Proceedings of the ASME 2016 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference
PVP2016
July 17-21, 2016, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
APPLICATION OF STRESS-MODIFIED FRACTURE STRAIN MODEL TO FULL-
SCALE PIPES WITH A CIRCUMFERENTIAL CRACK IN THE CENTER OF WELDS
Ho-Wan Ryu
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering,
Korea University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
E-mail : ohyeahs@korea.ac.kr
Hyun-Woo Jung
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering,
Korea University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
E-mail : jss721@korea.ac.kr
ABSTRACT
A lot of welded joints are required to connect the junctions
of components in the complex piping system. The structural
integrity assessment on welded pipes is especially important,
because the weldments are susceptible to material
discontinuities, flaws and residual stresses. Finite element (FE)
damage analysis can be useful and effective method for an
accurate assessment on extensive structures. For the case of
welded joint, the numerical method is necessarily required to
assess complex features because of material discontinuities and
flaws. This study provides a simple numerical method to
simulate ductile tearing in welded full-scale pipes. Stress-
modified fracture strain model is applied to finite element
analysis with a stress reduction technique. An element-size-
dependent critical damage model is also implemented in the full-
scale pipe simulations. From the results of simulation,
deformation response and characteristic loads are compared with
experimentally measured values to verify the application of
damage model on weld material. As a result, the predictions of
finite element damage analysis are in good agreement with
experiments.
INTRODUCTION
Due to the complexity of piping system, a lot of welded
joints are required to connect the junctions of components.
Because welding process is highly complicated, the weldments
are susceptible to material discontinuities, flaws and residual
stresses. For these reason, they should be inspected right after
welding process to find the defects which can affect failure and
life time reduction of components. The structural integrity
1 Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90490/ on 06/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
PVP2016-63546
Hune-Tae Kim
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering,
Korea University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
E-mail : hune11@korea.ac.kr
Yun-Jae Kim
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering,
Korea University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
E-mail : kimy0308@korea.ac.kr
assessment on welded pipes is especially important and should
be reliably performed.
For an accurate assessment, full-scale test is the most
reliable way to understand fracture behavior of cracked
components. However, it’s difficult to exactly reproduce
complex geometries and loading conditions of actual structural
components. In this case, finite element (FE) damage analysis
can substitute for extensive full-scale tests. For the case of
welded joint, because the complexity is increased by the shape
of joint, material discontinuities and flaws, the numerical method
is necessarily required to assess complex features.
Numerical ductile tearing simulation has been a challenging
issue in computational fracture mechanics for the last three
decades. Many models have been developed with different levels
of complexities up to present [1-4]. They can be applied to
predict ductile fracture of large-scale components [5-9].
However, in practical application, it is difficult to consistently
determine the parameters of models from material test data.
The authors have proposed a simple numerical method to
simulate ductile tearing [10-13]. The damage model is defined
based on the ductility exhaustion concept using the stress-
modified fracture strain model. Note that the stress-modified
fracture strain model has been used to understand ductile fracture
of cracked specimens by many other authors [14,15]. Recently,
the simple method has been proposed to cope with limited
material data to determine the parameters of model [13]. This
paper also applied the proposed simple numerical method to
simulate ductile tearing in a welded full-scale pipe.
In this study, at first, test data for material properties and a
full-scale welded pipe are summarized from original data in Pipe
Fracture Encyclopedia [16]. Finite element analysis are
 conducted for basic experiments with reasonable procedures to
determine the parameters and material constants. Then,
determined damage models are applied to ductile tearing
simulation for full-scale welded pipes. Crack initiation,
maximum loads are expected to characterize the fracture
behavior of full-scale welded pipes.
SUMMARY OF FULL-SCALE PIPE TEST
In 1987, Battelle funded by U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) published Pipe Fracture Encyclopedia [16].
Battelle had performed extensive pipe fracture tests for various
materials and geometries to study the fracture behavior of
nuclear power plant piping. In this paper, data set from the
submerged-arc welded (SAW) pipe test is used to simulate and
analyze fracture behavior of a short cracked pipe.
Four-point bending tests were conducted for a SA333 Gr. 6
circumferentially through-wall cracked weld pipe. The
geometry of pipe specimen is 24.1 inch (612 mm) nominal
diameter and 31.3 mm thickness (Schedule 80). Details of
specific geometry and a schematic configuration of the cross-
sectional view for weld pipe are summarized in Table 1 and Fig.
1, respectively. Fig. 2 shows the details of pipe cross section in
the vicinity of the weldment. The experiment were conducted
at a pipe temperature of 288oC by wrapping the entire specimen
with heater tapes.
Table 1. Summary of specimen dimensions for a circumferential
through-wall cracked SA333 Gr. 6 pipe at 288oC.
Experiment #
r t
r/t /π
(mm) (mm)
1.1.1.24 290.4 31.3 9.28 0.079
Fig. 1. Schematic of the cross-sectional view for SA333 Gr. 6
cracked weld pipe.
Fig. 2. Details of pipe cross section in the vicinity of the test weld.
2 Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90490/ on 06/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
DETERMINATION OF DAMAGE PARAMETERS
Damage Model
The well-known stress-modified fracture strain [17,18] is
employed in damage model based on the ductility exhaustion
concept. Incremental damage due to plastic deformation,
[10-13], can be calculated from FE analysis using
 p
  e (1)
f
where ep is the equivalent plastic strain increment calculated
from FE analysis. When the accumulated damage becomes a
critical value,
  p 
      e   c (2)
  f 

local ductile failure is assumed to occur and incremental crack
growth is simulated simply by reducing load carrying capacity at
the gauss point. This failure simulation technique was
implemented in the commercial FE program, ABAQUS using
user subroutines [20].
Multi-axial Fracture Strain
The multi-axial fracture strain, f, for dimple fracture is
assumed to depend exponentially on the stress triaxiality defined
as the ratio of hydrostatic stress m and equivalent stress e by:
  
 f   exp   m    (3)
 e 
where ,  and  are material constants. value is assumed to
be 1.5 by Rice and Tracey [19] and the constant is
conservatively assumed to be zero. This means fracture strain at
a high stress triaxiality region is very low, then, fracture can
occur even with a small plastic strain. Thus, the results of
prediction show conservative load-carrying capacity. As only
tensile and toughness test data are available, the following
simplified form is used in this work:
  
 f   exp  1.5 m  (4)
 e 
Note that a large element size should be used to simulate
long ductile tearing in full-scale pipes. Because different
element sizes in FE damage analyses could affect stress and
strain states at a local point, in this paper, element-size-
dependent critical damage model was used to include the
influence of the element size on FEA results [12,13]. In this
concept, the critical accumulated damage for local fracture, c,
is found as a function of an element size.
Tensile Test and Simulation
Tensile tests for SA333 Gr. 6 carbon steel were conducted at
288oC using round bar specimens of 6.35 mm diameter reduced
section and 31.8 mm gauge length. The specimens were oriented
such that the tensile axis was parallel to the pipe axis [16]. The
results of experiment are described in Fig. 3 by solid lines for
both of base and weld materials.
To determine the constant  in Eq. (1), the simulation of
tensile test is performed with conventional elastic-plastic FE
 analysis (Mises yield surface and isotropic hardening).
Symmetric conditions were fully utilized and the first order brick
elements (C3D8 within ABAQUS) were used with the 0.10mm
element size. The nonlinear geometry change option
(NLGEOM) was chosen to incorporate large deformation in the
simulation. Simulated results compared with experiment are
depicted in Fig. 3 and showing good agreement even after
necking for both materials.
In Fig. 4(a), variation of stress triaxiality with equivalent
plastic strain in the center of specimen were extracted from the
FEA results. In order to include history effect of stress
triaxiality, the averaged value is calculated. The point of
‘smooth bar’ in Fig 4(a) can be determined by the simulation of
tensile specimen from the SAW weldment.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 3. Engineering stress-strain curves and the results of
simulations: (a) SA333 Gr. 6 base and (b) weld materials.
Resulting fracture strain as a function of the (average) stress
triaxiality is shown in Fig. 4(b) by one point indicated as “smooth
bar”, from which the constant  in Eq. (4) can be determined for
submerged-arc weld material:
3 Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90490/ on 06/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
 m 
 f  1.435  exp  1.5  (5)
 e 
This locus is shown in Fig. 4(b).
(a)
(b)
Fig. 4. The results of tensile test simulation; (a) variation of the
stress triaxiality with equivalent plastic strain, extracted in the
center of tensile specimens and (b) assumed multi-axial fracture
strain loci.
Compact Tension Test and Simulation
Fracture toughness tests for the submerged-arc weld
material extracted from A516 Gr. 70 plate were conducted at
288oC to characterize the crack growth resistance [16]. A516
Gr. 70 and SA333 Gr. 6 are chemically and mechanically similar
materials. The weld bevel is shown in Fig. 5 and simulated in
FE damage analysis. Fracture toughness test was performed
using 1.25T compact type specimens machined from the weld in
plate. The specimen was oriented that crack growth would be
along the weld centerline in the direction of the weld.
Fig. 6 describe the difference of J-resistance properties
depends on materials. J-resistance curve of weld metal is
almost half of that of SA333 Gr. 6. Also, the thing that A516
 Gr. 70 and SA333 Gr. 6 materials are mechanically similar can
be found with same initial fracture toughness. For reference,
different slope of two resistance curves are dependent on the
different constraint by side grooves.
In FE damage analysis of fracture toughness test, a half
model was used considering symmetry conditions. First order
8-node brick elements were uniformly spaced in the expected
region of crack propagation. True stress-strain property that
can properly simulate tensile test results was directly used in the
FE analysis with the J2 flow theory. The nonlinear geometry
change option (NLGEOM) was also chosen to incorporate large
deformation in the simulation. Incremental damage was Fig. 7. FE mesh for weld compact tension specimen.
calculated from ABAQUS user subroutine using Eq. (1) with the
multi-axial fracture strain from Eq. (5).
At first, FE mesh having the minimum element size in the
crack propagation region of 0.2 mm was simulated.
Calculations were then performed for various element sizes to
determine the dependency on the value of c. In Fig. 8(a), the
effect of c on predicted J-R curves is shown. As expected,
predicted J-R curves depend on the choice of c. In the present
method, the value of c is chosen to fit the crack initiation
toughness (corresponding to 0.2mm crack growth, J0.2).
Results shown in Fig. 8(a) suggest that the value of c=0.71
gives the best agreement with experimental J0.2 for the SAW
material. The predicted J-R curves are compared with entire
experimental J-R curve in Fig. 8(a).

(a)

Fig. 5. Schematic of the weld joint design and extracted compact

tension specimen.

(b)
Fig. 8. Determined failure criterion; (a) comparison of
experimental J-R curve with simulated results, (b) dependence
of the critical accumulated damage, c, on the element size.

Then to find dependence of c on an element size, FE

meshes having different element sizes (Le=0.4mm to 0.8mm) in
Fig. 6. Comparision of J-resistance curves for base and weld the crack propagation region were prepared. The same
materials. procedure can be used to determine the c value for a given
element size, by matching predicted toughness value with

4 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90490/ on 06/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 experimental one. The J0.4 (J value at 0.4mm crack growth)
value was used for Le=0.4mm and the J0.8 value for Le=0.8mm
[13]. Resulting variations of c with Le are shown in Fig. 8(b).
Predicted J-R curves using different element size with
corresponding c value are compared with power law fit of
experimental data in Fig. 8(a).
For the simulation of full-scale pipe, large-size element is
essential for the stability of FE analysis and computational
efficiency. Especially, to simulate the test set includes about 24
inch schedule 80 pipe and long crack growth, 0.8 mm element
size is implemented.

DUCTILE TEARING SIMULATIONS AND RESULTS

Ductile Tearing Simulation
Using the determined failure criterion in previous section, (a)
the full-scale pipe test are simulated for through-wall short crack.
As explained previous section about element size, 3-D FE
damage analyses were performed using 0.8mm element size, and
a quarter model was used considering symmetric conditions. 8-
node brick elements with full integrations (C3D8) were
uniformly spaced in the same plane of cracked section.
Specific FE meshes for a pipe and cracked region are shown in
Fig. 9(a). True stress-strain curves for base and weld materials
are employed in the part of base metal and weldment,
respectively. Non-linear geometry change option was also
utilized for damage analysis. Fracture strain from Eq. (5) and
c=0.27 with Le=0.8 mm are implemented to simulate crack (b)
growth in the weld pipe. Fig. 9. Through-wall cracked pipe simulation; (a) FE mesh for
cracked section, cracked configurations at (b) crack growth
Results and Discussion configurations.
Configurations of crack propagation are shown in Fig. 9(b).
From the shape of crack growth, it shows crack tunneling.
Simulation results of through-wall cracked weld pipe are shown
in Fig. 10. Ordinate means applied load by four point bending
machine or the amount of projected crack growth and abscissa
means load line displacement (LLD). In damage analyses,
simulation results show good agreement with experiment data
for both of load and crack growth.
Predicted crack initiation and maximum loads are differ
from experimental ones in 5%. As described in experimental
report [16], the small load drop associated with a small crack
instability with crack jump occurred right after the maximum
load. At that time, crack tip turned away from the center of the
weld and grew through the base material. Load drop also
predicted in the simulation after maximum load. Although the
change of crack path cannot be simulated, the local compliance
related mainly with the ligament or projected crack growth can
be simulated accurately. (a)

5 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90490/ on 06/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo


(b)
Fig. 10. Comparison of through-wall cracked pipe test results
with simulated ones; (a) load – load line displacement curve and
(b) load line displacement – crack growth curve.
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, test data for material properties and full-scale
welded pipes are summarized from original data in Pipe Fracture
Encyclopedia. Finite element analysis are conducted for basic
experiments with reasonable procedures to determine the
parameters of damage model and material constants in the
equation of fracture strain. Then, determined damage model
and fracture strain are applied to ductile tearing simulation for
large-scale welded pipes. Crack initiation and maximum loads
are expected to characterize the fracture behavior of full-scale
welded pipes. From the results of simulation, deformation
response and characteristic loads are compared with
experimentally measured values to verify the application of
damage model on weld material. As a result, the predictions of
finite element damage analysis are in good agreement with
experiments.
NOMENCLATURE
A, B, C material constants in multi-axial fracture strain locus
ao initial crack length
a crack growth
t pipe thickness
rm mean radius of pipe
θ half circumferential crack angle
f (stress-modified) multi-axial fracture strain
ep, ep equivalent plastic strain and increment
σ e, σ m effective stress and mean normal stress, respectively
σ1, σ2, σ3 principal stress components
Le element size
,  accumulated and incremental damage, respectively
c critical damage for cracking
JR J-resistance
6 Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90490/ on 06/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
Abbreviations
C(T) compact tension
FE finite element
LLD load-line displacement
SAW submerged-art weld
TWC through-wall cracked
FEA finite element analysis
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported by the Energy Efficiency &
Resources Core Technology Program of the Korea Institute of
Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP), granted
financial resource from the Ministry of Trade, Industry &
Energy, Republic of Korea. (No. 20131520202170).
REFERENCES
[1] Gurson AL. Continuum theory of ductile rupture by void
nucleation and growth. Part 1-yield criteria and flow rules for
porous ductile media. J Engng Mater Tech. 1977;99:2–15.
[2] Tvergaard V, Needleman A. Analysis of the cup-cone fracture
in a round tensile bar. Acta Metall. 1984;32:157–69.
[3] Rousselier G. Ductile fracture models and their potential in
local approach of fracture. Nucl Engng Des. 1987;105:97–111.
[4] Cornec A, Scheider I, Schwalbe K-H. On the practical
application of the cohesive model. Engng Fract Mech.
2003;70:1963–87.
[5] Xu J, Zhang ZL, Qstby E, Nyhus B, Sun DB., Constraint
effect on the ductile crack growth resistance of circumferentially
cracked pipes, Engng Fract Mech. 2010;77:671–84.
[6] Ruggieri C, Dotta F. Numerical modeling of ductile crack
extension in high pressure pipelines with longitudinal flaws.
Engineering Structures. 2011;33:1423-38
[7] Yin S, Williams PT, Klasky HB, Bass BR. Analysis of ductile
crack growth in pipe test in STYLE project, In: Proceedings of
the 2012 ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference. Paper
PVP2012-78518; 2012.
[8] Hojo K, Watanabe D, Application of Gurson model to Ni-
based alloy weld Joint pipe with an axial or a circumferential
surface flaw (phase II). In: Proceedings of the 2013 ASME
Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, Paper PVP2013-97654;
2013.
[9] Hojo K, Ogawa N, Application of Gurson model to Ni-based
alloy weld Joint pipe with an axial or a circumferential surface
flaw In: Proceedings of the 2012 ASME Pressure Vessels and
Piping Conference, Paper PVP2012-78171; 2012.
[10] Oh CK, Kim YJ, Baek JH, Kim WS. Development of stress-
modified fracture strain for ductile failure of API X65 steel. Int
J Fract. 2007;143:119-33
[11] Oh CS, Kim NH, Kim YJ, Baek JH, Kim YP, Kim WS. A
finite element ductile failure simulation method using stress-
modified fracture strain model. Engng Fract Mech.
2011;78:124–37.
[12] Kim JH, Kim NH, Kim YJ, Hasegawa K, Miyazaki K.
Ductile fracture simulation of 304 stainless steel pipes with two
circumferential surface cracks. Fatig Fract Engng Mater Struct.
2013;36:1067–80.
 [13] Nam HS, Oh YR, Kim YJ, Kim JS, Miura N. Application of
engineering ductile tearing simulation method to CRIEPI pipe
test. Engng Fract Mech. 2015;153:128-142.
[14] Chi W, Kanvinde AM, Deierlein GG. Prediction of ductile
fracture in steel connections using SMCS criterion. J Struct Eng
2006;132:171–81.
[15] Kanvinde AM, Deierlein GG. Void growth model and stress
modified critical strain model to predict ductile fracture in
structural steels. J Struct Eng 2006;132:1907–18.
[16] Battelle, 1997, Pipe Fracture Encyclopedia, Volume 3: Pipe
Fracture Test Data.
[17] McClintock, FA. A Criterion for Ductile Fracture by the
Growth of Holes. Journal of Applied Mechanics. 1968;35:363-
371.
[18] Hancock, JW, Mackenzie, AC. On the mechanisms of
ductile failure in high-strength steels subjected to multi-axial
stress-states. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids.
1976;24(2-3):147-160.
[19] Rice, JR, Tracey, DM. On the ductile enlargement of voids
in triaxial stress fields. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of
Solids. 1969;17(3):201-217.
[20] ABAQUS 6.13, Analysis User’s Manual, 2013, Dassault
Systemes Simulia Corp., Providence, RI.

7 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90490/ on 06/03/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo