
School of Mechanical Engineering, Korea University, Republic of Korea
d
Department of Nuclear Engineering, Chosun University, Republic of Korea

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The complex through-wall cracks (TWC) that have been discovered in the dissimilar metal weld of nuclear power
Complex through-wall crack plants have different fracture behavior compared with the simple TWC that is typically assumed in a flaw
Instability moment evaluation. In this regards, a number of prior research has aimed at developing an appropriate J-estimation
J-R curve scheme and constructing of the J-R curve that can be utilized for complex crack analysis. In the present paper,
J-estimation formula
instability moments of complex TWC pipes of low alloy steel were calculated through the crack driving force
Complex cracked tension specimen
diagram approach, employing J-estimation formula for complex crack recently developed. As a fracture prop-
erty, the test data of complex crack tension (CCT) specimen was used. Comparing with the prediction results of
FE analysis using a damage model, it was observed that this procedure could provide an accurate prediction of
the instability moment with the reasonable conservatism.

1. Introduction
Typically, idealized shapes of surface crack or through-wall crack
(TWC) have been considered in standard analysis procedures for
cracked pipes of nuclear power plants (NPP)[1–3]. The flaws actually
found, however, could be significantly different from the shapes of the
idealized simple TWC as shown in Fig. 1 (a) and (b). In the recirculation
inlet nozzle safe end of the Duane Arnold Reactor, an intergranular
stress-corrosion crack (IGSCC) including both internal surface crack and
partially through-wall crack (see Fig. 1 (a)) was discovered in 1978 [4].
Several circumferential cracks found at the pressurizer nozzle of the
Wolf Creek nuclear power plant in 2006 were also identified that it
could be developed into a complex crack due to primary water stress
corrosion crack [5].
In the early 2010s, the United States Nuclear Regulatory Committee
(US NRC) Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) conducted a
program to investigate the behavior of complex cracks in dissimilar
metal (DM) welds [6–8]. As summarized in the second and third row of
Table 1, they tried two approaches using J-estimation solution for
simple TWC pipes due to the lack of the J-estimation scheme for
complex TWC pipes. First, the simple TWC J-estimation scheme was
employed assuming that the pipe wall thickness is equal to the depth of
crack ligament. For the material resistance, the CT specimen was
considered. Compared with the test results, the maximum moment in
the load-displacement curves (instability moment) and the compliance
of pipe were not properly predicted as shown in Fig. 2 (a) [6]. In
subsequent research, an effort was made to account the more appro-
priate J-estimation scheme and J-R characteristics [8]. In this case, the
pipe wall thickness was assumed as the full pipe thickness not con-
sidering surface crack depth, and the J-R curves determined from
complex TWC pipe tests was applied to the prediction of instability
moments. Although the load-displacement curve shapes in the initial
part are closer to the experimental results than the case of using the J-R
curve of CT specimen, the results suggested that there are still gaps
requiring further works to investigate the characteristics of complex
cracked pipes [8].
More recently, the closed-form expressions of the fully plastic crack-
opening displacement (COD) for complex cracked pipes were devel-
oped, and the GE-EPRI type J-estimation scheme procedures using the
newly proposed plastic influence functions were suggested as well
[9–11]. With regard to the experimental aspects, the authors conducted
the J-R test using complex cracked tension (CCT) specimens for their
application to complex TWC pipe assessment [12,13]. Based on these
earlier studies, in the present paper, the fracture behavior of complex
TWC pipe is assessed using the J-estimation scheme for complex TWC
pipes and the fracture test results of CCT specimens. The approach of

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: yjoh2@kepco-enc.com (Y.-J. Oh).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2019.103941

Available online 25 July 2019

0308-0161/ © 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Y. Kim, et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 179 (2020) 103941

Nomenclature n Ramberg-Osgood constant, Strain hardening exponent

t Pipe wall thickness
B Thickness of CT or CCT specimen tc Depth of internal surface crack in complex cracked pipes
CCT specimen Complex Cracked Tension specimen tn Net thickness(=t-tc)
COD Crack Opening Displacement α Ramberg-Osgood constant
E Elastic modulus of material β Constant in Eq. (2), (β = 2 for plane stress, β = 6 for plane
FCC Shape factor for stress intensity factor of complex cracked strain)
pipes ε Strain
Japp Applied J-integral Δεep Equivalent plastic strain increment
Mapp Applied bending moment εf Fracture strain
MLCC Limit bending moment for complex cracked pipes εy Yield strain
Rm Pipe mean radius η Ratio of pipe wall thickness to net thickness (=t/tn)
Rmc Mean radius of ligament (=(Ro+(Ro-tn))/2) θ Half angle of through-wall region of crack in complex
VCC Shape factor for COD of complex cracked pipes cracked pipes
W Width of CT or CCT specimen σ Stress
a0 Initial crack length of CT or CCT specimen σb,∞ Remote stress arisen from bending moment
ae Effective crack length σe Equivalent stress
h1CC Plastic influence functions for J-estimation of complex σm Hydrostatic stress
cracked pipes σy Yield strength
h2CC Plastic influence functions for COD of complex cracked Δω Incremental damage due to plastic deformation
pipes ωc Critical damage

Fig. 1. Examples of TWC pipe shape. (a) Experience at Duane Arnold [4], (b) Idealized shape of simple TWC, (c) Idealized shape of complex TWC.

Table 1
Comparisons of approaches in previous and present study for prediction of complex TWC pipe.
Applied J-integral J-R curve Instability prediction results for complex TWC
pipes
Previous study in Ref. [6] Engineering formula for simple TWC pipe with J-R test using 1TCT specimen Significantly underestimated (Fig. 2 (a))
reduced thickness1)
Previous study in Ref. [8] Engineering formula for simple TWC pipe with full J-R test using complex TWC pipe Significantly overestimated (Fig. 2 (b))
pipe thickness specimen
Present study Engineering formula for complex TWC pipe, J-R test using complex cracked tension –
developed in ref.[9–11] (CCT) specimen

Note 1) Reduced thickness = Thickness of uncracked ligament region.

this study is summarized in the fourth row of Table 1. Fig. 3 (a) and (b)
show the schematics of CCT specimen and the crack driving force
diagram for calculating load-displacement curves of cracked pipes.
Considering the fracture behavior characteristics of low alloy steel, the
net-section collapse criterion is not taken into account in this study.
In order to validate the accuracy of instability moment prediction
results, the finite element (FE) damage analysis for complex TWC pipes
was conducted. The FE damage analysis (Fig. 3 (c)) is an efficient and
reliable method for simulating ductile failure behavior of complex
structures that utilize the damage model defined using tensile and
fracture toughness properties of material [14]. This method was already
validated for various types of cracked pipes and materials [15]. Espe-
cially, the predictions of ductile tearing behavior for complex TWC pipe
fabricated from ferritic steels were in excellent agreement with the
experimental data, as shown in Fig. 4 [16].
2. J estimation formula for complex TWC pipes
For J-estimation of a cracked pipe, several engineering schemes
have been suggested, and among them, the most generally used one is
the GE-EPRI method [17] based on deformation plasticity theory and
with the Ramberg-Osgood (R–O) relation as follows;
n
= +
y y y (1)
where σy, εy, α and n denote yield strength, yield strain, and R–O
constants, respectively. In the GE-EPRI method, the most important
element to calculate J-integral is the plastic influence functions, which
are function of the geometry of pipe, crack length and strain hardening
exponent, calibrated using FE analyses. Huh et al. presented a series of

2
Y. Kim, et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 179 (2020) 103941

Fig. 2. Instability moment prediction results of complex TWC pipes from earlier researches by US NRC [6–8] (Symbols and bold dash lines show the pipe experiment
results and the prediction results, respectively.).

Fig. 3. Approaches of fracture prediction and validation for complex TWC pipes. (a) Schematics of CCT specimens, (b) Crack driving force diagram, (c) Examples of
FE damage analysis model of a complex TWC pipe.

paper, in which the influence functions for GE-EPRI based J and crack 1 1 n 1 b,
2
2
opening displacement (COD) estimation were calibrated according to a e = Rm 1+ 2
FCC
1+ (Mapp /MLCC ) n+1 y
the strain-hardening exponents and the geometric variables of a com-
plex TWC pipe subjected global bending moment, axial tension and
internal pressure [9–11]. The engineering formulae for J and COD of 8 1 1+
MLCC = 2
y Rmc tn sin + sin
complex TWC pipes under bending moment are summarized, as fol- 3 2 2 1+
lows:
Mapp
b, =
2
b,
2
a e FCC Mapp
n+1 Rm2 t
Japp = + y y Rm ( ) h1CC
E MLCC (2) = t /tn

n
Mapp, Japp, COD and E are applied bending moment, applied J-in-
4 b, a e VCC Mapp tegral, crack opening displacement and elastic modulus, respectively. θ,
COD = + y Rm h2CC
E MLCC (3) Rm, Rmc, t, tc and tn are the geometrical configurations of pipe and crack
depicted in Fig. 5. VCC is a function of Rm / t , / and tc / t . h1CC and h2CC
are functions of Rm / t , / , tc / t and n . The tables of VCC , h1CC and h2CC

3
Y. Kim, et al.
Fig. 4. Examples of FE damage analysis results which agree well with pipe fracture experimental results (load – load line displacement curves) [16].
Fig. 5. Pipe and crack geometry parameters in idealized complex TWC pipes.
are presented in the reference [9–11].
As described in the introduction, the previous study employed the
solutions for TWC for predicting complex-cracked pipe behavior base
on the assumption that the pipe wall thickness is equal to i) the liga-
ment of complex crack, or ii) total depth of complex crack (see Table 1),
and the significant differences were observed compared with the ex-
perimental data of pipes (see Fig. 2) [6,8,18]. The analysis was con-
ducted to identify the amount of conservatism of these assumptions
compared with the solution in Eqs. (2) and (3). Fig. 6 summarizes the
comparison results of J-integral obtained using the newly developed J
estimation formula for complex-cracked pipe (line) and the GE-EPRI
solution for TWC pipe (symbol). The differences of J-integral indicate
that the reduced thickness simple TWC assumptions can lead to over-
estimation of COD and underestimation of maximum loads, which is
agreed with the results of earlier researches using the reduced thickness
assumption [6,8,18].
3. J-R curve construction using CCT specimen
3.1. Experiments
In this subsection, the experiments to evaluate the material prop-
erties conducted in the author's earlier studies are summarized [12,13].
4
International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 179 (2020) 103941
Test specimens were fabricated from the SA508 Gr. 1a low alloy steel
material which is typically adopted in the primary coolant piping of
Korean nuclear power plants. The tensile and fracture toughness tests
were conducted at room (20 °C) and operating (316 °C) temperatures.
The procedures of each test are also addressed here in some detail.
For the tensile tests, the standard cylindrical specimen with a dia-
meter of 5 mm, gage length of 25 mm, and uniform length of 38 mm
was employed based on the ASTM standard E8-09 [19]. The tests were
conducted using a motor-driven universal testing machine at a quasi-
static strain rate of 3.947 × 10−4/s. Strain was measured using the
high temperature extensometers with a gage length of 25 mm. The
tensile properties are summarized in Fig. 7(a).
Compact tension (CT) specimens were utilized for evaluating the
fracture resistance of simple TWC. The specimen was designed in-
cluding side-groove and pre-crack according to ASTM E1820-08 stan-
dard [20], and fabricated to make the crack propagation be oriented
with the circumferential direction of the pipe. Other detailed config-
urations of the specimen are summarized in Table 1. To simulate the
behavior of complex cracked pipe, complex cracked tension (CCT)
specimens were employed based on the past study on the development
of a novel complex-cracked fracture specimen [21]. The detailed con-
figurations of the specimen were determined as shown in Table 2. The
notches were machined by the electric discharge machining (EDM) and
then fatigue pre-cracking was conducted as shown in Fig. 7(c). The
applied load during fatigue pre-cracking was determined based on the
maximum stress intensity factor at crack tip obtained from FE analysis.
During ductile crack growth of CCT specimen, several times unloading
sequences were employed in order to make crack shape mark in the
fracture surface. The examples of test results for CT and CCT specimen
are represented in Fig. 7(b).
3.2. FEA assisted normalization method
Typically, J-R tests are conducted in accordance with a standard
procedure (e.g., ASTM E1820 [20]) and using the unloading com-
pliance method. A crack extension is determined by the change of un-
loading slope, and J-integral is determined by load-displacement area
and plastic η-factor. However, this standard procedure cannot be ap-
plied to CCT specimen because this is the non-standard specimen. The
normalization method is also a standard procedure that is generally
acceptable to determine crack extension [20,22,23]. This method re-
quires the normalized load-(plastic) displacement curves which re-
present the hypothetical deformation curves without crack extension.
To this end, the load-displacement curve and final crack length of the
Y. Kim, et al.
Fig. 6. J-integral characteristics of complex TWC pipes and reduced thickness simple TWC pipes.
standard specimen are needed. Thus, the implementation of the nor-
malization method can be limited to the standard specimens.
In this context, the authors tried to develop the FEA-assisted nor-
malization method. In this approach, the normalization curves are ob-
tained based on the detailed 3-dimensional FE analysis [13]. If the FE
analysis is conducted, one can determine normalization curves as well
as J-integral values in all range of deformation and crack lengths. Using
these tabulated data, J-integral and crack extension values can be de-
termined without using the plastic η-factor approach. Fig. 8 shows the
schematic diagram for the FEA-assisted normalization method. Al-
though it needs detailed FE analysis and complicated iterative calcu-
lations, this procedure can be successfully applied to construct J-R
curves of non-standard fracture specimens without η-factor formula.
3.3. J-R curve construction
In the present study, J-R curves for CT specimens and CCT speci-
mens were determined using the tensile and fracture test data of the
SA508 Gr.1a material. Fig. 9 shows the 3-dimensional FE models for CT
and CCT specimens, and Fig. 10 shows examples of FE analysis results
compared with the experimental data. In the case of CT specimen, the
hypothetical crack front shape can be assumed to be a straight line,
therefore the FE models including various size of crack can be easily
constructed. However, in the case of CCT specimen, the crack front does
not have simple straight line as shown in Fig. 7 (c). In this case, several
smooth curves for the hypothetical crack front line were determined
using measured crack configurations in the fracture surface, then the FE
models for CCT specimens were made. An example of measured crack
5
International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 179 (2020) 103941
front lines of a CCT specimen was presented in the right side of Fig. 9.
Fig. 11 shows the comparisons of J-R curves obtained based on the
FEA-assisted normalization method described in subsection 3.2 for the
CT and CCT specimens. As shown in this figure, the J-R curves of CCT
specimen are significantly lower than those of the CT specimen. The
reduction of the fracture toughness in complex-crack is evident re-
gardless of the test temperature. These results imply that the non-con-
servative results can be obtained when the J-R curves of CT specimen
are used for the complex crack analysis without considering the dif-
ference of constraint condition between a complex TWC pipe and a CT
specimen.
4. Instability moment prediction of complex TWC pipes
4.1. Instability moment prediction using CDFD approach
The crack driving force diagram (CDFD) approach based on the J-
integral was employed to predict the instability moment. In this ap-
proach, the crack driving force (applied J-integral) was compared with
the material resistance to crack growth (J-R curve) to predict a load at
instability [24].
For simple TWC pipe analysis, GE-EPRI based J estimation formula
for a TWC pipe was used to calculate the applied J, and J-R curves of
(1T)CT specimen were applied. In the case of complex TWC pipe, three
different schemes of analysis were performed as follows;
i) case 1: applied J for reduced thickness simple TWC pipe and J-R
curves of (1T)CT specimen
Y. Kim, et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 179 (2020) 103941

Fig. 7. Tensile and fracture test results of SA508 Gr.1a low alloy steel.

Table 2
Fracture test specimen geometry.
CT specimen CCT specimen
W 50.8 mm (1T)CT W 72 mm
101.6 mm (2T)CT
B 25.4 mm (20% S.G.) t 12 mm
tc ~8 mm (tc/t = 0.67)
a0 30–33 mm a0 26–29 mm

Fig. 8. Schematic diagram for the procedure of the FEA-assisted normalization method.

6
Y. Kim, et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 179 (2020) 103941

Fig. 9. Examples of 3-dimensional FE models for CT and CCT specimens.

Fig. 10. Examples of FE analysis results compared with the experimental data.

Fig. 11. J-R curves determined from CT and CCT specimens of SA508 Gr.1a low alloy steel material.

ii) case 2: applied J for complex TWC pipe using the solution addressed
in section 2 and J-R curves of (1T)CT specimen
iii) case 3: applied J for complex TWC pipe using the solution addressed
in section 2 and J-R curves of CCT specimen
The geometrical configurations of the pipe were taken to be as
follows; Rm of 152.4 mm (6 inches), Rm/t of 5, through wall crack
lengths (θ/π) of 0.2 and 0.4 (See Table 3). In case of complex cracked
pipe, two surface crack depths (tc/t = 0.5, 0.7) were considered.
4.2. Instability moment prediction using FE damage analysis
A series of FE damage analysis was conducted to validate the in-
stability moments predicted using the CDFD approach. The FE damage

7
Y. Kim, et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 179 (2020) 103941

Table 3
Geometrical configurations of simple and complex TWC pipe considered in instability moment predictions.
Simple TWC pipe Complex TWC Pipe
Rm 152.4 mm (6 in.) Rm 152.4 mm (6 in.)
t 30.48 mm (1.2 in.) t 30.48 mm (1.2 in.)
θ/π 0.2, 0.4
θ/π 0.2, 0.4 tc/t 0.5, 0.7

Fig. 12. Finite element model to predict instability moment using damage analysis.

Fig. 13. Load-displacement curve prediction by CDFD compared with damage model FEA - 20 °C.

analysis is a convenient method for simulating ductile failure behavior m

= 2.7306exp 1.5 + 0.0858 for 20 °C
of complex structures when detailed experimental data are not avail- f
e (5)
able. In this analysis, the damage model can be defined using the tensile
and fracture toughness properties of material [14]. The multi-axial
fracture strain damage model was employed in this paper in which the f = 1.9982exp 1.5 m
+ 0.3830 for 316 °C
fracture strain ( f ) is represented as; e (6)

where σm and σe are hydrostatic stress and equivalent stress, respec-

tively. A, B and C are material constants. By comparing the FE damage
m
f = Aexp B +C
e (4) analysis results with the test data described in subsection 3.1, the da-
mage models for SA508 Gr. 1a material were determined as follows;
The incremental damage due to plastic deformation ( ) is defined

8
Y. Kim, et al.
Fig. 14. Load-displacement curve prediction by CDFD compared with damage model FEA - 316 °C.
Fig. 15. Instability moment prediction by CDFD compared with damage model
FEA (black solid line and dash line indicate 1:1 line and 1:0.8 line, respec-
tively).
as the ratio of the equivalent plastic strain increment ( ep ) to the
fracture strain ( f ) [See equation (7)]. The user subroutines were
mounted on the commercial program ABAQUS [25] to provide a rapid
reduction in stress when the accumulated damage reaches the critical
Fig. 16. Crack growth (extension) directions of (a) simple TWC pipes and (b) CT specimen.
9
International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 179 (2020) 103941
value ( c ). The critical damages for SA508 Gr.1a material were de-
termined as 0.7 and 0.34 at room temperature and operating tem-
perature for 0.6 mm size element.
p
e
=
f (7)
A series of FE damage analysis was then performed to predict the
maximum load at the instability of cracked pipes. The FE meshes of half
model are depicted in Fig. 12. Eight-node brick elements with full in-
tegration (C3D8 in ABAQUS [25]) are employed. The crack tip regions
are modeled with the 0.6 mm size of elements. A total number of nodes
and elements were ranged from 100,403 to 104,843 to 171,810 and
176,936. As a loading condition, a bending moment was applied to a
point constrained with nodes at pipe end, and contact between inner
surface cracks was considered. Simulation results will be compared
with the prediction results of subsection 4.1.
4.3. Instability moment of complex TWC pipes
The load-displacement curves obtained using the CDFD approach
and FE damage analysis are compared in Fig. 13 and Fig. 14 under 20 °C
and 316 °C conditions, respectively. The predicted instability moment
values are compared with each other in Fig. 15. Note that the results of
simple TWC pipes can be referred to confirm that the CT specimen is
appropriate to predict the behavior of simple TWC pipes. It means that
constraint conditions of CT specimen are comparable with those of
TWC pipe.
In this study, three different cases of CDFD analysis were considered
Y. Kim, et al.
Fig. 17. Crack growth (extension) directions. (a) Hypothetical crack growth directions of a complex TWC pipe, (b) Real crack growth directions of a complex TWC
pipe, (c) Hypothetical and real crack growth directions of a CCT specimen.
to assess the instability of complex TWC pipes as described in section
4.1. In the case of using the applied J-integral of (reduced thickness)
simple TWC pipe and J-R curve of CT specimen, the maximum loads at
instability were predicted to be 15–40% lower than the FE damage
analysis results. It indicates that the reduced thickness simple TWC
assumptions are over-conservative to predict instability moments of
complex TWC pipes.
Instead, when the applied J-integral is calculated using the formula
for complex TWC pipe in section 2, the instability moments are ob-
tained to be 5–30% higher than the FE damage analysis results. How-
ever, in case of both the applied J of complex TWC pipe and J-R curve
of CCT specimen are considered, the CDFD assessment gives more ac-
curate results with the reasonable level of conservatism than other
cases. It means that the J-integral of complex TWC pipe has to be used
for assessing complex TWC pipes. In addition, it also means that the
constraint levels of CT specimen are lower than those of complex TWC
pipes and the CCT specimen can be utilized to provide the J-R curves
for evaluating the stability of complex TWC pipes.
4.4. Discussion on the use of CCT specimen
In the fracture analysis for pipe with a simple TWC, the directions of
crack growth is typically assumed to be perpendicular to their crack
front line as the simple TWC pipe actually behaves (see Fig. 16).
Therefore, the employment of J-estimation for hypothetical pipe model
and J-R curve from CT specimens can properly reflect the fracture be-
havior of simple TWC pipe. In the case of complex crack, however, the
crack propagates in both radial and circumferential directions as de-
picted in Fig. 17(b). In the viewpoint of J-estimation of complex TWC
pipes, it is complicated and impractical to consider the configurations
of real crack and direction of crack growth. In order to use engineering
formula for calculating J of complex TWC pipes according to the
10
International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 179 (2020) 103941
previous research [10], the hypothetical crack growth direction was
defined in the present study as shown in Fig. 17 (a).
This assumption can raise an additional problem that the hypothe-
tical crack growth direction is not perpendicular to the real crack front
line. This also implies that CT specimen is not applicable to predict the
complex TWC pipe fracture accompanying with the J-estimation for-
mula for complex crack (Eq. (2)). As shown in Fig. 17 (c), the crack
front shapes of CCT specimen are more similar with those of real
complex TWC pipe. Due to the uneven configuration of crack front, J-R
curves constructed from CCT specimen cannot be regarded as material
properties, but can be very useful to predict approximate behavior of
complex TWC pipe fracture as shown in Fig. 15 since the crack front
configuration of CCT specimens is more similar with that of complex
TWC pipes.
5. Conclusions
The present paper introduced the earlier studies on the engineering
formula for applied J-integral and COD of complex TWC pipes and the
J-R curve construction procedure for non-standard specimens. Based on
the earlier research results, instability moment predictions of complex
TWC pipes were conducted using the J estimation formula of simple
TWC and complex TWC pipes as well as J-R curves of CT and CCT
specimens. The results of comparisons with the FE damage analysis
show that the reduced thickness simple TWC assumptions for predicting
the complex crack instability could be over-conservative. It was also
observed that the applied J formula for complex crack accompanying
with the use of J-R curve of CCT specimen could accurately predict the
instability moment with the reasonable conservatism.
Y. Kim, et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 179 (2020) 103941

Acknowledgements [11] J.-U. Jeong, J.-B. Choi, N.-S. Huh, Y.-J. Kim, Fully plastic crack opening analyses of
complex-cracked pipes for Ramberg-Osgood materials, J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 30 (4)
(2016) 1563–1572.
The authors would like to express their gratitude to Professor Nam- [12] H.-B. Park, et al., Development of Improved Methodology for Enhancing Leak-
Su Huh for his kind discussions about using engineering formula of J Before-Break Margin of Advanced PWR and OPR-1000, Final Report of the Research
and COD assessment of complex TWC pipes. Project Supported by KETEP, Project No.20131520202170, Republic of Korea,
2016.
[13] J.-W. Kim, I.-H. Song, Y. Kim, Y.-J. Oh, J-R curve characteristics of complex
References through-wall cracked specimens, Asian Conference on Experimental Mechanics,
Jeju, Korea, Nov. 13-16, 2016.
[14] J.-H. Kim, N.-H. Kim, Y.-J. Kim, K. Hasegawa, K. Miyazaki, Ductile fracture simu-
[1] ASME Code Section XI Task Group for Piping Evaluation, Evaluation of Flaws in
lation of 304 stainless steel pipes with two circumferential surface cracks, Fatigue
Austenitic Steel Piping, EPRI Report NP-4690-SR, Electric Power Research Institute,
Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct. 36 (2013) 1067–1080.
Palo Alto, CA, 1986.
[15] J.-H. Kim, A Full Scaled Ductile Pipe Fracture Simulation Method Using Finite
[2] NUREG-0800, Leak-Before-Break Evaluation Procedures, US NRC Standard Review
Elements Based on Element-size-dependent Critical Damage Model, Korea
Plan 3.6.3 Revision 1, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.,
University, 2013 Ph.D. Thesis.
2007.
[16] K.-D. Bae, H.-W. Ryu, Y.-J. Kim, J.-S. Kim, Comparison of ductile tearing simulation
[3] NUREG-1061 Vol 3, Report of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Piping
with complex cracked pipe test data, J. Press. Vessel Technol. 139 (2017) 011203-1-
Review Committee-Evaluation of Potential for Pipe Breaks, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
011203-11.
Commission, Washington, D.C., 1984.
[17] V. Kumar, M.D. German, Elastic-plastic Fracture Analysis of Through-Wall and
[4] NUREG-0531, Investigation and Evaluation of Stress-Corrosion Cracking in Piping
Surface Flaws in Cylinders, EPRI Report NP-5596, Electric Power Research Institute,
of Light Water Reactor Plants, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
Palo Alto, CA, 1988.
D.C., 1979.
[18] S. Rahman, F. Brust, N. Ghadiali, G. Wilkowski, Crack-opening-area analyses for
[5] D. Rudland, D.-J. Shim, T. Zhang, G. Wilkowski, Implication of Wolf Creek
circumferential through-wall cracks in pipes - part II: model validations, Int. J.
Indications—Final Report, Report No. ML072470394, Engineering Mechanics
Press. Vessel. Pip. 75 (1998) 375–396.
Corporation of Columbus, Columbus, OH, 2007.
[19] American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard Test Methods for Tension
[6] D. Rudland, R. Lukes, P. Scott, R. Olson, A. Cox, D.-J. Shim, Dissimilar metal weld
Testing on Metallic Materials, ASTM E8/E8M-09, 2009.
pipe fracture testing: analysis of results and their implications, PVP2012-78140,
[20] American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard Test Method for Measurement
Proceedings of the ASME 2012 Pressure Vessels & Piping Conference, 2012.
of Fracture Toughness, (2008) ASTM E1820-08.
[7] A. Cox, R. Olson, B.A. Young, P. Scott, D. Rudland, Dissimilar metal weld pipe
[21] D.-J. Shim, G. Wilkowski, S. Kalyanam, F. Brust, A novel fracture specimen for
fracture testing: experimental procedures and results, PVP2012-78353, Proceedings
assessment of circumferential complex-cracks in pipes, PVP2012-78188,
of the ASME 2012 Pressure Vessels & Piping Conference, 2012.
Proceedings of the ASME 2012 Pressure Vessels & Piping Conference, 2012.
[8] D. Rudland, M. Benson, D.-J. Shim, Fracture toughness behavior of complex cracks
[22] J.D. Landes, Z. Zhou, K. Lee, R. Herrera, Normalization method for developing J-R
in dissimilar metal welds, PVP2014-28105, Proceedings of the ASME 2014 Pressure
curves with the LMN function, J. Test. Eval. 19 (4) (1991) 305–311.
Vessels & Piping Conference, 2014.
[23] Y.-J. Oh, I.-S. Hwang, J.A. Joyce, Round robin test on normalization method under
[9] J.-U. Jeong, J.-B. Choi, N.-S. Huh, Y.-J. Kim, Stress intensity factor and elastic crack
static loading condition, J. Test. Eval. 34 (6) (2006) 537–561.
opening displacement solutions of complex cracks in pipe using elastic finite-ele-
[24] T.L. Anderson, Fracture Mechanics: Fundamentals and Applications, third ed., CRC
ment analyses, J. Press. Vessel Technol. 138 (1) (2016) 011206-1-011206-11.
press, Boca Raton, 2005.
[10] J.-U. Jeong, J.-B. Choi, M.-K. Kim, N.-S. Huh, Y.-J. Kim, Plastic influence functions
[25] Dassault Systems Simulia Corp, ABAQUS Version 6.13, User’s manual, 2013.
for calculating J-integral of complex-cracks in pipe, Int. J. Press. Vessel. Pip. 146
(2016) 11–21.

11