ASME BPVC.VIII.2-2021 5.4.1.2 – 5.5.1.

5.4.1.2 The design factor to be used in a structural stability assessment is based on the type of buckling analysis
performed. The following design factors shall be the minimum values for use with shell components when the buckling
loads are determined using a numerical solution (i.e., bifurcation buckling analysis or elastic–plastic collapse analysis).
(a) Type 1 – If a bifurcation buckling analysis is performed using an elastic stress analysis without geometric nonli-
nearities in the solution to determine the pre-stress in the component, a minimum design factor of Φ B = 2/B c r shall be
used (see 5.4.1.3). In this analysis, the pre-stress in the component is established based on Design Load Combinations
(1) through (9) in Table 5.3.
(b) Type 2 – If a bifurcation buckling analysis is performed using an elastic–plastic stress analysis with the effects of
non-linear geometry in the solution to determine the pre-stress in the component, a minimum design factor of Φ B =
1.667/β c r shall be used (see 5.4.1.3). In this analysis, the pre-stress in the component is established based on Design
Load Combinations (1) through (9) in Table 5.3.
(c) Type 3 – If a collapse analysis is performed in accordance with 5.2.4, and imperfections are explicitly considered in
the analysis model geometry, the design factor is accounted for in the factored load combinations in Table 5.5. It should
be noted that a collapse analysis can be performed using elastic or plastic material behavior. If the structure remains
elastic when subject to the applied loads, the elastic–plastic material model will provide the required elastic behavior,
and the collapse load will be computed based on this behavior.

n n
5.4.1.3 The capacity reduction factors, β c r , shown below shall be used unless alternative factors can be developed
from published information.
(a) For unstiffened or ring stiffened cylinders and cones under axial compression

aw ke
ð5:12Þ

k ð5:13Þ

(b) For unstiffened and ring stiffened cylinders and cones under external pressure
ith ro
ð5:14Þ

(c) For spherical shells and spherical, torispherical, elliptical heads under external pressure

ð5:15Þ
dr
t

5.4.2 Numerical Analysis. If a numerical analysis is performed to determine the buckling load for a component, all
ge

possible buckling mode shapes shall be considered in determining the minimum buckling load for the component. Care
should be taken to ensure that simplification of the model does not result in exclusion of a critical buckling mode shape.
For example, when determining the minimum buckling load for a ring-stiffened cylindrical shell, both axisymmetric and
non-axisymmetric buckling modes shall be considered in determination of the minimum buckling load.
In

5.5 PROTECTION AGAINST FAILURE FROM CYCLIC LOADING

W

5.5.1 OVERVIEW
5.5.1.1 A fatigue evaluation shall be performed if the component is subject to cyclic operation. The evaluation for
fatigue is made on the basis of the number of applied cycles of a stress or strain range at a point in the component. The
allowable number of cycles should be adequate for the specified number of cycles as given in the User’s Design
Specification.
5.5.1.2 Screening criteria are provided in 5.5.2 that can be used to determine if fatigue analysis is required as part of
a design. If the component does not satisfy the screening criteria, a fatigue evaluation shall be performed using the tech-
niques in 5.5.3, 5.5.4 or 5.5.5.
5.5.1.3 Fatigue curves are typically presented in two forms: fatigue curves that are based on smooth bar test speci-
mens and fatigue curves that are based on test specimens that include weld details of quality consistent with the fab-
rication and inspection requirements of this Division.
(a) Smooth bar fatigue curves may be used for components with or without welds. The welded joint curves shall only
be used for welded joints.
(b) The smooth bar fatigue curves are applicable up to the maximum number of cycles given on the curves. The
welded joint fatigue curves do not exhibit an endurance limit and are acceptable for all cycles.

587

Dit document is door NEN onder licentie verstrekt aan: / This document has been supplied under license by NEN to:
Pallas Reactor GLavayen@invap.com.ar 2023-10-11 14:58:04
5.5.1.3 – 5.5.2.3 ASME BPVC.VIII.2-2021

(c) If welded joint fatigue curves are used in the evaluation, and if thermal transients result in a through-thickness
stress difference at any time that is greater than the steady-state difference, the number of design cycles shall be deter-
mined as the smaller of the number of cycles for the base metal established using either 5.5.3 or 5.5.4, and for the weld
established in accordance with 5.5.5.
5.5.1.4 Stresses and strains produced by any load or thermal condition that does not vary during the cycle need not
be considered in a fatigue analysis if the fatigue curves utilized in the evaluation are adjusted for mean stresses and
strains. The design fatigue curves referenced in 5.5.3 and 5.5.4 are based on smooth bar test specimens and are adjusted
for the maximum possible effect of mean stress and strain; therefore, an adjustment for mean stress effects is not re-
quired. The fatigue curves referenced in 5.5.5 are based on welded test specimens and include explicit adjustments
for thickness and mean stress effects.
5.5.1.5 Under certain combinations of steady-state and cyclic loadings there is a possibility of ratcheting. A rigorous
evaluation of ratcheting normally requires an elastic–plastic analysis of the component; however, under a limited num-
ber of loading conditions, an approximate analysis can be utilized based on the results of an elastic stress analysis, see
5.5.6.
5.5.1.6 Protection against ratcheting shall be considered for all operating loads listed in the User’s Design Specifi-

n n
cation and shall be performed even if the fatigue screening criteria are satisfied (see 5.5.2). Protection against ratcheting
is satisfied if one of the following three conditions is met:
(a) The loading results in only primary stresses without any cyclic secondary stresses.

aw ke
(b) Elastic Stress Analysis Criteria – Protection against ratcheting is demonstrated by satisfying the rules of 5.5.6.
(c) Elastic–Plastic Stress Analysis Criteria – Protection against ratcheting is demonstrated by satisfying the rules of
5.5.7.
5.5.1.7 If a fatigue analysis is required, the effects of joint alignment (see 6.1.6.1) and weld peaking (see 6.1.6.3) in
shells and heads shall be considered in the determination of the applicable stresses.

5.5.2 SCREENING CRITERIA FOR FATIGUE ANALYSIS

5.5.2.1 Overview.
ith ro
k
(a) The provisions of this paragraph can be used to determine if a fatigue analysis is required as part of the vessel
design. The screening options to determine the need for fatigue analysis are described below. If any one of the screening
options is satisfied, then a fatigue analysis is not required as part of the vessel design.
(1) Provisions of 5.5.2.2, Experience with comparable equipment operating under similar conditions.
dr
(2) Provisions of 5.5.2.3, Method A based on the materials of construction (limited applicability), construction de-
t
tails, loading histogram, and smooth bar fatigue curve data.
ge

(3) Provisions of 5.5.2.4, Method B based on the materials of construction (unlimited applicability), construction
details, loading histogram, and smooth bar fatigue curve data.
(b) The fatigue exemption in accordance with this paragraph is performed on a component or part basis. One compo-
nent (integral) may be exempt, while another component (non-integral) is not exempt. If any one component is not ex-
empt, then a fatigue evaluation shall be performed for that component.
(c) If the specified number of cycles is greater than (10)6, then the screening criteria are not applicable and a fatigue
In
W

analysis is required.
5.5.2.2 Fatigue Analysis Screening Based on Experience With Comparable Equipment. If successful experience
over a sufficient time frame is obtained with comparable equipment subject to a similar loading histogram and ad-
dressed in the User’s Design Specification (see 2.2.3.1(f)), then a fatigue analysis is not required as part of the vessel
design. When evaluating experience with comparable equipment operating under similar conditions as related to the
design and service contemplated, the possible harmful effects of the following design features shall be evaluated.
(a) The use of non-integral construction, such as the use of pad type reinforcements or of fillet welded attachments, as
opposed to integral construction
(b) The use of pipe threaded connections, particularly for diameters in excess of 70 mm (2.75 in.)
(c) The use of stud bolted attachments
(d) The use of partial penetration welds
(e) Major thickness changes between adjacent members
(f) Attachments and nozzles in the knuckle region of formed heads
5.5.2.3 Fatigue Analysis Screening, Method A. The following procedure can only be used for materials with a spe-
cified minimum tensile strength that is less than or equal to 552 MPa (80,000 psi).
Step 1. Determine a load history based on the information in the User’s Design Specification. The load history should
include all cyclic operating loads and events that are applied to the component.

588

Dit document is door NEN onder licentie verstrekt aan: / This document has been supplied under license by NEN to:
Pallas Reactor GLavayen@invap.com.ar 2023-10-11 14:58:04
 ASME BPVC.VIII.2-2021 5.5.2.3 – 5.5.2.4

Step 2. Based on the load history in Step 1, determine the expected (design) number of full-range pressure cycles in-
cluding startup and shutdown, and designate this value as N Δ F P .
Step 3. Based on the load history in Step 1, determine the expected number of operating pressure cycles in which the
range of pressure variation exceeds 20% of the design pressure for integral construction or 15% of the design pressure
for non-integral construction, and designate this value as N Δ P O . Pressure cycles in which the pressure variation does not
exceed these percentages of the design pressure and pressure cycles caused by fluctuations in atmospheric conditions
do not need to be considered in this evaluation.
Step 4. Based on the load history in Step 1, determine the effective number of changes in metal temperature difference
between any two adjacent points, Δ T E , as defined below, and designate this value as N Δ T E . The effective number of such
changes is determined by multiplying the number of changes in metal temperature difference of a certain magnitude by
the factor given in Table 5.8, and by adding the resulting numbers. In calculating the temperature difference between
adjacent points, conductive heat transfer shall be considered only through welded or integral cross sections with no al-
lowance for conductive heat transfer across un-welded contact surfaces (i.e., vessel shell and reinforcing pad).
(a) For surface temperature differences, points are considered to be adjacent if they are within the distance L com-
puted as follows: for shells and dished heads in the meridional or circumferential directions,

n n
ð5:16Þ

aw ke
and for flat plates,

ð5:17Þ

(b) For through-the-thickness temperature differences, adjacent points are defined as any two points on a line normal
to any surface on the component.
k
Step 5. Based on the load history in Step 1, determine the number of temperature cycles for components involving
welds between materials having different coefficients of thermal expansion that causes the value of (α 1 − α 2 )Δ T to ex-
ith ro
ceed 0.00034, and designate this value as N Δ T α .
Step 6. If the expected number of operating cycles from Steps 2, 3, 4 and 5 satisfy the criterion in Table 5.9, then a
fatigue analysis is not required as part of the vessel design. If this criterion is not satisfied, then a fatigue analysis is re-
quired as part of the vessel design. Examples of non-integral attachments are: screwed-on caps, screwed-in plugs, shear
dr
ring closures, fillet welded attachments, and breech lock closures.
t
ge

5.5.2.4 Fatigue Analysis Screening, Method B. The following procedure can be used for all materials.
Step 1. Determine a load history based on the information in the User’s Design Specification. The load histogram
should include all significant cyclic operating loads and events that the component will be subjected. Note, in eq.
(5.18), the number of cycles from the applicable design fatigue curve (see Annex 3-F) evaluated at a stress amplitude
of S e is defined as N ( S e ) . Also in eqs. (5.19) through (5.23), the stress amplitude from the applicable design fatigue
curve (see Annex 3-F) evaluated at N cycles is defined as S a ( N ) .
In
W

Step 2. Determine the fatigue screening criteria factors, C 1 and C 2 , based on the type of construction in accordance
with Table 5.10, see 4.2.5.6(j).
Step 3. Based on the load histogram in Step 1, determine the design number of full-range pressure cycles including
startup and shutdown, N Δ F P . If the following equation is satisfied, proceed to Step 4; otherwise, a detailed fatigue anal-
ysis of the vessel is required.

ð5:18Þ

Step 4. Based on the load histogram in Step 1, determine the maximum range of pressure fluctuation during normal
operation, excluding startups and shutdowns, ΔP N , and the corresponding number of significant cycles, N Δ P . Significant
pressure fluctuation cycles are defined as cycles where the pressure range exceeds S a s /C 1 S times the design pressure. If
the following equation is satisfied, proceed to Step 5; otherwise, a detailed fatigue analysis of the vessel is required.

ð5:19Þ

589

Dit document is door NEN onder licentie verstrekt aan: / This document has been supplied under license by NEN to:
Pallas Reactor GLavayen@invap.com.ar 2023-10-11 14:58:04
5.5.2.4 – 5.5.3.2 ASME BPVC.VIII.2-2021

Step 5. Based on the load histogram in Step 1, determine the maximum temperature difference between any two ad-
jacent points of the vessel during normal operation, and during startup and shutdown operation, ΔT N , and the corre-
sponding number of cycles, N Δ T N . If the following equation is satisfied, proceed to Step 6; otherwise, a detailed
fatigue analysis of the vessel is required.

ð5:20Þ

Step 6. Based on the load histogram in Step 1, determine the maximum range of temperature difference fluctuation,
ΔT R , between any two adjacent points (see 5.5.2.3, Step 4) of the vessel during normal operation, excluding startups and
shutdowns, and the corresponding number of significant cycles, Δ N Δ T R . Significant temperature difference fluctuation
cycles for this Step are defined as cycles where the temperature range exceeds S a s /C 2 E y m α . If the following equation is
satisfied, proceed to Step 7; otherwise, a detailed fatigue analysis of the vessel is required.

ð5:21Þ

n n
Step 7. Based on the load histogram in Step 1, determine the range of temperature difference fluctuation between any
two adjacent points (see 5.5.2.3, Step 4) for components fabricated from different materials of construction during nor-

aw ke
mal operation, Δ T M , and the corresponding number of significant cycles, N Δ T M . Significant temperature difference fluc-
tuation cycles for this Step are defined as cycles where the temperature range exceeds S a s /[C 2 (E y 1 α 1 − E y 2 α 2 )]. If the
following equation is satisfied, proceed to Step 8; otherwise, a detailed fatigue analysis of the vessel is required.

ð5:22Þ
k
Step 8. Based on the load histogram in Step 1, determine the equivalent stress range computed from the specified full
range of mechanical loads, excluding pressure but including piping reactions, Δ S M L , and the corresponding number of
ith ro
significant cycles, N Δ S . Significant mechanical load range cycles for this Step are defined as cycles where the stress range
exceeds S a s . If the total specified number of significant load fluctuations exceeds the maximum number of cycles defined
on the applicable fatigue curve, the S a s value corresponding to the maximum number of cycles defined on the fatigue
curve shall be used. If the following equation is satisfied a fatigue analysis is not required; otherwise, a detailed fatigue
dr
analysis of the vessel is required.
t

ð5:23Þ
ge

5.5.3 FATIGUE ASSESSMENT — ELASTIC STRESS ANALYSIS AND EQUIVALENT STRESSES

5.5.3.1 Overview.
(a) An effective total equivalent stress amplitude is used to evaluate the fatigue damage for results obtained from a
In
W

linear elastic stress analysis. The controlling stress for the fatigue evaluation is the effective total equivalent stress am-
plitude, defined as one-half of the effective total equivalent stress range (P L + P b + Q + F ) calculated for each cycle in the
loading histogram.
(b) The primary plus secondary plus peak equivalent stress (see Figure 5.1) is the equivalent stress, derived from the
highest value across the thickness of a section, of the combination of all primary, secondary, and peak stresses produced
by specified operating pressures and other mechanical loads and by general and local thermal effects and including the
effects of gross and local structural discontinuities. Examples of load case combinations for this stress category for ty-
pical pressure vessel components are shown in Table 5.3.
5.5.3.2 Assessment Procedure. The following procedure can be used to evaluate protection against failure due to
cyclic loading based on the effective total equivalent stress amplitude.
Step 1. Determine a load history based on the information in the User’s Design Specification and the methods in Annex
5-B. The load history should include all significant operating loads and events that are applied to the component. If the
exact sequence of loads is not known, alternatives should be examined to establish the most severe fatigue damage, see
Step 6.
Step 2. For a location in the component subject to a fatigue evaluation, determine the individual stress–strain cycles
using the cycle counting methods in Annex 5-B. Define the total number of cyclic stress ranges in the histogram as M .

590

Dit document is door NEN onder licentie verstrekt aan: / This document has been supplied under license by NEN to:
Pallas Reactor GLavayen@invap.com.ar 2023-10-11 14:58:04
 ASME BPVC.VIII.2-2021 5.5.3.2

Step 3. Determine the equivalent stress range for the kth cycle counted in Step 2.
(a) If the effective alternating equivalent stress is computed using eq. (5.30), then determine the stress tensor at the
start and end points (time points m t and n t, respectively) for the kth cycle counted in Step 2, Determine the local ther-
mal stress at time points m t and n t, m σLTij,k and n σLTij,k, respectively, as described in Annex 5-C. The component stress
ranges between time points m t and n t and the effective equivalent stress ranges for use in eq. (5.30) are calculated using
eqs. (5.24) through (5.27).

ð5:24Þ

ð5:25Þ

ð5:26Þ

n n
ð5:27Þ

aw ke
(b) If the effective alternating equivalent stress is computed using eq. (5.36), then determine the stress tensor at the
start and end points (time points m t and n t, respectively) for the k th cycle counted in Step 2, The component stress
ranges between time points m t and n t, and the effective equivalent stress range for use in eq. (5.36) are given by
eqs. (5.28) and (5.29), respectively.
ith ro
k ð5:28Þ

ð5:29Þ

Step 4. Determine the effective alternating equivalent stress amplitude for the kth cycle using the results from Step 3.
dr
t
ð5:30Þ
ge

(a) If the local notch or effect of the weld is accounted for in the numerical model, then K f = 1.0 in eqs. (5.30) and
(5.36). If the local notch or effect of the weld is not accounted for in the numerical model, then a fatigue strength reduc-
tion factor, K f , shall be included. Recommended values for fatigue strength reduction factors for welds are provided in
Tables 5.11 and 5.12.
(b) The fatigue penalty factor, K e , k , in eqs. (5.30) and (5.36) is evaluated using the following equations where the
In
W

parameters and are determined from Table 5.13 and S P S and Δ S n , k are defined in 5.5.6.1. For K e , k values greater than
1.0, the simplified elastic–plastic criteria of 5.5.6.2 shall be satisfied.

ð5:31Þ

ð5:32Þ

ð5:33Þ

(c) The Poisson correction factor, K v , k in eq. (5.30) is computed using eq. (5.34).

ð5:34Þ

where

591

Dit document is door NEN onder licentie verstrekt aan: / This document has been supplied under license by NEN to:
Pallas Reactor GLavayen@invap.com.ar 2023-10-11 14:58:04
5.5.3.2 – 5.5.4.1 ASME BPVC.VIII.2-2021

ð5:35Þ

(d) The Poisson correction factor, K v , k , in eq. (5.34) need not be used if the fatigue penalty factor, K e , k , is used for the
entire stress range (including ΔS L T , k ). In this case, eq. (5.30) becomes:

ð5:36Þ

Step 5. Determine the permissible number of cycles, N k , for the alternating equivalent stress computed in Step 4. Fa-
tigue curves based on the materials of construction are provided in Annex 3-F, 3-F.1.
Step 6. Determine the fatigue damage for the kth cycle, where the actual number of repetitions of the kth cycle is n k .

ð5:37Þ

Step 7. Repeat Steps 3 through 6 for all stress ranges, M , identified in the cycle counting process in Step 2.

n n
Step 8. Compute the accumulated fatigue damage using the following equation. The location in the component is ac-
ceptable for continued operation if this equation is satisfied.

aw ke
ð5:38Þ

Step 9. Repeat Steps 2 through 8 for each point in the component subject to a fatigue evaluation.
5.5.3.3 In Step 4 of 5.5.3.2, K e , k may be calculated using one of the following methods.
(a) Method 1 – The equivalent total strain range from elastic–plastic analysis and the equivalent total strain range
k
from elastic analysis for the point of interest as given below.

ð5:39Þ
ith ro
where

ð5:40Þ
dr
t
ge

ð5:41Þ

ð5:42Þ
In
W

The stress range ΔS P , k is given by eq. (5.29) and is the elastic–plastic value in eq. (5.40) and the elastic value in eq.
(5.41). The component stress and plastic strain ranges (differences between the components at the start and end points
of the cycle) for the kth cycle are designated as Δ σ i j , k and Δp i j , k , respectively. eq. (5.42) is a special form of the effective
plastic strain equation based on engineering shear strains (typical FEA output and twice the tensorial shear strain
values).
(b) Method 2 – The alternate plasticity adjustment factors and alternating equivalent stress may be computed using
Annex 5-C.
5.5.3.4 In lieu of a detailed stress analysis, stress indices may be used to determine peak stresses around a nozzle
opening in accordance with Annex 5-D.

5.5.4 FATIGUE ASSESSMENT — ELASTIC–PLASTIC STRESS ANALYSIS AND EQUIVALENT STRAINS

5.5.4.1 Overview.
(a) The Effective Strain Range is used to evaluate the fatigue damage for results obtained from an elastic–plastic stress
analysis. The Effective Strain Range is calculated for each cycle in the loading histogram using either cycle-by-cycle anal-
ysis or the Twice Yield Method. For the cycle-by-cycle analysis, a cyclic plasticity algorithm with kinematic hardening
shall be used.

592

Dit document is door NEN onder licentie verstrekt aan: / This document has been supplied under license by NEN to:
Pallas Reactor GLavayen@invap.com.ar 2023-10-11 14:58:04
 ASME BPVC.VIII.2-2021 5.5.4.1 – 5.5.4.2

(b) Twice Yield Method is an elastic–plastic stress analysis performed in a single loading step, based on a specified
stabilized cyclic stress range-strain range curve and a specified load range representing a cycle. Stress and strain ranges
are the direct output from this analysis. This method is performed in the same manner as a monotonic analysis and does
not require cycle-by-cycle analysis of unloading and reloading. The Twice Yield Method can be used with an analysis
program without cyclic plasticity capability.
(c) For the calculation of the stress range and strain range of a cycle at a point in the component, a stabilized cyclic
stress–strain curve and other material properties shall be used based on the average temperature of the cycle being
evaluated for each material of construction. The cyclic curve may be that obtained by test for the material, or that which
is known to have more conservative cyclic behavior to the material that is specified. Cyclic stress–strain curves are also
provided in 3-D.4 of Annex 3-D for certain materials and temperatures. Other cyclic stress–strain curves may be used
that are known to be either more accurate for the application or lead to more conservative results.

5.5.4.2 Assessment Procedure. The following procedure can be used to evaluate protection against failure due to
cyclic loading using elastic–plastic stress analysis.
Step 1. Determine a load history based on the information in the User’s Design Specification and the methods in Annex
5-B. The load history should include all significant operating loads and events that are applied to the component.

n n
Step 2. For a location in the component subject to a fatigue evaluation, determine the individual stress–strain cycles
using the cycle counting methods in Annex 5-B. Define the total number of cyclic stress ranges in the histogram as M.

aw ke
Step 3. Determine the loadings at the start and end points of the kth cycle counted in Step 2. Using these data, deter-
mine the loading ranges (differences between the loadings at the start and end points of the cycle).
Step 4. Perform elastic–plastic stress analysis for the kth cycle. For cycle-by-cycle analysis, constant-amplitude loading
is cycled using cyclic stress amplitude-strain amplitude curve (5.5.4.1). For the Twice Yield Method, the loading at the
start point of the cycle is zero and the loading at the end point is the loading range determined in Step 3. The cyclic stress
range-strain range curve is used (5.5.4.1). For thermal loading, the loading range in Twice-Yield Method may be applied
k
by specifying the temperature field at the start point for the cycle as an initial condition, and applying the temperature
field at the end point for the cycle in a single loading step.
ith ro
Step 5. Calculate the Effective Strain Range for the kth cycle.

ð5:43Þ
dr
where the stress range Δ S p , k is given by eq. (5.29) and Δ Ɛ p e q , k is given by eq. (5.42).
t

The component stress and plastic strain ranges (differences between the components at the start and end points of the
ge

cycle) for the kth cycle are designated as Δ σ i j , k and Δ p i j , k , respectively. However, since a range of loading is applied in a
single load step with the Twice Yield Method, the calculated maximum equivalent plastic strain range, Δɛ p e q , k and the
von Mises equivalent stress range ΔS p , k defined above are typical output variables that can be obtained directly from a
stress analysis.
Step 6. Determine the effective alternating equivalent stress for the kth cycle.
In
W

ð5:44Þ

Step 7. Determine the permissible number of cycles, N k , for the alternating equivalent stress computed in Step 6. Fa-
tigue curves based on the materials of construction are provided in Annex 3-F, 3-F.1,
Step 8. Determine the fatigue damage for the kth cycle, where the actual number of repetitions of the kth cycle is n k .

ð5:45Þ

Step 9. Repeat Steps 3 through 8 for all stress ranges, M, identified in the cycle counting process in Step 2.
Step 10. Compute the accumulated fatigue damage using the following equation. The location in the component is ac-
ceptable for continued operation if this equation is satisfied.

ð5:46Þ

Step 11. Repeat Steps 2 through 10 for each point in the component subject to a fatigue evaluation.

593

Dit document is door NEN onder licentie verstrekt aan: / This document has been supplied under license by NEN to:
Pallas Reactor GLavayen@invap.com.ar 2023-10-11 14:58:04
5.5.5 – 5.5.5.2 ASME BPVC.VIII.2-2021

5.5.5 FATIGUE ASSESSMENT OF WELDS — ELASTIC ANALYSIS AND STRUCTURAL STRESS

5.5.5.1 Overview.
(a) An equivalent structural stress range parameter is used to evaluate the fatigue damage for results obtained from a
linear elastic stress analysis. The controlling stress for the fatigue evaluation is the structural stress that is a function of
the membrane and bending stresses normal to the hypothetical crack plane. This method is recommended for evaluation
of welded joints that have not been machined to a smooth profile. Weld joints with controlled smooth profiles may be
evaluated using 5.5.3 or 5.5.4.
(b) Fatigue cracks at pressure vessel welds are typically located at the toe of a weld. For as-welded and weld joints
subject to post weld heat treatment, the expected orientation of a fatigue crack is along the weld toe in the
through-thickness direction, and the structural stress normal to the expected crack is the stress measure used to cor-
relate fatigue life data. For fillet welded components, fatigue cracking may occur at the toe of the fillet weld or the weld
throat, and both locations shall be considered in the assessment. It is difficult to accurately predict fatigue life at the weld
throat due to variability in throat dimension, which is a function of the depth of the weld penetration. It is recommended
to perform sensitivity analysis where the weld throat dimension is varied.

n n
5.5.5.2 Assessment Procedure. The following procedure can be used to evaluate protection against failure due to
cyclic loading using the equivalent structural stress range.
Step 1. Determine a load history based on the information in the User’s Design Specification and the histogram devel-

aw ke
opment methods in Annex 5-B. The load history should include all significant operating loads and events that are applied
to the component.
Step 2. For a location at a weld joint subject to a fatigue evaluation, determine the individual stress–strain cycles using
the cycle counting methods in Annex 5-B. Define the total number of cyclic stress ranges in the histogram as M.
Step 3. Determine the elastically calculated membrane and bending stress normal to the assumed hypothetical crack
k
plane at the start and end points (time points m t and n t, respectively) for the kth cycle counted in Step 2. Using this data,
calculate the membrane and bending stress ranges between time points m t and n t, and the maximum, minimum and
mean stress.
ith ro
ð5:47Þ

ð5:48Þ
dr
t
ge

ð5:49Þ

ð5:50Þ
In
W

ð5:51Þ

Step 4. Determine the elastically calculated structural stress range for the kth cycle, Δ σ e k, using eq. (5.52).

ð5:52Þ

Step 5. Determine the elastically calculated structural strain, , from the elastically calculated structural stress, ,
using eq. (5.53)

ð5:53Þ

The corresponding local nonlinear structural stress and strain ranges, Δσ k and Δɛ k , respectively, are determined by
simultaneously solving Neuber’s Rule, eq. (5.54), and a model for the material hysteresis loop stress–strain curve given
by eq. (5.55), see Annex 3-D, 3-D.4.

ð5:54Þ

594

Dit document is door NEN onder licentie verstrekt aan: / This document has been supplied under license by NEN to:
Pallas Reactor GLavayen@invap.com.ar 2023-10-11 14:58:04
 ASME BPVC.VIII.2-2021 5.5.5.2

ð5:55Þ

The structural stress range computed solving eqs. (5.54) and (5.55) is subsequently modified for low-cycle fatigue
using eq. (5.56).

ð5:56Þ

NOTE: The modification for low-cycle fatigue should always be performed because the exact distinction between high-cycle fatigue and low-
cycle fatigue cannot be determined without evaluating the effects of plasticity which is a function of the applied stress range and cyclic stress–
strain curve. For high cycle fatigue applications, this procedure will provide correct results, i.e., the elastically calculated structural stress will
not be modified.

Step 6. Compute the equivalent structural stress range parameter for the kth cycle using the following equations. In
eq. (5.57), for SI Units, the thickness, t, stress range, Δ σ k , and the equivalent structural stress range parameter, ΔS e s s , k ,

n n
are in mm, MPa, and MPa/(mm)(2 − m s s )/2m s s , respectively, and for U.S. Customary Units, the thickness, t , stress range,
Δ σ k , and the equivalent structural stress range parameter, Δ S e s s , k , are in ksi, ksi, and in ksi/(inches)(2 − m s s )/2m s s ,
respectively.

aw ke
ð5:57Þ

where
ith ro
k ð5:58Þ

ð5:59Þ

ð5:60Þ
dr
t
ð5:61Þ
ge

ð5:62Þ

ð5:63Þ
In
W

ð5:64Þ

ð5:65Þ

ð5:66Þ

Step 7. Determine the permissible number of cycles, N k , based on the equivalent structural stress range parameter for
the kth cycle computed in Step 6. Fatigue curves for welded joints are provided in Annex 3-F, 3-F.2.
Step 8. Determine the fatigue damage for the kth cycle, where the actual number of repetitions of the kth cycle is n k .

ð5:67Þ

595

Dit document is door NEN onder licentie verstrekt aan: / This document has been supplied under license by NEN to:
Pallas Reactor GLavayen@invap.com.ar 2023-10-11 14:58:04
5.5.5.2 – 5.5.5.3 ASME BPVC.VIII.2-2021

Step 9. Repeat Steps 6 through 8 for all stress ranges, M , identified in the cycle counting process in Step 3.
Step 10. Compute the accumulated fatigue damage using the following equation. The location along the weld joint is
suitable for continued operation if this equation is satisfied.

ð5:68Þ

Step 11. Repeat Steps 5 through 10 for each point along the weld joint that is subject to a fatigue evaluation.

5.5.5.3 Assessment Procedure Modifications. The assessment procedure in 5.5.5.2 may be modified as shown
below.
(a) Multiaxial Fatigue – If the structural shear stress range is not negligible, i.e., Δ τ k > Δ σ k /3, a modification should be
made when computing the equivalent structural stress range. Two conditions need to be considered:
(1) If Δσ k and Δ τ k are out of phase, the equivalent structural stress range Δ S e s s , k in eq. (5.57) should be replaced
by:

n n
ð5:69Þ

aw ke
where
ith ro
k ð5:70Þ

ð5:71Þ
dr
t
ge

ð5:72Þ

ð5:73Þ
In
W

ð5:74Þ

In eq. (5.69), F ( δ) is a function of the out-of-phase angle between Δσ k and Δτ k if both loading modes can be de-
scribed by sinusoidal functions, or:

ð5:75Þ

A conservative approach is to ignore the out-of-phase angle and recognize the existence of a minimum possible value for
F ( δ) in eq. (5.75) given by:

ð5:76Þ

(2) If Δ σ k and Δτ k are in-phase the equivalent structural stress range ΔS e s s , k is given by eq. (5.69) with F ( δ) = 1.0.

596

Dit document is door NEN onder licentie verstrekt aan: / This document has been supplied under license by NEN to:
Pallas Reactor GLavayen@invap.com.ar 2023-10-11 14:58:04