Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
www.elsevier.com/locate/nucengdes
Abstract
In the past, weld-induced residual stresses caused damage to numerous (power) plant parts, components and
systems (Erve, M., Wesseling, U., Kilian, R., Hardt, R., Brummer, G., Maier, V., Ilg, U., 1994. Cracking in Stabilized
Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping of German Boiling Water Reactors Characteristic Features and Root Causes. 20.
MPA-Seminar 1994, vol. 2, paper 29, pp.29.1 29.21). In the case of BWR nuclear power plants, this damage can be
caused by the mechanism of intergranular stress corrosion cracking in austenitic piping or the core shroud in the
reactor pressure vessel and is triggered chiefly by weld-induced residual stresses. One solution of this problem that has
been used in the past involves experimental measurements of residual stresses in conjunction with weld optimization
testing. However, the experimental analysis of all relevant parameters is an extremely tedious process. Numerical
simulation using the finite element method (FEM) not only supplements this method but, in view of modern computer
capacities, is also an equally valid alternative in its own right. This paper will demonstrate that the technique
developed for numerical simulation of the welding process has not only been properly verified and validated on
austenitic pipe welds, but that it also permits making selective statements on improvements to the welding process.
For instance, numerical simulation can provide information on the starting point of welding for every weld bead, the
effect of interpass cooling as far as a possible sensitization of the heat affected zone (HAZ) is concerned, the effect
of gap width on the resultant weld residual stresses, or the effect of the last pass heat sink welding (welding of the
final passes while simultaneously cooling the inner surface with water) producing compressive stresses in the root area
of a circumferential weld in an austenitic pipe. The computer program FERESA (finite element residual stress analysis)
was based on a commercially available ABAQUS code (Hibbitt, Karlsson, Sorensen, Inc, 1997. ABAQUS users manual,
version 5.6), and can be used as a 2-D or 3-D FEM analysis; depending on task definition it can provide a starting
point for a fracture mechanics safety analysis with acceptable computing times. 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All
rights reserved.
25th MPA Seminar Safety and Reliability Integrity Verification, Component Qualification, Damage Prevention-Stuttgart, 7 and
8 October, 1999.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +49-9131-182530; fax: +49-9131-182911.
E-mail address: juergen.schmidt@erl1.siemens.de (J. Schmidt).
0029-5493/01/$ - see front matter 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 0 2 9 - 5 4 9 3 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 4 1 4 - 3
140
1. Background
Residual stresses are a crucial factor in serviceinduced crack formation in nuclear power plants.
Component integrity is considerably influenced by
crack formation, depth and distribution, particularly if corrosion mechanisms play a role in crack
initiation and at least initial crack propagation
(e.g. intergranular stress corrosion cracking in
austenitic pipes, or the core shroud in the reactor
pressure vessel, or strain-induced corrosion cracking in ferritic pipes in BWR plants). Weld residual
stresses are initially caused by the heat used to
create a fusion zone and, thereafter, by cooling
processes, which produce areas of local deformation in the weld region.
Established test techniques are available for
measuring weld-induced residual stresses. These
include X-ray examination or strain gauge measurements. Analytical or simpler numerical techniques (2-D FEM) are also used to confirm test
results. However, the fact remains that measurements always contain geometrical singularities,
crack initiation is always a local phenomenon,
and the residual stress condition is by no means
rotationally symmetrical. In this respect, great
3108
2220
3108 (temperature field
calculation)
9324 (stress displacement
fields)
141
of the heat-affected zone was increased to a minimal element width of 0.2 mm, to obtain higher
accuracy in that area, which is critical for crack
initiation.
142
Fig. 2. Axial stress through wall thickness (DN 100 middle of weld).
Fig. 4. Residual stresses (around circumference) due to pipe welding experimental/numerical analysis.
144
Fig. 5. Residual stresses due to pipe welding (convent/narrow gap) experimental/numerical analysis.
time in the critical temperature range is comparatively longer in parts with larger wall thick-
145
146
Fig. 8. Transient temperature 0.2 mm beside the fusion line in HAZ DN 100/DN 200 weld simulation.
Fig. 9. Total keeping time at sensitizing temperature due to welding experimental/numerical analysis.
147
Fig. 10. Postweld heat treatment last pass heat sink welding (LPHSW).
148
Fig. 11. Contour plot of stress values in the welding region 12:00 h position before and after LPHSW.
passes 16 are each welded in two steps, a singularity is obtained in 06:00 (starting point of welding) and 12:00 h position (end of first half of
welding). An interesting feature of the calculation
results is that peak residual stresses occur at the
key location (laterally approximately 0.2 mm
away from the fusion line (HAZ) on the inner
surface of the pipe) while the root pass (bead 1 in
Fig. 12) is being welded. There is a steady reduction in residual stresses during welding of the
subsequent passes. Residual tensile stresses nevertheless prevail at the weld root until the weld gap
has been filled. Compressive axial stresses do not
occur at the weld root until LPHSW is simulated;
these compressive stresses persist over a considerable distance from the weld and the entire area,
which is potentially susceptible to weld sensitization is consequently affected favorably by compressive residual stresses.
Fig. 12. Axial stress at the inner side (0.2 mm positive direction from fusionline) after cooling to interpass temperature.
Fig. 13. Axial stress (inner surface, 0.2 mm from fusionline) after welding sequence, aging 1st/10th cycle, and final stage.
149
150
4. Outlook
The technique presented here is a useful tool
References
Hibbitt, Karlsson, Sorensen, Inc, 1997. ABAQUS users manual, version 5.6.
Schmidt, J., Wei, E., Pellkofer, D., 1986. Avoiding IGSCC in
Austenitic Piping System of BWR Nuclear Power Plants
from the Standpoint of Welding Technology, Proceedings
of the American Power Conference, Chicago.
Schmidt, J., Pellkofer, D., Wei, E., 1995. Alternativen bei der
Nachbehandlung von austenitischen Rohrleitungsnahten
zur Erhohung der Betriebssicherheit von SWR-Anlagen,
21. MPA-Seminar, Stuttgart, October 1995.
Zimmer, R., Kilian, R., 1998. Neuronale Netze zur
Beurteilung von Einflugroen auf die interkristalline
Spannungsrikorrosion, VGB Konferenz, Forschung fur
die Kraftwerkstechnik 1998, Essen, February 1998, TB
233.
NUREG-1061, vol. 1, Report of the US Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Piping Review Committee Investigation and
Evaluation of Stress Corrosion Cracking in Piping of
Boiling Water Reactor Plants.