FossilPlantHigh-EnergyPipingDamage EPRI PDF

Effective December 6, 2006, this report has been made publicly available in
accordance with Section 734.3(b)(3) and published in accordance with Section

734.7 of the U.S. Export Administration Regulations. As a result of this
publication, this report is subject to only copyright protection and does not
require any license agreement from EPRI. This notice supersedes the export
control restrictions and any proprietary licensed material notices embedded in
the document prior to publication.
Fossil Plant High-Energy Piping Damage:

Theory and Practice
Volume 1: Piping Fundamentals
Place Image Here

Fossil Plant High-Energy Piping
Damage: Theory and Practice
Volume 1: Piping Fundamentals
1012201
Interim Report, June 2007
EPRI Project Manager

K. Coleman
ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE

3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338 • PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 • USA
800.313.3774 • 650.855.2121 • askepri@epri.com • www.epri.com
DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES
THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN
ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH
INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE
ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM:
(A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I)

WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR
SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR
INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S
CIRCUMSTANCE; OR
(B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER

(INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE
HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR
SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD,
PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT.
ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT
Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.
NOTE
For further information about EPRI, call the EPRI Customer Assistance Center at 800.313.3774 or
e-mail askepri@epri.com.
Electric Power Research Institute, EPRI, and TOGETHER…SHAPING THE FUTURE OF ELECTRICITY
are registered service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc.
Copyright © 2007 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
CITATIONS
This report was prepared by
Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.

3315 Almaden Expressway, Suite 24
San Jose, CA 95118-1557
Principal Investigators
S. Rau
C. Krause
M. Clark
Y. Krampfner
K. Bezzant
This report describes research sponsored by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).
This report is a corporate document that should be cited in the literature in the following manner:
Fossil Plant High-Energy Piping Damage: Theory and Practice, Volume 1: Piping
Fundamentals. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2007. 1012201.
iii
PRODUCT DESCRIPTION
Condition assessment programs for high-energy piping systems are often a major aspect of a
fossil utility’s inspection and maintenance program. In the past 30 years, a number of major
failures of fossil high-energy piping have been associated with flow-accelerated corrosion of
feedwater piping, creep failures of longitudinal seam-welded hot reheat and main steam piping,
and corrosion fatigue failures of cold reheat steam piping. In addition to these well-documented
failures, most utilities experience failures of support systems, branch lines, instrumentation and
inspection connections, and even circumferential weld cracking. Although considerable literature
is available to describe the more notable and catastrophic failure mechanisms, many of the more
frequent but generally less catastrophic failures are less well documented, and the understanding
of these failures has been garnered through experience and utility participation in industry-
sponsored seminars and user groups.
Results and Findings

High-energy fossil piping systems include the main steam, hot and cold reheat, feedwater, and
extraction steam piping. These systems can be subjected to a number of damage mechanisms,
including creep, fatigue, thermal fatigue, creep-fatigue, microstructural instability, and flow-
accelerated corrosion. An effective in-service inspection program anticipates the occurrence of
damage and provides for a cost-effective inspection program to identify this damage during an
early stage of development to allow for budgeted repair or replacement. This report presents an
overview of the design and fabrication of high-energy piping systems, common damage
mechanisms, inspection techniques, and condition assessment approaches.
Challenges and Objectives

As utilities’ technical personnel continue to mature and retire, there is often little opportunity for
less senior technical staff to glean information from these individuals. This report gathers, in a
single resource, an overview of the design, fabrication, common failure mechanisms, inspection
techniques, and condition assessment tools associated with fossil utility high-energy piping
systems.
Boiler and turbine manufacturers provide an in-depth resource for condition assessment
programs associated with their components. In contrast, much of the technical expertise
associated with the design and construction of fossil high-energy piping systems was distributed
through a large number of medium to large architect-engineering or engineering-construction
firms. With the decrease in new construction, most of these firms have gone through
restructuring and downsizing, resulting in a significant loss of centralized piping design and
fabrication experience. At the same time, most utilities have experienced similar reductions in
v
their technical staff. Concurrent with the loss of available technical resources, the U.S. fleet of
fossil power plants continue to age, the potential for the development of long-term damage
mechanisms increases, and a need for the appropriate level of condition assessment continues.
The objective of this report is to provide a guidance document that facilitates the development
and implementation of a comprehensive, programmatic approach to life management of fossil
generation piping systems.
Applications, Value, and Use

Utilities can use the information in this report to develop and implement a comprehensive high-
energy piping inspection program with an emphasis on safety, system reliability, optimized
inspection costs and timing, and outage planning.
EPRI Perspective
Although the more notable and catastrophic failure mechanisms are well documented in industry
literature, the more frequent but generally less catastrophic failures are less well documented.
The understanding of these less catastrophic failures has been garnered through experience and
utility participation in industry-sponsored seminars and user groups. This report compiles
information from a variety of sources to describe the design, fabrication, common failure
mechanisms, inspection techniques, and condition assessment tools associated with fossil utility
high-energy piping systems.
Approach
This report will be produced in three volumes.
This first volume, Volume 1: Piping Fundamentals, provides an overview of the design and
fabrication of high-energy piping systems. Volume 1 also describes common damage
mechanisms, inspection techniques, and condition assessment approaches.
Volume 2: Performance of Steam Piping will provide a more in-depth perspective associated
with the materials and fabrication methods used in high-energy fossil steam piping. It will also
cover common damage mechanisms and describe how to develop a condition assessment
program to identify these mechanisms.
Volume 3: Performance of High-Energy Water Piping will provide information similar to that
provided in Volume 2, but it will focus on high-energy water piping systems.
Keywords
Condition assessment
Creep-fatigue
Damage mechanisms
Design
Flow-accelerated corrosion
Nondestructive examination
vi
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................1-1
2 DESIGN ..................................................................................................................................2-1
Introduction ...........................................................................................................................2-1
The Design Process ..............................................................................................................2-1
Fundamental Questions ...................................................................................................2-1
Material Selection .............................................................................................................2-2
Support Locations.............................................................................................................2-2
Stress Analysis .................................................................................................................2-2
Design Codes and Regulations.............................................................................................2-3
ASME Codes ....................................................................................................................2-4
Design Life ............................................................................................................................2-6
System Loads .......................................................................................................................2-7
Dead Weight Loads .....................................................................................................2-7
Pressure Loads............................................................................................................2-8
Wind Loads ..................................................................................................................2-9
Seismic Loads ...........................................................................................................2-10
Pressure Relief Loads ...............................................................................................2-10
Expansion Loads .......................................................................................................2-11
System Supports, Design, and Function .............................................................................2-12
Basic Design Steps ........................................................................................................2-12
Flow Considerations and Modeling .....................................................................................2-16
Flow-Related Dynamic Load Events ..............................................................................2-16
Flow-Accelerated Corrosion ...........................................................................................2-17
Inspection Methods....................................................................................................2-19
Assessment Approaches ...........................................................................................2-20
Attemperator Design and Function......................................................................................2-20
References ..........................................................................................................................2-22
vii
3 METALLURGY OF STEELS ..................................................................................................3-1
Introduction ...........................................................................................................................3-1
Comparison of Material Standards........................................................................................3-1
Historical Perspective on Material Changes in the American Power Piping Standards ........3-7
Steel Metallurgy ....................................................................................................................3-9
Iron-Carbon Systems........................................................................................................3-9
Nonequilibrium Cooling of Steels ...................................................................................3-12
Continuous Cooling Transformations .............................................................................3-13
Effects of Composition on Microstructure and Properties ...................................................3-18
Elemental Effects............................................................................................................3-18
Mechanical Properties.........................................................................................................3-21
Strength ..........................................................................................................................3-21
Fatigue............................................................................................................................3-21
Creep..............................................................................................................................3-22
Creep Crack Growth.......................................................................................................3-23
Creep-Fatigue.................................................................................................................3-23
Classification of Steels Used in Power Plant Applications ..................................................3-23
Carbon and Low-Alloy Steels .........................................................................................3-25
Ferritic and Advanced Ferritic Boiler Steels ...................................................................3-27
Austenitic Steels .............................................................................................................3-30
Carbon Steels......................................................................................................................3-32
Microstructure.................................................................................................................3-33
Mechanical Properties ....................................................................................................3-35
Allowable Stress Values .................................................................................................3-38
Creep Properties ............................................................................................................3-40
Aging Effects ..................................................................................................................3-41
Chromium-Molybdenum Steels ...........................................................................................3-43
Microstructure.................................................................................................................3-46
Aging Effects ..................................................................................................................3-50
Carbide Changes and Coarsening.............................................................................3-50
Carbide Embrittlement ...............................................................................................3-52
Temper Embrittlement ...............................................................................................3-53
viii
Austenitic Steels..................................................................................................................3-54
Microstructure.................................................................................................................3-55
Aging Behavior ...............................................................................................................3-58
Sigma Phase .............................................................................................................3-59
Sensitization ..............................................................................................................3-60
Grain Growth .............................................................................................................3-62
Advanced Ferritic Steels .....................................................................................................3-62
Microstructure.................................................................................................................3-65
Creep Strength ...............................................................................................................3-68
Aging Behavior ...............................................................................................................3-69
References ..........................................................................................................................3-70
4 WELDING FUNDAMENTALS ................................................................................................4-1

Introduction ...........................................................................................................................4-1
Welding Processes ...............................................................................................................4-1
Shielded Metal Arc Welding .............................................................................................4-2
Gas Tungsten Arc Welding...............................................................................................4-3
Submerged Arc Welding...................................................................................................4-4
Process Description.....................................................................................................4-4
Consumables ...............................................................................................................4-5
Gas Metal Arc Welding.....................................................................................................4-7
Spray Transfer .............................................................................................................4-8
Short Circuiting Arc Transfer........................................................................................4-8
Globular Transfer .........................................................................................................4-9
Pulsed-Arc Spray Transfer.........................................................................................4-10
Flux Cored Arc Welding..................................................................................................4-10
Weld Design ........................................................................................................................4-11
Microstructural Development...............................................................................................4-15
Solidification Structure ...............................................................................................4-15
Buoyancy and Electromagnetic Effects .....................................................................4-15
Surface Tension.........................................................................................................4-16
ix
Inclusion Formation....................................................................................................4-21
Microstructure of the Heat Affected Zone ..................................................................4-22
Welding Defects ..................................................................................................................4-23
Cracks ............................................................................................................................4-25
Incomplete Fusion ..........................................................................................................4-26
Incomplete Joint Penetration ..........................................................................................4-27
Inclusions........................................................................................................................4-27
Porosity...........................................................................................................................4-27
Undercut .........................................................................................................................4-27
References ..........................................................................................................................4-28
5 MANUFACTURE, FABRICATION, AND ERECTION ............................................................5-1

Introduction ...........................................................................................................................5-1
Piping ....................................................................................................................................5-2
Historical Perspective on Piping Codes—Boiler Proper, Boiler External, and Power
Piping................................................................................................................................5-4
Development of ASME B31.1 ......................................................................................5-4
Fabrication of Piping Components ...................................................................................5-5
Seamless Pipe..................................................................................................................5-6
Pierce and Pilger Rolling Process................................................................................5-6
Plug Rolling Process....................................................................................................5-7
Pierce and Draw Process ............................................................................................5-9
Extrusion Process ......................................................................................................5-10
Forged and Bored ......................................................................................................5-10
Centrifugally Cast ......................................................................................................5-10
Welded Pipe ...................................................................................................................5-10
Pipe Bends .....................................................................................................................5-11
Furnace Bending .......................................................................................................5-12
Incremental Bending ..................................................................................................5-12
Induction Bending ......................................................................................................5-12
Ram Bending .............................................................................................................5-14
Rotary Draw Bending.................................................................................................5-14
Roll Bending ..............................................................................................................5-15
Pipe Fittings....................................................................................................................5-16
References ..........................................................................................................................5-16
x
6 OPERATION...........................................................................................................................6-1
7 DAMAGE MECHANISMS AND MODELS .............................................................................7-1

Introduction ...........................................................................................................................7-1
Creep ....................................................................................................................................7-5
Introduction.......................................................................................................................7-5
Crack Initiation..................................................................................................................7-7
Crack Growth....................................................................................................................7-8
Analytical Techniques.......................................................................................................7-8
Creep Deformation—Life Models.................................................................................7-8
Creep Crack Growth Models......................................................................................7-10
Damage Accumulation Rules.....................................................................................7-12
Commercially Available Modeling Packages .............................................................7-15
Example..........................................................................................................................7-15
Fatigue ................................................................................................................................7-18
Introduction.....................................................................................................................7-18
Crack Initiation................................................................................................................7-20
Crack Growth..................................................................................................................7-20
Analytical Techniques.....................................................................................................7-22
Introduction ................................................................................................................7-22
Nominal Stress Approaches—Goodman Diagram and Modified Goodman
Diagram .....................................................................................................................7-23
The Local Strain Approach to Fatigue .......................................................................7-25
Miner’s Rule for Calculation of Fatigue Life-Fraction .................................................7-27
Fracture Mechanics Approaches to Crack Growth by Fatigue ..................................7-29
Example..........................................................................................................................7-31
Creep-Fatigue .....................................................................................................................7-34
Introduction.....................................................................................................................7-34
Crack Initiation................................................................................................................7-36
Crack Growth..................................................................................................................7-37
Analytical Techniques.....................................................................................................7-37
Life Prediction Techniques ........................................................................................7-37
Crack Growth Under Creep-Fatigue Loading ............................................................7-40
Comparison of Analytical Techniques for Creep, Fatigue, and Creep-Fatigue..........7-43
Example..........................................................................................................................7-44
xi
Flow-Accelerated Corrosion ................................................................................................7-46
Introduction.....................................................................................................................7-46
Operational Conditions ...................................................................................................7-47
Oxidation-Reduction Potential ...................................................................................7-48
Water pH....................................................................................................................7-48
Temperature ..............................................................................................................7-48
Flow Velocity..............................................................................................................7-49
Mass Transfer ............................................................................................................7-49
Geometry ...................................................................................................................7-49
Materials Influences........................................................................................................7-49
Analysis Techniques.......................................................................................................7-50
Examples........................................................................................................................7-50
Other Potential Damage Mechanisms.................................................................................7-52
Microstructural Degradation and Embrittlement .............................................................7-52
Spheroidization ..........................................................................................................7-53
Graphitization.............................................................................................................7-55
Temper Embrittlement ...............................................................................................7-57
Corrosion ........................................................................................................................7-59
Stress Corrosion Cracking and Corrosion Fatigue .........................................................7-61
Erosion ...........................................................................................................................7-61
Cavitation........................................................................................................................7-62
Material Selection Considerations.......................................................................................7-63
References ..........................................................................................................................7-64
8 PROGRAMMATIC APPROACHES TO LIFE MANAGEMENT OF PIPING SYSTEMS ........8-1

Introduction ...........................................................................................................................8-1
Three-Level, Phased Approach to Assessment ....................................................................8-3
Level I ...............................................................................................................................8-4
Level II ..............................................................................................................................8-7
Level III .............................................................................................................................8-9
Advantages and Disadvantages of the Phased Approach to Assessment .........................8-12
Currently Available Prediction Tools ...................................................................................8-14
Introduction.....................................................................................................................8-14
BLESS (Boiler Life Evaluation and Simulation System) .................................................8-14
xii
Inputs .........................................................................................................................8-14
Material Properties.....................................................................................................8-15
Calculational Methods ...............................................................................................8-15
OmegaPipe Software .....................................................................................................8-16
Overview ....................................................................................................................8-16
Piping Stress Analysis ...............................................................................................8-18
Local Weld Stresses ..................................................................................................8-19
Life Assessment ........................................................................................................8-19
CHECWORKS™ and CHECUP™ Programs .................................................................8-20
European Programs .......................................................................................................8-22
References ..........................................................................................................................8-22
9 PIPING SYSTEM SURVEYS..................................................................................................9-1

Introduction and Background ................................................................................................9-1
Support System Design....................................................................................................9-1
Types of Hanger Supports................................................................................................9-3
Flexible Supports .........................................................................................................9-4
Rigid Supports .............................................................................................................9-5
Snubbers and Sway Braces.........................................................................................9-6
Dampers ......................................................................................................................9-7
Support Attachments (Pipe Side) .....................................................................................9-7
Evaluation of Hanger and Support Performance...................................................................9-8
What to Look for in a Hanger Support Evaluation ............................................................9-8
When a Hanger Support Problem Has Been Identified ....................................................9-9
Replacing a Hanger Support ............................................................................................9-9
Addressing Chronic Hanger Support Problems..............................................................9-10
In Situ Hanger Testing....................................................................................................9-10
Sagging and Skews in Critical Piping .............................................................................9-10
Hot and Cold Hanger Walkdown Inspections......................................................................9-11
Preparation .....................................................................................................................9-11
Inspection Equipment and Documentation Aids.............................................................9-13
Documentation of the Hanger Walkdown .......................................................................9-14
Summary of Hanger Walkdown Documentation Requirements .....................................9-15
System Survey Checklist.....................................................................................................9-15
xiii
General Hanger Observations ...................................................................................9-15
Constant Load Support Observations........................................................................9-15
Variable Load Support Observations .........................................................................9-16
Rigid Support Observations .......................................................................................9-16
Sway Brace Support Observations ............................................................................9-16
Snubber and Shock Suppressors Support Observations ..........................................9-16
General Piping Observations .....................................................................................9-17
References ..........................................................................................................................9-17
10 NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING ..........................................................................................10-1

Introduction .........................................................................................................................10-1
Assessment Objective (Macro/Micro).............................................................................10-2
Access and Required Surface Preparation ....................................................................10-4
No Surface Preparation .............................................................................................10-4
Surface Debris and Scale Removal ...........................................................................10-5
Access Limitations .....................................................................................................10-6
Visual Testing......................................................................................................................10-6
Overview.........................................................................................................................10-6
Application in Piping Systems ........................................................................................10-6
Advantages and Disadvantages.....................................................................................10-7
Advantages ................................................................................................................10-7
Disadvantages ...........................................................................................................10-7
Magnetic Particle Testing ....................................................................................................10-7
Overview.........................................................................................................................10-7
Advantages ................................................................................................................10-8
Disadvantages ...........................................................................................................10-9
Dye Penetrant Testing.........................................................................................................10-9
Overview.........................................................................................................................10-9
Application in Piping Systems ......................................................................................10-10
Advantages and Disadvantages...................................................................................10-10
Advantages ..............................................................................................................10-10
Disadvantages .........................................................................................................10-10
xiv
Eddy Current Testing ........................................................................................................10-11
Overview.......................................................................................................................10-11
Advantages ..............................................................................................................10-12
Disadvantages .........................................................................................................10-12
Conventional Ultrasonic Testing........................................................................................10-12
Overview.......................................................................................................................10-12
Advantages ..............................................................................................................10-15
Disadvantages .........................................................................................................10-15
Advanced Ultrasonic Testing.............................................................................................10-15
Time-of-Flight Diffraction ..............................................................................................10-15
Overview ..................................................................................................................10-15
Application in Piping Systems..................................................................................10-19
Advantages/Disadvantages .....................................................................................10-19
Advantages .........................................................................................................10-19
Disadvantages ....................................................................................................10-19
Phased Array Ultrasonic Testing ..................................................................................10-20
Overview ..................................................................................................................10-20
Application in Piping Systems..................................................................................10-21
Advantages and Disadvantages ..............................................................................10-21
Advantages .........................................................................................................10-21
Disadvantages ....................................................................................................10-21
Acoustic Emission Crack Detection...................................................................................10-22
Overview.......................................................................................................................10-22
Advantages ..............................................................................................................10-22
Disadvantages .........................................................................................................10-22
Pulsed Eddy Current Testing ............................................................................................10-23
Overview.......................................................................................................................10-23
xv
Advantages ..............................................................................................................10-23
Disadvantages .........................................................................................................10-23
Radiographic Testing ........................................................................................................10-24
Overview.......................................................................................................................10-24
Advantages ..............................................................................................................10-25
Disadvantages .........................................................................................................10-25
Guided Wave Ultrasonic Testing.......................................................................................10-25
Overview.......................................................................................................................10-25
Advantages ..............................................................................................................10-26
Disadvantages .........................................................................................................10-26
11 METALLURGICAL EXAMINATION AND ANALYSIS AND MATERIAL

CHARACTERIZATION............................................................................................................11-1
Introduction .........................................................................................................................11-1
Material Sampling................................................................................................................11-3
Large-Sample Collection Methods .................................................................................11-3
Boat Sampling ...........................................................................................................11-4
Plug Sampling............................................................................................................11-4
Small-Sample Collection Methods..................................................................................11-4
Small Cone Sampling ................................................................................................11-4
Sample Removal by Drilling.......................................................................................11-5
Surface Sampling System .........................................................................................11-5
Remediation ...................................................................................................................11-6
Hardness Testing ................................................................................................................11-6
Overview.........................................................................................................................11-6
Alloy Identification .............................................................................................................11-10
Manufacturer’s Identification.........................................................................................11-10
Qualitative Alloy Identification.......................................................................................11-11
xvi
Quantitative Alloy Identification ....................................................................................11-11
Material Testing.................................................................................................................11-12
Mechanical Testing.......................................................................................................11-12
Metallographic Examination .........................................................................................11-13
Metallurgical Replication ...................................................................................................11-15
Overview.......................................................................................................................11-15
Casting Replication.......................................................................................................11-15
Metallurgical Replication...............................................................................................11-16
Advantages ..............................................................................................................11-17
Disadvantages .........................................................................................................11-18
Accelerated Creep-Rupture Testing..................................................................................11-18
References ........................................................................................................................11-19
12 INSTRUMENTATION AND MONITORING ........................................................................12-1

Introduction .........................................................................................................................12-1
Thermocouples....................................................................................................................12-1
Strain Gauges .....................................................................................................................12-3
Creep-FatiguePro On-Line Damage Monitoring..................................................................12-4
Acoustic Emission On-Line Damage Monitoring .................................................................12-6
Water Chemistry..................................................................................................................12-7
Dimensional Measurements................................................................................................12-8
References ..........................................................................................................................12-9
13 DATA STORAGE, RETRIEVAL, AND EVALUATION.......................................................13-1

Introduction .........................................................................................................................13-1
Traditional Methods.............................................................................................................13-2
PC-Based Applications........................................................................................................13-2
Web-Based Applications .....................................................................................................13-3
System Isolation and Security ........................................................................................13-3
Software Changes, Patches, and Upgrades ..................................................................13-3
Data Collection Periods ..................................................................................................13-3
Remote Access ..............................................................................................................13-4
System Capacity.............................................................................................................13-4
xvii
14 REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT .........................................................................................14-1
Introduction .........................................................................................................................14-1
Governing Codes ................................................................................................................14-1
Type and Extent of Repair ..................................................................................................14-1
Permanent Repairs.........................................................................................................14-2
Temporary Repairs.........................................................................................................14-2
Piping System Support or Restraint ....................................................................................14-3
Repair Design .....................................................................................................................14-3
Pipe or Component Replacement ..................................................................................14-3
Complete Weld Removal—Through-Wall Weld Repairs ................................................14-5
Non-Through-Wall Weld Repairs....................................................................................14-6
Circumferential Repairs .............................................................................................14-7
Localized Repairs ......................................................................................................14-8
Through-Wall Defects ................................................................................................14-9
Base Metal Repairs ...................................................................................................14-9
Plug Sample Repairs ...............................................................................................14-11
Radiographic Plugs..................................................................................................14-11
Other Repair Designs ..............................................................................................14-11
Repair Considerations.......................................................................................................14-12
Flaw Excavation ...........................................................................................................14-12
Fit-up, Tack Welding, and Temporary Attachments ..........................................................14-12
Fit-Up............................................................................................................................14-12
Cleaning .......................................................................................................................14-12
Alignment......................................................................................................................14-13
Tack Welding................................................................................................................14-13
Temporary Attachments ...............................................................................................14-13
Preheating and Post-Weld Heat Treatment..................................................................14-14
General ....................................................................................................................14-14
Preheat ....................................................................................................................14-14
Post-Weld Heat Treatment ......................................................................................14-15
Prerequisites .......................................................................................................14-15
Temperature Measurement.................................................................................14-15
Post-Weld Heat Treatment Procedure ................................................................14-16
Resistance Heating Pad Installation ...................................................................14-17
xviii
Post-Weld Heat Treatment Schedule..................................................................14-17
Nondestructive Evaluation Following Completion of Post-Weld Heat
Treatment............................................................................................................14-17
Alternatives to Post-Weld Heat Treatment...............................................................14-18
Component Replacement..................................................................................................14-18
Like-for-Like..................................................................................................................14-18
Upgrading by Design or Material Improvement ............................................................14-18
References ........................................................................................................................14-18
xix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1 Configuration of a Constant Load Support .............................................................2-15

Figure 2-2 Cross Section of a Variable Load Support Using a Single Coil Spring...................2-15
Figure 2-3 Contact Type (Spray) Attemperator Showing General Configuration.....................2-21
Figure 3-1 The Iron Carbon Equilibrium Diagram Showing How the Phases Change with
Temperature and Carbon Composition............................................................................3-10
Figure 3-2 Detail of the Iron Carbon Diagram, Illustrating Microstructures Formed During
Equilibrium Cooling ..........................................................................................................3-11
Figure 3-3 Dimensional Changes That Occur on Heating and Cooling through the
Temperature Range in Which Microstructural Transformations Take Place....................3-14
Figure 3-4 Continuous Cooling Transformation Diagram for Carbon Steel .............................3-15
Figure 3-5 Continuous Cooling Transformation Diagram for 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo Steel ...................3-16
Figure 3-6 Peak Temperature Variations in the Weld and Heat-Affected Zone Result in a
Range of Prior Austenite Grain Sizes ..............................................................................3-17
Figure 3-7 Changes That Occur in the Precipitates Present in Cr Mo Low-Alloy Steels
with Exposure to Elevated Temperatures ........................................................................3-25
Figure 3-8 Historical Background of the Development of Power Plant Steels .........................3-26
Figure 3-9 Variation in Strength and Ductility for New 9 wt% and 12 wt% Cr Steels as a
Function of C + N and Chromium Equivalent (Based on Irving) ......................................3-27
Figure 3-10 Development of High-Strength Boiler Steels ........................................................3-29
Figure 3-11 Development of High-Strength Boiler Steels ........................................................3-32
Figure 3-12 Typical Micrographs of Carbon Steel, Showing (a) Predominantly Ferrite
with Approximately 10% Pearlite and (b) Detail of the Pearlitic Microstructure................3-35
Figure 3-13 Changes in Strength and Ductility with Increasing Carbon Levels for a
Simple Carbon Steel ........................................................................................................3-36
Figure 3-14 The Influence of Increasing Carbon Level on Charpy Impact Tests for
Carbon Steels ..................................................................................................................3-37
Figure 3-15 Variation of Microstructural Changes Resulting from Spheroidization and
Graphitization with Time at Elevated Temperature ..........................................................3-42
Figure 3-16 Effect of Spheroidization on the Rupture Strength of Carbon-Molybdenum
Steel (0.17 C 0.88 Mn 0.20 Si 0.42 Mo) ...........................................................................3-44
Figure 3-17 Differences in Fatigue Behavior for Carbon Steels with a Pearlitic or a
Spheroidized Microstructure ............................................................................................3-45
Figure 3-18 Variation of Creep Strength with Chromium Content for a Series of Low-
Alloy Steels ......................................................................................................................3-45
xxi
Figure 3-19 Continuous Cooling Transformation Diagram for 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo Steel .................3-46
Figure 3-20 Typical Weld Microstructures in Cr Mo Low-Alloy Steel Shown in (a)
Macrosection, (b) with Details of Typical Microstructures in the Weld Metal, and (c)
Heat-Affected Zone ..........................................................................................................3-47
Figure 3-21 Variation of Allowable Stress Values for Grade 11, 1-1/4 Cr Mo Steel at
Different Metal Temperatures ..........................................................................................3-48
Figure 3-22 Variation of the Larson-Miller Parameter with Creep Stress for 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo
Steel .................................................................................................................................3-49
Figure 3-23 Optical Micrograph Showing Precipitate Coarsening of P22 Material ..................3-50
Figure 3-24 Progressive Changes in the Microstructure of 1 Cr Mo Steel...............................3-51
Figure 3-25 Variation in Creep Strength of 1 Cr Mo Steel Samples as Microstructural
Aging Progresses.............................................................................................................3-52
Figure 3-26 Charpy Impact Transition Curves for 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo Steel....................................3-53
Figure 3-27 Stress Rupture Curves for a Weak Heat (Heat A) and an Average Heat
(Heat B) of Type 304 Stainless Steel Tubing Material .....................................................3-56
Figure 3-28 Etched Surface of a Service-Degraded Type 304H Stainless Steel Tube
Sample .............................................................................................................................3-57
Figure 3-29 Microstructural Changes That Occurred in 321H Stainless Steel After
Exposure at Elevated Temperatures for Different Times .................................................3-58
Figure 3-30 Microstructural Changes That Occurred in 347H Stainless Steel After
Exposure at Elevated Temperatures for Different Times .................................................3-59
Figure 3-31 The Development of Sigma Phase for Different Austenitic Stainless Steels
Exposed at 1292°F (700°C) .............................................................................................3-60
Figure 3-32 When Austenitic Stainless Steels Are Exposed to Prolonged Exposure to
Temperatures in the Range of 805°F–1650°F (430°C–900°C), Chromium Carbides
Form on the Grain Boundaries .........................................................................................3-61
Figure 3-33 Typical Micrographs of Grade 91 Martensitic Steel Shown in (a) an Optical
Micrograph and (B) a Transmission Electron Micrograph ................................................3-62
Figure 3-34 Continuous Cooling Transformation Results for Grade 91 Steel..........................3-66
Figure 3-35 Ferrite and Coarse Carbides Formed in Grade 91 Steel ......................................3-66
Figure 3-36 Comparison of the Creep Strength of Grade 91 with P22 and X20......................3-68
Figure 3-37 Summary of the Microstructural Changes Noted During Long-Term Aging of
Grade 91 Material at 1112°F (600°C) ..............................................................................3-69
Figure 3-38 Results of Postexposure Testing on Grade 91 Material, Showing the
Decrease in Strength Compared to Unexposed Material.................................................3-70
Figure 4-1 Schematic of Shielded Metal Arc Welding Process..................................................4-2
Figure 4-2 Schematic of Gas Tungsten Arc Welding Process ...................................................4-3
Figure 4-3 Schematic of Submerged Arc Welding Process .......................................................4-5
Figure 4-4 Schematic of Gas Metal Arc Welding Process .........................................................4-7
Figure 4-5 Schematic of Short Circuit Cycle in Gas Metal Arc Welding.....................................4-9
Figure 4-6 Pulsed-Spray Arc Welding Current Characteristic..................................................4-10
xxii
Figure 4-7 Schematic of Flux Cored Arc Welding Process ......................................................4-11
Figure 4-8 Standard 37-1/2° Weld Bevel .................................................................................4-12
Figure 4-9 J-Bevel Weld End Preparation ...............................................................................4-12
Figure 4-10 Compound Bevel Weld End Preparation..............................................................4-13
Figure 4-11 Allowable Weld End Transition for Components With Different Wall
Thickness or Outside Diameter ........................................................................................4-14
Figure 4-12 Weld Metal Fluid Flow as a Result of Buoyancy Effects.......................................4-16
Figure 4-13 Weld Metal Fluid Flow as a Result of Electromagnetic Force ..............................4-16
Figure 4-14 Weld Metal Fluid Flow as a Result of the Variation of Surface Tension of (a)
Iron and (b) Surface Active Elements (Such As Sulfur and Oxygen) As a Function of
Temperature.....................................................................................................................4-17
Figure 4-15 Weld Metal Fluid Flow Along the Direction of Welding .........................................4-17
Figure 4-16 Different Solidification Processes in an Iron Base Alloy .......................................4-18
Figure 4-17 Two-Dimensional Appearance of the Weld Pool Showing the Columnar
Grain Development ..........................................................................................................4-19
Figure 4-18 Schematic Illustration of Location of Inclusions in the Microstructure of a
Weld Solidifying As (a) δ-Ferrite and (b) Austenite ..........................................................4-20
Figure 4-19 Transmission Electron Microscopy Images of Weldment Oxides Exhibiting
MnS Caps on the Surface of the Oxide............................................................................4-22
Figure 4-20 Schematic Diagram of the Various Subzones of the Heat-Affected Zone
Approximately Corresponding to a Carbon Steel Containing 0.15 Wt% Carbon .............4-23
Figure 4-21 Classification Scheme For Cracks in Steam Pipe Weldments .............................4-26
Figure 5-1 Pilger Mill Process for Seamless Pipe Manufacture .................................................5-7
Figure 5-2 Plug Rolling Process for Seamless Pipe Manufacture .............................................5-8
Figure 5-3 Pierce and Draw Process for Seamless Pipe Manufacture ......................................5-9
Figure 5-4 Induction Bending...................................................................................................5-13
Figure 5-5 Ram Bending Process............................................................................................5-14
Figure 5-6 Rotary Draw Bending Process ...............................................................................5-14
Figure 5-7 Roll Bending Process .............................................................................................5-15
Figure 5-8 Cold Bending Ranges.............................................................................................5-15
Figure 7-1 Typical Creep Curve Showing the Three Steps of Creep (Curve A, Constant
Load Test; Curve B, Constant Stress Test)........................................................................7-6
Figure 7-2 Use of a Parametric Method (the Larson-Miller Parameter) to Estimate the
Remaining Life of Service-Damaged Material..................................................................7-10
Figure 7-3 Flowchart of the Time-Dependent Fracture Mechanics Analysis Approach to
Determining the Remaining Life in Creep and Creep-Fatigue Assessments ...................7-12
Figure 7-4 Comparison Between Life Estimates Based on the Life-Fraction Rule and the
Observed Life in Postexposure Accelerated Tests ..........................................................7-14
Figure 7-5 Remaining Life-Fraction from Postexposure Accelerated Tests Versus
Expended Life Under Service Conditions ........................................................................7-15
Figure 7-6 Schematic Drawing Illustrating the Location and Extent of Cracking .....................7-16
xxiii
Figure 7-7 Micrographic (Left) and Macrographic (Right) Images of the Creep Crack ............7-17
Figure 7-8 Compilation of Fatigue S-N Data for Common Engineering Materials ...................7-19
Figure 7-9 Fatigue Crack Growth Data for Type A533 Steel ...................................................7-21
Figure 7-10 Typical Steps to Calculate Total Fatigue Life (Initiation and Propagation) in a
Fatigue Analysis...............................................................................................................7-22
Figure 7-11 Typical Steps to Calculate Fatigue Life in Propagation by Fracture
Mechanics Analyses Given an Existing or Assumed Flaw...............................................7-23
Figure 7-12 Plotting Locations of Mean (σM) and Alternating Stress (σA) and Comparing
Failure Lines.....................................................................................................................7-24
Figure 7-13 Schematic Representation of the Strain-Amplitude versus Cyclic Life
Relationship .....................................................................................................................7-26
Figure 7-14 An Example of the Application of Miner’s Rule.....................................................7-28
Figure 7-15 Schematic of Stress Fields in Cracked Bodies .....................................................7-30
Figure 7-16 Damage Caused by Fatigue Failure in a Section of Cold Reheat Piping .............7-32
Figure 7-17 Macroscopic Etch of the Seam Weld and Micrograph of the Fracture Surface ....7-33
Figure 7-18 Stereographic Image of the Fracture Surface ......................................................7-33
Figure 7-19 Effect of Prior Creep Damage and Tensile Hold Time on the Fatigue Life of
1 Cr 1/2 Mo Steel Base Metal and Heat-Affected Zones .................................................7-35
Figure 7-20 Schematic of Creep-Fatigue Curves (Design) For Some High-Temperature
Alloys................................................................................................................................7-36
Figure 7-21 Interaction and Consequences of Creep and Fatigue (Based on ASME N47)
for a Typical Power Plant Steel (2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo)...............................................................7-39
Figure 7-22 Stress Relaxation Curves For 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo Steel ..............................................7-40
Figure 7-23 Comparison of Creep-Fatigue Crack Growth Rates With (a) Ct(ave), (b) ΔK.......7-42
Figure 7-24 The Initial Stress-Temperature Distribution Generated by Upshock ....................7-45
Figure 7-25 Stereoscopic Macrographs of Creep-Fatigue Cracking Resulting from (a)
Upshock and (b) Downshock ...........................................................................................7-46
Figure 7-26 FAC Failure and Damage on an Economizer Inlet Header Tube .........................7-51
Figure 7-27 Typical Surface Appearance of FAC ....................................................................7-51
Figure 7-28 Typical Scalloped Appearance of Single-Phase Flow-Accelerated Corrosion
as Viewed with a Scanning Electron Microscope.............................................................7-52
Figure 7-29 Effect of Spheroidization on the Rupture Strength of Carbon-Molybdenum
Steel (0.17 C 0.88 Mn 0.20 Si 0.42 Mo) ...........................................................................7-54
Figure 7-30 Difference in the Fatigue Behavior for Carbon Steels with a Pearlitic or a
Spheroidized Microstructure ............................................................................................7-55
Figure 7-31 Variation of Microstructural Changes Due to Spheroidization and
Graphitization with Time at Elevated Temperature ..........................................................7-56
Figure 7-32 Shift in Impact Transition Curve to Higher Temperatures as a Result of
Temper Embrittlement Produced in SAE 3140 Steel by Isothermal Holding and
Furnace Cooling Through the Critical Range ...................................................................7-58
xxiv
Figure 7-33 Charpy Impact Transition Curves for 2-1/4 Cr Mo Steel Before Service, After
Laboratory Aging, and After Prolonged Service at 1022°F (550°C).................................7-59
Figure 7-34 Basic Corrosion Cell .............................................................................................7-60
Figure 8-1 Data Requirements in Assessment Stages for the Three-Level Approach ............8-3
Figure 8-2 Generic Steps in a Level 1 Assessment for Creep ...................................................8-5
Figure 8-3 Generic Steps in a Level II Assessment...................................................................8-8
Figure 8-4 Generic Steps in a Level III Assessment ................................................................8-11
Figure 8-5 Flowchart of the OmegaPipe Software ...................................................................8-18
Figure 8-6 Sample Input Screen for CHECUPTM Software FAC Analysis................................8-21
Figure 8-7 Sample Output Report from CHECUPTM Software FAC Analysis...........................8-21
Figure 10-1 Transducer Arrangement and Coverage Volume for Time-of-Flight
Diffraction .......................................................................................................................10-16
Figure 9-1 Portion of Typical High-Energy Piping Isometric Drawing ........................................9-3
Figure 9-2 Cross Section of a Constant-Load Support Hanger .................................................9-4
Figure 9-3 Cross Section of a Variable-Load Support Hanger ..................................................9-5
Figure 9-4 An Example of a Rigid Support ................................................................................9-6
Figure 9-5 Sway Brace Arrangements.......................................................................................9-6
Figure 9-6 Configuration of Welded Attachment Lugs on Piping ...............................................9-7
Figure 9-7 A Typical Hanger Plate Attachment Configuration ...................................................9-8
Figure 9-8 A Simple Isometric Sketch of Piping System Showing Relative Locations of
Supports with ID Names and the Type of Support Hanger ..............................................9-11
Figure 9-9 Detailed Design Drawings for a Typical Constant-Support Hanger Showing
the Pertinent Load and Travel Information .......................................................................9-12
Figure 9-10 Detailed Design Drawings for a Typical Variable-Load Support Hanger
Showing the Pertinent Load and Travel Information ........................................................9-13
Figure 9-11 A Support Hanger Running Through the Floor Grating ........................................9-14
Figure 10-2 Time-of-Flight Diffraction Standing Waves .........................................................10-16
Figure 10-3 Tip Signals from Mid-Wall Flaw ..........................................................................10-17
Figure 10-4 Typical Time-of-Flight Diffraction Image Showing Lateral Wave, Backwall
Reflection, Mid-Wall Flaw, and Small Back Surface Flaw..............................................10-18
Figure 10-5 Phased Array Coverage of a Seam Weld from Two Probe Positions.................10-20
Figure 11-1 Variation in Measured Hardness with Indenter Load for a 1 Cr 1/2 Mo Steel
Sample Ground to a 300-Grit Finish ................................................................................11-7
Figure 11-2 Variation in Hardness with Indenter Load for a 1 Cr 1/2 Mo Steel Sample
Polished to a 1-μm Diamond Finish .................................................................................11-8
Figure 11-3 Variation in Hardness with Indenter Load for a 1CrMo Steel Sample That
Had Been Repeatedly Polished .......................................................................................11-8
Figure 12-1 Thermocouple Junction Types .............................................................................12-2
Figure 12-2 Flowchart Illustrating the Creep-FatiguePro Monitoring Approach .......................12-5
Figure 14-1 Standard Weld Joint Details .................................................................................14-4
xxv
Figure 14-2 Typical Counterbore Design .................................................................................14-5
Figure 14-3 Weld Buttering to Reestablish Pipe or Component Length After Removal of
Heat-Affected Zone ..........................................................................................................14-6
Figure 14-4 Typical Non-Through-Wall, Full-Circumferential Weld Repair Detail....................14-7
Figure 14-5 Typical Non-Through-Wall, Local Weld Repair Detail ..........................................14-8
Figure 14-6 Typical Base Metal Excavation Details...............................................................14-10
Figure 14-7 Plug Sample Repair Methods.............................................................................14-11
xxvi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 Grid Size as a Function of Pipe Size for Ultrasonic Thickness Testing for Flow-
Accelerated Corrosion......................................................................................................2-19
Table 3-1 Summary of ASTM Materials Used in Fossil Generation ..........................................3-2
Table 3-2 Comparison of Selected Material Specifications for Piping Alloys.............................3-4
Table 3-3 Superseded ASTM/ASME Steel Piping Specifications ..............................................3-7
Table 3-4 Comparison of Select Allowables for Historic Editions of B31.1 ................................3-9
Table 3-5 Nominal Compositions of Ferritic Piping Steels .......................................................3-28
Table 3-6 Chemical Compositions of Austenitic Heat-Resistant Piping Steels........................3-31
Table 3-7 Specified Composition and Tensile Properties for Selected Carbon Steels ............3-33
Table 3-8 Specified Composition and Tensile Properties for Representative Pipe Alloys .......3-34
Table 3-9 ASME BPVC Section II Maximum Allowable Stress for Selected Carbon
Steels ...............................................................................................................................3-39
Table 3-10 Larson-Miller Parameters for Stress Rupture Properties .......................................3-40
Table 3-11 Typical Composition for Selected Advanced Ferritic Steels ..................................3-63
Table 3-12 Tensile Properties and Hardness for Selected Advanced Ferritic Steels ..............3-67
Table 3-13 Allowable Stress Values for Selected Advanced Ferritic Steels (Units: ksi) ..........3-67
Table 4-1 Summary of Measured Weld Metal Oxygen Contents...............................................4-6
Table 5-1 Permissible Variation in Wall Thickness for Pipe Made to NPS Schedules...............5-3
Table 5-2 Permissible Variation in Outside Diameter for Pipe Made to NPS Schedules...........5-3
Table 5-3 Approximate Lower Critical Temperatures As Given in ASME B31.1......................5-11
Table 7-1 Damage Mechanisms for Main Steam and Hot Reheat Piping..................................7-2
Table 7-2 Comparison of Assessment Methods for Fatigue, Creep, and Creep-Fatigue ........7-43
Table 7-3 Steel Selection Guide Based on Damage Mechanism Susceptibility ......................7-63
Table 10-1 NDE Methods Cross-Reference ............................................................................10-2
Table 11-1 Invasive Testing Options for High-Energy Piping ..................................................11-2
xxvii
1
INTRODUCTION
The objective of this three-volume report is to provide a guidance document that facilitates the
development and implementation of a comprehensive, programmatic approach to life
management of fossil generation piping systems. This first volume presents an overview of
general issues that relate to all piping systems, including the following:
• Design fundamentals
• Design of piping support systems
• Materials
• Fabrication
• Damage mechanisms
• Inspection methods
• Programmatic approaches to life management
• Considerations for repair versus replacement
High-energy fossil piping systems are normally considered to include the main steam, reheat
(both hot and cold), feedwater, and extraction steam piping. These systems can be subjected to a
number of damage mechanisms, including creep, fatigue, thermal fatigue, creep-fatigue,
microstructural instability, and flow-accelerated corrosion (FAC). An effective in-service
inspection program anticipates the occurrence of damage and provides for a cost-effective
program to identify this damage during an early stage of development in order to allow for
budgeted repair or replacement.
Unlike boiler tubes, high-energy piping has no expected design life. When in service, this
equipment undergoes continuous damage; however, the design margins established in the
fabrication codes are such that the anticipated damage rate was not expected to result in a failure
of major components during the economic life of a unit. When failure occurs, it is normally the
result of inadequate design as a result of overestimation of material strength (for example,
1-1/4 Cr 1/2 Mo has been derated over the years), an incomplete understanding of the
metallurgical impact of fabrication variables (creep cavitation damage in submerged arc welds),
or a significant change in operating practices (excessive temperatures or a change from base load
to cyclic operation).
1-1
Introduction
Although repair of selected locations (such as circumferential welds) might be required

throughout the life of the unit, the need for complete replacement of the piping system is unusual
and not expected. In addition, when major modifications are necessary, there is typically no
expectation of performance improvement. Therefore, the goal of a critical piping program is to
ensure personnel safety and to limit expenditures associated with forced outages resulting from
failure.
Historically, the assessment of high-energy fossil piping systems primarily consisted of regular
monitoring and adjustment of the piping support systems and nondestructive examination (NDE)
of a limited number of select circumferential welds. However, following the catastrophic failure
of seam-welded hot reheat (HRH) pipe at two power stations in 1985 and 1986, the U.S. electric
power industry embarked on an aggressive inspection and evaluation effort to minimize the risk
associated with operating seam-welded high-energy piping. As a result of these inspections, a
significant number of failures and major cracking occurrences have been identified in seam-
welded HRH and main steam piping.
Similarly, recent occurrences of circumferential weld damage have frequently developed in

nontraditional locations and, in many cases, have initiated subsurface, increasing the difficulty of
detection. Historically, critical piping inspection programs have considered a stress-biased
approach that focused attention on the calculated highest-stress welds with the expectation that
these welds would develop damage first and then serve as indicators for the overall system
condition. However, recent experience has shown that many industry failures and severe
cracking events have developed in lower-stress welds, demonstrating that stress is only one of
several critical factors that must be considered in developing a comprehensive inspection plan.
Finally, the catastrophic failure of a seam-welded cold reheat pipe in 2003 resulting from
corrosion fatigue and the periodic occurrence of FAC damage failures in feedwater and
extraction steam piping demonstrate potential for damage occurrence in fossil piping systems
operating outside the normal creep regime.
These experiences demonstrate the need for a comprehensive understanding of the design and
fabrication of high-energy piping systems, the identification of probable damage mechanisms,
and the tools available for developing and implementing a comprehensive high-energy piping
program with the following objectives and benefits:
• Safety. Personnel safety is the highest priority. Although it is impossible to remove all risk,
the goal of an effective high-energy piping program should be to lower the risk of failure to a
level that is reflective of risks to which employees are normally exposed and that the
employees readily accept. For example, an acceptable level of risk could be comparable to
the level of risk that employees expose themselves to during their daily commute to work.
• System reliability. An additional objective of the high-energy piping program is to reduce
the financial impact associated with forced outages resulting from failure. This can be
accomplished by using state-of-the-art inspection techniques to identify damage in sufficient
time to effect mitigation or any required repair and replacement during scheduled
maintenance overhauls. Although early detection of service-induced damage by inspection is
1-2
Introduction
necessary to limit the risk of forced outages, it is equally important to reduce the occurrence
of damage through proper maintenance of piping supports and to identify system operating
conditions that adversely impact component life. For a given operating history, a properly
implemented program will anticipate damage associated with known damage mechanisms
and will schedule periodic inspections to identify components for repair or replacement
during routine scheduled maintenance outages.
• Optimized inspection costs. An effective high-energy fossil piping program can minimize
inspection costs through the following methods:
– Proper documentation. Documentation of weld locations, materials of construction,
fabrication practices, and previous inspection results can help reduce inspection costs.
Many of the risk factors associated with circumferential weld failures are associated with
material properties and fabrication practices. For example, submerged arc welds (SAW)
are more susceptible to the development of subsurface-initiated Type IV creep damage
than shielded metal arc welds (SMAW). Similarly, the presence of a repair to a weld
(longitudinal or circumferential) greatly increases the probability of damage initiating in
the weld. Minor compositional variables can also be a significant factor in determining
the susceptibility of a weld to failure, and it is not uncommon to find welds in a piping
system fabricated with an incorrect filler metal.
When possible, fabrication practices should be documented, and compositional

information should be gathered. When available, construction records can be used to
identify fabrication practices and the compositional make-up of a component. However,
in most cases these detailed records will not be available. When detailed fabrication
records are not available, welding methods (for example, SAW versus SMAW) can be
inferred from the appearance of the weld, and the occurrence of a weld repair can be
ascertained by noting a disruption of the weld bead pattern in the finished weld. Limited
compositional information can be obtained by nondestructive alloy analysis.
– Optimal inspection timing. Using the best inspection technology and documenting the
inspection results can prevent premature or unnecessary reinspection.
• Outage planning. Program costs can be minimized only through complete and effective
forecasting of inspection and repair requirements. Forecasting inspection and repair activities
can enable a utility to schedule and budget for inspection, repair, and replacement costs and
to coordinate these activities with concurrent outage activities.
1-3
2
DESIGN
Introduction
The initial design of a piping system is established by the functional requirements of transporting
a fluid from one point to another. The detailed design is affected by such criteria as the type of
fluid being transported, the allowable pressure drop, the pumping requirements, the desired
velocity, and the available materials.
In the design of a piping system and its supports, the factors that must be considered are
predicated by the type of plant in which the system will be used. Clearly, piping systems are a
major component (and expense) in power stations. Other than in nuclear applications, where
environmental hazard potential is the prime factor, power plant designs are affected by economic
considerations. Aside from the functional aspects of piping system design, the system supports
require significant engineering effort (design, fabrication, and installation) to ensure that the
piping system operates at stress levels within the levels prescribed by codes and provides reliable
operation for a prescribed time period.
This section describes a typical design process, the role of codes and regulations in the
formulation of a design, the primary parameters that affect the design, and the relationship of the
design process to other disciplines.
The Design Process
Fundamental Questions
The fundamental function of a high-energy piping system is to transport fluid (water or steam)
from a source to a delivery point. The characteristics of the piping system are developed to
achieve this goal. The fundamental design requirement is to deliver the required fluid volume at
the specified conditions and in compliance with the governing code. In the United States, the
governing codes are the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure
Vessel Code (BPVC), Section I, Power Boilers, and ASME B31.1, Code for Pressure Piping
Standards: Power Piping [2-1, 2-2]. These documents are examples of design-by-rule codes
wherein simplified equations are used to determine characteristic stress values that are then
compared with allowable stresses. Therefore, after the piping diameter is determined (to meet
flow requirements), wall thickness requirements can be determined from the code rules based on
the specified fluid conditions and the selected materials of construction.
2-1
Design
Material Selection
For the most part, material selection is governed by cost and availability. However, there are
other indirect effects of material selection that might not be readily apparent. For example,
selection of a high-chromium alloy steel instead of a low-alloy steel can result in a significantly
thinner wall requirement for a given pressure and temperature according to the code allowable. A
thinner pipe results in less dead weight, which could allow the use of smaller pipe supports and
lighter structural steel. Each potential selection has both beneficial and less beneficial points. The
difficult part is arriving at the optimum balance of cost, functionality, and safety. A more in-
depth description of the material selection process can be found in the EPRI report Metallurgical
Guidebook for Fossil Power Plant Boilers (1004509) [2-3].
Support Locations
After the pipe sizes are established, a routing plan can be developed to get from the source to the
delivery point. Because most high-energy piping is large (greater than 10 in. [25.4 cm]) diameter,
cost considerations dictate that run geometry be kept simple with as few directional changes as
possible. Specification of support types and locations is critical. For this process, detailed
drawings of the proposed pipe routing, structural steel drawings, and location of other piping and
equipment in the proposed run area are required.
With all the geometric data collected, the next step is to define initial support locations. This is
accomplished by establishing characteristic support spans for each pipe diameter based on dead
weight loading (vertical support span) and, if applicable, seismic and wind loadings (lateral
support span). It is advantageous to use one span that satisfies both criteria, thereby allowing a
combination of directional support at one location.
With the characteristic spans determined, superimposing the piping drawings over the structural
steel layouts should allow identification of candidate support locations. These locations should
be near, or coincident with, structural steel or other convenient points of attachment, and the
distance between locations should be consistent with the characteristic spans. When available
structure is not present to maintain the determined spans, it is usually preferable to shorten the
span between supports as opposed to constructing a more complicated attachment. It is also
important to review drawings from other systems and equipment to avoid physical interference.
Stress Analysis
After the initial support locations are selected, stress analysis of the system is performed to
determine the support characteristics required to prevent piping overstress according to the code
requirements. In this design phase, a balance between required support and flexibility for thermal
expansion must be obtained. A design that provides the minimum number of supports with
locations and functions that minimize resistance to thermal expansion, within the code allowable
stresses, will be the best.
2-2
Design
By analysis, support function (constant load, variable load, or restraint) and required load
capability can be determined through the combination of individual load cases. These load cases
include dead weight (DW), thermal expansion (Th), seismic loading (EQ), and wind loading.
From these load cases, the following combinations should be considered:
• DW + Th + (EQ + Wind)
• DW + Th - (EQ + Wind)
• DW + (EQ + Wind)
• DW - (EQ + Wind)
The maximum loading in each direction determined from these load combinations should be
used to design the support.
Design Codes and Regulations
In the interest of public protection, numerous international, federal, state, and local government
regulations have been created and enacted. In the United States, these are typically associated
with the ASME BPVC and ASME B31 [2-1, 2-2] . The ASME BPVC Section I, Power Piping,
for power boilers was issued in 1914. Today the ASME BPVC includes eleven sections, and it is
mandatory in most states. The ASME B31 code collection (B31.1 through B31.9) is not
mandatory in the United States, although it has been adopted as a legal requirement with the
minimum design requirements being accepted by the power industry as a standard for all piping
outside the jurisdiction of the ASME BPVC.
In response to these regulations and with the intent of simplifying their interpretation, several
professional societies have published guidelines, codes, and standards. However, some confusion
exists as a result of the number of such documents. The following generally accepted definitions
are used in this volume:
• Codes. The collections of rules or systematic standards for design, materials, fabrication,
installation, or inspection prepared in a way that they can be adopted by a legal jurisdiction
and made into law.
• Standards. Documents prepared by a professional group describing requirements that are
good and proper engineering practices and that are written with mandatory requirements (use
the verb “shall”).
• Recommended practices. Documents prepared by a professional group specifying good
engineering practices, the application of which is optional.
• Guidelines. Documents prepared by agencies, organizations, or committees describing
engineering methods that are considered good practice but have no specific recommendation
or requirement.
2-3
Design
For the purposes of system design, it is important that designers remain current regarding
changes to the applicable codes. The codes and standards applicable to a given design are those
that are in effect at the time that the system or component purchase order is awarded.
Typically, changes to any of these documents are identified as addenda, errata sheets, or new
editions. When a code requirement is questioned and an interpretation is requested, a Code Case
is assigned. The resulting committee response can result in the relaxation of a specific
requirement. Code Cases do not signify a revision to the code; designers who use Code Cases
should be sure that they apply to their situation. Code changes are typically not retroactive; they
become mandatory six months after they are issued, unless otherwise indicated.
ASME Codes
The ASME BPVC, Section III, Rules for Construction of Nuclear Power Plant Components,
Subsections NC (Class 2 Components) and ND (Class 3 Components), and the ASME B31
codes, which are applicable to the majority of piping systems, use the maximum principal stress
theory to assess component failure [2-4, 2-2]. This theory states that yielding occurs when the
magnitude of any of the three principal stresses exceeds the material yield strength. More
detailed evaluations of stress combined with the maximum shear stress theory are allowed for
Section III, Subsection NB (Class 1) components.
Piping stresses are categorized by the following three types:

• Primary stresses are developed by applied mechanical loads. Primary stresses are not self-
limiting. Failure modes are plastic deformation and bursting.
• Secondary stresses are developed as a result of constraint of the system against displacement
such as thermal expansion or imposed displacements. Secondary stresses are self-limiting
and can be relieved by deformation of the system. Failure modes are plastic instability and
buckling.
• Peak stresses are developed locally, and they typically do not result in distortion of the
system. Peak stresses form as the result of thermal gradients or stress concentrations. Failure
mode is fatigue failure from cyclic loading.
Stress limits within a fossil piping system designed under ASME B31.1 criteria must meet the
following limits:
• Sustained-load stresses from pressure, weight, and other mechanical loads must satisfy
Equation 2-1.
PDO 0.75iM A
(English Units) + ≤ 1.0S h
4t n Z
PDO 1000(0.75i ) M A
(SI Units) + ≤ 1.0S h Eq. 2-1
4t n Z
2-4
Design
Where:
P is the internal design pressure (psi or kPa).
DO is the outside diameter of the pipe (in. or mm).
tn is the nominal wall thickness of the pipe (in. or mm).
MA is the resultant moment on the cross section from sustained loads (in-lb or mm-N).
Z is the section modulus of the cross section (in3 or mm3).
i is the stress intensification factor (a dimensionless parameter).
Sh is the material allowable stress at maximum temperature from the stress tables in
the ASME BPVC, Section II, Part D (psi or kPa) [2-5].
• Occasional-load stresses from pressure, weight, other mechanical loads, and occasional loads
(including earthquake) must satisfy Equation 2-2.
PDO 0.75iM A 0.75iM B

(English Units) + + ≤ kS h
4t n Z Z
PDO 1000(0.75i ) M A 1000(0.75i ) M B

(SI Units) + + ≤ kS h Eq. 2-2
4t n Z Z
Where:
k is 1.15 for occasional loads acting less than 10% of the operating time,
and 1.2 for occasional loads acting less than 1% of the operating time.
MB is the resultant moment on the cross section from sustained loads (in-lb or mm-N).
• Expansion-load stresses, the effects of thermal expansion loads, must satisfy Equation 2-3.
iM C
(English Units) SE = ≤ S A + f (Sh − S L )
Z
1000(iM C )
(SI Units) S E = ≤ S A + f (S h − S L ) Eq. 2-3
Z
Where:
MC is the range of moments on the cross section from thermal expansion (in-lb or
mm-N).
SA is the allowable stress range for thermal expansion stresses
= f(1.25SC + 0.25Sh).
SC is the material allowable stress at minimum temperature from the stress tables.
2-5
Design
f is the stress range reduction factor for cyclic conditions.

SL is the sustained stress calculated in Equation 2-1.
Design Life
The determination of design life for high-energy piping, as for any component, can be made only
based on an in-depth understanding of the properties of the construction materials and the service
conditions that will be experienced. The guidelines contained in the ASME BPVC, Section I, and
ASME B31.1 have demonstrated that they provide adequate margins in establishing these values
for the majority of high-energy system components [2-1, 2-2]. As with any complex system,
identification of all factors and their respective application ranges is not possible. As a
consequence, neither code defines a specific design life.
ASME B31.1 states in its Foreword, “this Code is more conservative than some other piping
codes, reflecting the need for long service life and maximum reliability in power plant
installations” [2-2]. The Foreword of the ASME BPVC section states that “the objective of the
rules is to afford reasonably certain protection of life and property and to provide a margin for
deterioration in service so as to give a reasonably long, safe period of usefulness” [2-1]. Clearly,
“long service life” and “reasonably long, safe period of usefulness” are not specific design lives.
Therefore, it is the designer’s responsibility to be aware of those factors that affect component or
system life and to establish the design life for a component or system that also meets code rules.
Recognizing that not all factors are covered in the code, the designer must be ready to go beyond
the code rules to ensure the target design life.
Although the codes do not explicitly define a design life, examination of the bases used in
development of the allowable stress tables can provide some general insight. In the design-by-
rule method, the basis for design of pressure components is the comparison of a singular
calculated stress value with the allowable stresses provided in the code. In general, values in the
stress tables have been established to prevent the following:
• Rupture of the pressure boundary, independent of temperature
• General yielding during short-term loading at temperatures below the creep range
• Large strains (>1%) for components with extended service at temperatures in the creep range.
To prevent pressure boundary rupture, design stresses at temperature are limited to 0.314 of the
material tensile strength at temperature. In the creep range, design stresses are limited to the
lower of a secondary creep rate of 1% per 100,000 hours or 80% of the 100,000-hour creep
rupture stress.
For general yielding of most materials, the primary stress values are limited to two-thirds of the
yield strength at temperature. For some more-ductile materials, as much as 90% of the yield
strength at temperature is allowed. For long-term exposure in the creep range, allowable stresses
produce an average secondary creep rate of 1% per 100,000 hours exposure.
2-6
Design
Therefore, for components that operate at temperatures below the creep range of the constituent
materials, it is reasonable to presume that—barring faulty fabrication, material degradation with
time, out of specified operation, or fatigue—extended lives will be realized. For components that
operate in the creep range, the factors described in this section indicate a minimum design life of
100,000 hours.
System Loads
All piping codes followed in the United States were developed from the American Standards
Association (ASA) B31, Code for Pressure Piping, which was first published in 1935. As a
consequence of this common source, today’s codes share a common terminology regarding the
classification of loads experienced by piping systems. Specifically, loads are classified as the
following three types:
• Sustained loads are those loads caused by forces that are present throughout normal
operation, such as pipe weight and internal pressure.
• Occasional loads, as the name implies, are those that do not occur on a regular basis but do
happen during operation. Examples of occasional loads are wind, seismic events, fault
events, and valve relief.
• Expansion loads are the result of pipe displacements typically caused by pipe thermal
expansion and terminal point displacements from thermal expansion or foundation
settlement.
Regardless of the type of load, the system supports must be able to transmit that load to the
building structure. To ensure that the supports are able to perform this function for the life of the
plant, the loads applied must be determined and combined to develop a set of design loads for the
system. The following subsections describe how to estimate or calculate design loads for a
system.
Dead Weight Loads
All systems must be designed for dead weight loading. This load type is not self-relieving;
therefore, supports must be provided to prevent collapse of the system from its own weight.
Because this load is present throughout the operating cycle of a system, it is a sustained load.
The load at a support from system weight must include the weight of the pipe, insulation, fluid,
attached components, and support hardware. Dead weight loads establish the initial spacing of
supports so that bending stresses on the pipe cross section do not exceed code allowables.
Support spacing should also consider other load contributions; therefore, dead weight loads
frequently do not by themselves determine the final spacings in a design.
2-7
Design
Considering the span of piping between supports as a beam, the maximum bending moments and
end loads on the cross section as a function of the span (L), assumed end conditions (pinned or
fixed), and material densities (ρ) are determined using strength of materials formulas (Equation
2-4 for pinned-end conditions, and Equation 2-5 for fixed-end conditions).
Pinned-end conditions Mmax = (1/2)WL2 and FEnd = 1/2WL Eq. 2-4
Fixed-end conditions Mmax = (1/12)WL2 and FEnd = 1/2WL Eq. 2-5
Where:
W is the combined weight per unit length of pipe, insulation, and other materials.
L is the length of pipe between span ends.
FEND is the vertical reaction load at each end of the section.
In application, the actual conditions at a support fall between the fixed and pinned conditions.
Consequently, bending moments at supports are best approximated in the range of WL2/4 to
WL2/7, depending on the support type.
For a given W for a section of piping, support spacing is determined by using the allowable
stress at temperature from the stress tables for the specified material, as shown in Equation 2-6,
applying the best approximation formulation for bending stress.
Lmax = (10ZSALL/W)1/2 Eq. 2-6
Where:
L is the overall length of the span for which you are determining the support
spacing.
Z is the section modulus of the pipe cross section or the outside radius/moment of
inertia.
SALL is the allowable stress at the operating temperature for the specified material from
the applicable code stress table.
W is the combined weight per unit length of pipe, insulation, and other materials.
Pressure Loads
Internal pressure from the water or steam being transported is another sustained load. This
pressure does not typically result in loads on the supports other than at terminal points or where
the pipe wall is not continuous (for example, at bellows or slip joints). However, it certainly is a
main contributor to the stress state in a section of piping.
2-8
Design
At a terminal point or discontinuous pipe-wall location, the load (F) developed from internal
pressure is determined from the magnitude of the pressure (P) multiplied by the cross-sectional
flow area (DFlow), as shown in Equation 2-7.
PπDFlow
F= Eq. 2-7
4
Where:
F is the load.
P is the pressure.
DFlow is the cross-sectional flow area.
Wind Loads
Wind loads are classified as occasional loads. Any section of a piping system that is outdoors
could be subjected to external pressure forces (horizontal, vertical, or both) from wind. To
develop the potential contribution from wind loading, the maximum anticipated wind velocity
over the life of the system must be determined. Wind velocity maps and mean and peak velocity
data as a function of location and elevation are published by several organizations and should be
cited in the system design documentation.
The load applied by wind is typically modeled as uniform, acting over the projected area of the
pipe, parallel to the wind direction. The force generated per unit length, FWind, is calculated using
Equation 2-8 (based on Bernoulli’s equation for fluid flow over a body).
C Drag Dq
FWind = Eq. 2-8
g
Where:
CDrag is the drag coefficient for the pipe (dimensionless).
D is the pipe and insulation outside diameter.
g is the gravitational constant.
q is the dynamic pressure exerted by the wind, calculated as 1/2ρV2 for the air
density (ρ) in mass/length3 and wind velocity (V) in length/s.
The drag coefficient, CDrag, is a function of the body shape and flow velocity evaluated using the
Reynolds number. Values for CDrag for piping are found in tables available in many references.
2-9
Design
Seismic Loads
Safety-related nonnuclear piping must be designed to withstand seismic loads. Accurate

evaluation of seismic loads is complex, whether by modal or time-history analysis, and it
requires numerical analysis that is typically performed on a computer. In those instances where
less accuracy is acceptable, static analyses can be performed.
The first step in the process is to establish the seismic potential in the area in which the piping
system is located. The Uniform Building Code provides one source of damage potential based on
a four-tiered zone ranking system. After the area-based seismic characteristics (particularly
magnitude and duration) are determined, they are converted into loads using Equation 2-9.
FSeismic = ZKCW Eq. 2-9
Where:
Z is a factor based on the seismic zone.
K is a factor based on the type of structure, typically 0.67 to 3.0.
C is 0.5/T1/2 for T, the fundamental period of the system (s)
W is the weight of the piping system, including insulation and support hardware
(lb or kg).
Pressure Relief Loads
All high-energy piping systems must have the capability to relieve internal pressure to prevent
boundary ruptures. This is accomplished by placing pressure-sensitive valves in the piping
system. When a pressure relief valve opens, the resulting stream of fluid causes a jet force that
must be resisted by the pipe and its supports. The magnitude of the relief force is typically
supplied by the valve manufacturer. If it is not provided, it can be calculated for those instances
in which the pipe is vented directly to the atmosphere, as shown in Equation 2-10.
⎡ MV ⎤
FRelief = FDynamic ⎢ + PA ⎥ Eq. 2-10
⎣ gc ⎦
Where:
FDynamic is a dynamic load factor included to account for the increased load applied as a
result of the rapid application of the relief force, typically in the range of 1.1 to 2.0.
M is the mass flow rate from the valve.
gc is the gravitational constant.
V is the fluid exit velocity.
P is the fluid pressure.
A is the discharge flow area.
2-10
Design
Expansion Loads
The more supports provided in a system, the more effectively restrained it will be for dead
weight and occasional loads. However, with increased temperatures during operation, the pipe
will expand. A system that is too constrained will resist this expansion, resulting in locations of
increased stress. Ideally, the piping support system need only support the weight of the piping
and fluid and provide no additional restraints. Complete lack of restraint is not possible, and
some expansion forces will be developed at restrained locations. The most comprehensive
evaluation of expansion loads is accomplished by using numerical methods implemented through
several currently available computer programs.
Besides evaluating an entire system using a computer, there are simplified methods for
determining expansion loads. The primary concern regarding thermal expansion is in the
direction parallel to the pipe axis. The amount of thermal expansion, ΔThermal, in a given section of
pipe can be determined by Equation 2-11.
Δ Thermal = αLΔT Eq. 2-11
Where:
α is the pipe material coefficient of thermal expansion.
L is the pipe length.
ΔT is the difference in temperature.
For typical piping materials, the value of α is temperature dependent. Mean values for the
expansion coefficient are provided in the code for application over temperature ranges starting at
70°F (21°C).
After the magnitude of the expansion is determined, the loads created by that expansion on the
supports can be approximated by assuming that the expansion must be absorbed by bending of
the piping that is perpendicular to the expansion. Then, treating each perpendicular leg as a
cantilever beam, the moment (M) and force (P) at each end of the expansion length can be
determined from beam theory, as shown in Equation 2-12.
6 EIΔ Thermal 12 EIΔ Thermal

M = and P= Eq. 2-12
L2 L3
Where:
E is the pipe modulus of elasticity.
I is the pipe cross-section moment of inertia.
L is the leg length perpendicular to the expansion direction.
ΔThermal is the change in length as a result of the difference in temperature.
2-11
Design
The expansion accommodated by each leg is inversely proportional to the ratio of the leg
stiffness to the sum of all leg stiffnesses absorbing the expansion. This method is only
approximate because the leg intersections provide some rotation capability and thereby
redistribute the developed moment. Consequently, in most cases, the calculated moments should
be conservative.
To alleviate the development of excessive expansion loads, most high-temperature systems are
designed with expansion loops. This term is not to be taken literally, but instead represents the
introduction of run directional changes and reduced numbers of rigid supports to provide
additional system flexibility. This flexibility allows for the accommodation of thermal expansion
without the penalty of added loads. The downside is that as a system becomes more flexible, it is
less able to handle occasional loads without additional supports.
System Supports, Design, and Function
The design of high-energy piping system supports is a nontrivial task with no set method of
accomplishment. The design process, from initial conceptual drawings of support locations and
calculations to final construction, involves many steps performed in series and in parallel. Each
project must be individually tailored to the specifics of the plant.
As a result of the inherent flexibility of large-volume, long-run piping systems, supports are
available in a variety of types and styles, each designed for a specific function and location.
Regardless of the size and shape of the supports, their functions remain the same, as follows:
• To support the dead weight of the piping, insulation, and attached components from the
available structure
• To allow thermal expansion of the piping, yet provide weight support and minimize load
transfer at terminal points
• To provide vibration, fault, and seismic event displacement control
A detailed description of system support design is outside the scope of this report. However,
having a general understanding of the design process and those factors that influence a design
will facilitate the treatment of support problems if and when they occur.
Basic Design Steps
The basic steps followed in support system design are the following:
1. Determine the support locations to meet the applicable code pipe stress requirements.
2. Determine the loads carried by each support.
3. Determine the thermal movement of the piping at each support location.
2-12
Design
4. Select the support types (that is, constant, variable, rigid, and so on) to meet the requirements
of steps 2 and 3.
5. Check the clearances between the support components and nearby piping, cable trays, ducts,
and so on.
Each basic step contains several steps and requirements that must be met for a given design to
perform adequately. The following paragraphs describe those steps and requirements.
Support Locations. Determination of support locations within a system depends on several

factors, including pipe size, piping configuration, the location of heavy valves and fittings, and
the structure available for support. There are no set rules or limits that positively fix support
locations. However, suggested characteristics that have performed well are the following:
• Published tables of recommended piping spans between hangers based on diameter and
carried product (straight runs only) should be used.
• For concentrated loads (such as valves and wyes), supports should be located as close as
possible to the load to minimize bending stresses.
• When practical, supports should be located adjacent to any change in direction of the piping.
• When changes in direction occur between supports, span lengths should be less than 75% of
comparable straight-run lengths.
• The load carried by a hanger in a vertical section should be selected such that the elevation of
the support is above the midpoint of the length of pipe supported. This eliminates a tendency
for the piping to rotate about the support.
Support Loads. For high-energy piping systems, the loads carried by the supports are created
primarily by the weight of the piping, insulation, valves, fittings, and support hardware. Wind,
seismic, and fault condition loads typically define the capacity (but not the size) of the support and
its attachment structure. During normal operation, the job of the majority of supports is to support
the weight of the system while allowing unrestricted thermal expansion. It is this aspect of support
operation (the combination of structural support and motion) that complicates support design.
Through the use of static equilibrium equations, estimates of the load applied to a support can be
determined. The procedure requires that you divide the system into sections, constructing a
“free-body” diagram of each section. When the weights and locations of the components in each
section with respect to the section end points are known, the equations for static equilibrium
within the section can be written (see Equation 2-13), where Mi and Vi are moment and force
values in each orthogonal direction.
∑Mi = 0 and ∑Vi = 0 for i = x, y, and z directions Eq. 2-13
Combining the equations from each free-body diagram will result in a series of equations that
will allow determination of the load at each support. As a final check, the total weight of the
piping, insulation, valves, and so on should be equal to the total load carried by all of the hangers
plus the load supported by the terminal points.
2-13
Design
Thermal Movements. The accurate evaluation of thermal movements requires complex study of
a system, typically through the use of computer programs. In the absence of access to software or
the time required for such an evaluation, simplified methods of approximating thermal
displacement can be applied. Using a sketch of the system and knowledge of general dimensions,
thermal movements at a point in the system with respect to a fixed reference location can be
determined using Equation 2-14.
Δ thermal = αLΔT Eq. 2-14
Where:
α is the piping material’s coefficient of thermal expansion.
L is the orthogonal distance from the point to the fixed reference.
ΔT is the piping temperature difference between operation and shutdown conditions.
Support Selection. Piping supports come in many types and sizes. A brief summary of the most
common support types and their respective functions is provided in the following paragraphs.
The type of support required at a specific location is governed in large part by the amount of
displacement expected. The size of the support is governed by the magnitude of the supported
loads and any space limitations. As a general rule, locations in which expected thermal
displacements are greater than 2 in. (5.08 cm) will require a constant load support to minimize
load transfer. Displacements of 2 in. (5.08 cm) or less can be handled using variable load or rigid
supports.
• Rigid Supports. As the name implies, rigid supports are intended to restrict displacement of
the piping. They are used at locations in which displacement is not desired or needs to be
limited, taking the form of restraints, guides, anchors, or limit stops. Most high-energy piping
systems contain one vertical rigid support located in the longest vertical run. Systems that
don’t have a vertical rigid support are called floaters. As a result of the inherent flexibility of
long piping runs, many systems use guides and limit stops to direct piping deformation and
guard against severe distortion. These supports are constructed of solid or tubular rods to
connect the piping to structural members. They restrain motion parallel to the rod axis and
can potentially restrain out of plane motion depending on the characteristics of the end
attachment.
• Constant Load Supports. When thermal movements greater than 2 in. (5.08 cm) are
expected or stress concerns exist at equipment nozzles where low loads must be maintained,
constant load supports should be used. Constant load supports use coil springs working in
conjunction with a bell-crank lever (see Figure 2-1) to maintain the transmitted load (P) over
an extended displacement range. Constant load supports have some form of deflection scale
that allows monitoring of the lever position through its travel range.
2-14
Design
Figure 2-1
Configuration of a Constant Load Support
• Variable Load Supports. Variable load supports consist of one or more coil springs encased
in a can. They supply a variable supporting load as the actuator moves (see Figure 2-2) based
on the classic spring formula shown in Equation 2-15.
Figure 2-2
Cross Section of a Variable Load Support Using a Single Coil Spring
2-15
Design
FSupport = FInitial + KΔ Eq. 2-15
Where:
FInitial is the starting load on the support.
K is the spring stiffness.
Δ is the actuator displacement from the as-installed position or the anticipated
thermal movement.
With this type of support, the direction of motion controls whether the support load increases
or decreases. Supports of this type will also have a displacement or load scale to facilitate
monitoring of support loads.
As dictated by design practice, the supported load, FSupport, is the hot load; therefore, in
Equation 2-15, FInitial is the cold load, or more appropriately, the installed load. In general
practice, it is desirable to limit the load variability from cold to hot conditions to a maximum
of 25%. Because the hot condition load and thermal movement are established by the piping
design, load variability can be controlled only by changing the spring stiffness (K) of the
support.
Flow Considerations and Modeling
As a result of the high flow velocities and volumes present in power generation steam and
feedwater piping systems, the potential exists for significant dynamic loads. For steam lines,
flow-related damage can occur from safety valve operation, steam hammer, condensate buildup,
and inside diameter (ID) erosion. In feedwater piping, FAC and water hammer can occur.
Generally, for steam hammer, water hammer, and other dynamic load events, adherence to
standard design practices and recommended operating methods and procedures will alleviate
these events and their causative effects. For FAC mechanisms, some form of monitoring or
predictive assessment is required to ensure the identification of affected components and
assessment of long-term effects.
Flow-Related Dynamic Load Events
Flow-related dynamic loads occur in steam piping from safety valve operation, steam hammer,
and condensate buildup. The opening of safety relief valves produces a jet force that must be
accommodated by the piping and support system in the vicinity of the valve. The magnitude of
the force created will be function of the fluid pressure, exhaust conditions, and valve flow
capacity. According to ASME B31.1, the discharge force, F, can be calculated as shown in
Equation 2-16 [2-2].
⎛ MV ⎞
F = D f ⎜⎜ + PA ⎟⎟ Eq. 2-16
⎝ gc ⎠
2-16
Design
Where:
Df is a dynamic load factor with a range of 1.1 to 2.0, depending on the rigidity of
the valve support and its opening time.
M is the mass flow rate from the valve.
V is the steam exit velocity.
gc is the gravitational constant.
P is the discharge pressure.
A is the discharge flow area.
During startup and low-load operation, conditions can exist in which condensate will collect in
the piping system. This condition is exacerbated by inadequate or nonoperating drains. The
velocity of the steam flowing over the condensate causes ripples in the water. Turbulence builds
up until the water forms a solid mass, or slug, that fills the pipe cross section. This slug of
condensate travels at the speed of the steam until it impacts the first change in flow direction (for
example, an elbow or bend) with significant force, resulting in dynamic loading of the piping.
The impact force is a function of the flow velocity and the mass of the slug.
During fault events, the rapid closure of stop or control valves can produce a significant shock
wave that propagates upstream through the piping system as a result of the fluid momentum
change (steam hammer). The magnitude of the shock wave is a function of steam velocity,
enthalpy, and valve closure time. Because this is a momentum change, forces are applied at each
change in direction of the piping, staggered according to the shock wave velocity.
Flow-Accelerated Corrosion
Service-related damage in low-temperature piping systems predominantly occurs as a result of

fatigue, corrosion fatigue, or erosion-corrosion (commonly referred to as flow-accelerated
corrosion or FAC). FAC is a significant degradation mechanism that occurs in low-temperature
piping systems and has resulted in a number of failures in both nuclear and fossil-fueled power
plants. Thermal or mechanical fatigue cracking can occur in feedwater and other low-
temperature piping systems that are exposed to significant thermal shock events, water hammer,
or deficient pipe support conditions. These are localized events that occur as a result of unit- or
operations-specific conditions, as opposed to generic problems.
FAC refers to material wall loss that occurs in piping systems through dissolution of the
protective oxide layer (magnetite or hematite) by localized turbulence from flowing water or wet
steam. A number of FAC-related failures have occurred in low-temperature piping systems of
fossil-fueled power plants over the years. As was the case with longitudinal seam-welded failures
occurring in high-temperature HRH piping systems, the occurrence of these failures resulted in
2-17
Design
various EPRI and other industry-sponsored studies of the FAC damage mechanism [2-6–2-8].
From these studies, the following major factors influencing FAC susceptibility have been
identified:
• Material composition. FAC has been found to be highly dependent on levels of trace
elements such as chromium, molybdenum, and copper. Chromium (Cr) content, in particular,
offers significantly improved resistance to FAC. In general, FAC is active in piping systems
containing 0%–0.20% Cr with increased susceptibility in systems containing only 0%–0.05%
Cr content.
• Temperature. FAC is generally active at temperatures ranging from 200°F–550°F (93°C–
288°C) with increased susceptibility occurring at 260°F–400°F (127°C–288°C).
• Oxygen content. The presence of dissolved oxygen (O2) in the feedwater system promotes
formation of the protective oxide layer, in turn reducing the susceptibility to FAC. FAC is
generally active at dissolved O2 levels of ≤40 ppb with increased susceptibility at O2 levels of
≤5 ppb.
• pH level. FAC is generally active at cold pH levels of 7.0–9.5, with increased susceptibility
at levels of 7.0–8.0. FAC is primarily a function of the hot pH, but this is usually difficult to
measure and is usually inferred from the cold pH.
• Fluid velocity. FAC is generally active at fluid velocities greater than 10 ft/s (3.05 m/s), with
increased susceptibility occurring at rates greater than 17–20 ft/s (5.2–6.1 m/s).
• Fluid quality. FAC is generally active in water or wet steam systems, with increased
susceptibility occurring in a two-phase flow that is 30%–80% steam.
• Flow geometry. FAC can occur in any piping location; areas of flow turbulence—tees,
elbows, reducers, valves, orifices, or other flow control devices—are particularly susceptible.
Piping systems that should be evaluated for potential FAC damage based on the above
parameters include the following:
• Feedwater and economizer inlet lines
• Condensate lines
• Feedwater drips and drains
• Wet steam extraction lines
Piping systems that can be considered immune to FAC (for the most part) include the following:
• Stainless steel piping systems or low-alloy systems with nominal specified chromium content
of 1% or greater
• Superheated steam systems with no moisture content
• Raw water systems not subject to strict water chemistry limits, such as service water piping
where dissolved oxygen content is typically high (greater than 1 ppm)
• Single-phase flow systems that operate at temperatures <200°F (93°C).
2-18
Design
Because operating pressure does not affect FAC wear rates, it cannot directly exclude a piping
system from FAC susceptibility. However, operating pressure affects the consequences or severity
of a FAC failure; therefore, attention is generally focused on high-pressure piping systems.
Inspection Methods
NDE methods traditionally used for detection of FAC-related wall loss consist primarily of
ultrasonic testing (UT) of wall thickness and, to a lesser extent radiography. Recently, digital
radiography and pulsed eddy current techniques have also been used. In addition, long-range
guided-wave UT, which is capable of measuring long lengths of piping quickly and with
minimal access and insulation removal requirements, offers promise as a screening tool to
identify suspect locations that can subsequently be more closely examined by UT of wall
thickness or other means.
Field testing for material composition has also been used to measure trace levels of chromium,
molybdenum, and copper alloys, which can allow the tested locations to be eliminated from
further consideration for FAC damage based on the presence of these alloys. This testing
requires use of optical emission spectroscopy or equivalent equipment capable of measuring
alloy contents at resolutions on the order of ≤0.1%.
UT of wall thickness is by far the most common inspection method for detection and quantification
of FAC. Testing is typically performed at discrete locations in a grid pattern over the area of
concern. The grid size (the distance along the pipe surface between test points) is typically selected
as a function of pipe diameter. A common guideline is to use a grid size no greater than πD/12
(where D is the nominal outside diameter of the pipe) with a minimum grid size of 1 in. (2.54 cm)
and maximum grid size of 6 in. (15.2 cm) considered to be practical limits [2-8]. Recommended
maximum grid sizes as a function of pipe diameter (see Table 2-1) are considered sufficient to
detect the presence of wear, but might not necessarily be sufficient to quantify the maximum depth
of wear. Therefore, should evidence of FAC be detected in a given inspection, it might be
advisable to reduce the size of the grid to quantify the worst-case thinning.
Table 2-1
Grid Size as a Function of Pipe Size for Ultrasonic Thickness Testing for Flow-Accelerated
Corrosion
Pipe Diameter Maximum Grid Size

(in.) (cm) (in.) (cm)
2–6 5–15 1 2.5
8–10 20–25 2 5
12–14 30–35 3 7.5
16–18 40–45 4 10
20–24 50–60 5 12.5
≥25 ≥65 6 15
2-19
Design
Assessment Approaches
Assessment approaches for FAC can be classified as preinspection or postinspection activities.

Preinspection evaluations include quantitative predictive modeling to predict FAC wear rates or
otherwise identify FAC-susceptible locations, as well as other relative ranking methodologies
that are performed to similarly identify and prioritize locations for inspection. Postinspection
evaluations essentially entail the assessment of pipe wall thickness measurements relative to
nominal or minimum wall thickness specifications in order to determine serviceability (run,
replace, or reinspect).
The CHEC™ software series developed by EPRI is one of the more common analytical tools
used to predict FAC susceptibility and wear rates. These programs, which use the Chexal-
Horowitz FAC model, were first developed for nuclear plants in response to the Surry plant
failure in 1986. The initial version of the software, called CHEC, was developed in 1987.
Incremental modifications to the software resulted in later versions such as CHECMATE™ and
CHECWORKS™. CHECUP™ is a version of the software that was specifically developed for
fossil plants to rank piping locations based on predicted FAC wall loss.
The CHEC software programs require input related to water chemistry (pH, dissolved oxygen,
and water treatment), hydrodynamic variables (fluid velocity, pipe diameter, temperature, steam
quality, and flow path geometry) and materials composition. As with the application of any
predictive tool, the results should be supplemented by engineering judgment and field
experiences when selecting inspection sites. For more information about the CHEC software
series, refer to the EPRI reports Recommendations for an Effective Flow-Accelerated Corrosion
Program (1011838) and CHECWORKS™ Fossil Plant Application, Version 1.0 (TR-103198-
P5R1) [2-7, 2-9].
Attemperator Design and Function
Attemperation is the primary means for controlling the degree of superheat in a superheated
boiler. Attemperation is the process of removing steam enthalpy by either the controlled injection
of water into the superheated steam flow or the direct removal of heat from the steam. The
degree of superheat present in the steam flow depends on the steam load and the heat available in
the boiler, given the design of the superheater. The degree of superheat of the final exiting steam
is generally not subject to wide variation because the design of downstream processes requires
consistency. To achieve control of the steam temperature (amount of superheat), an attemperator
is used.
The attemperator is typically located in one of three places in the steam generation process:
between the saturated steam outlet and the superheater, between sections of the superheater, or at
the outlet of the superheater. Attemperators are classified as one of two types: surface or direct
contact. In surface attemperators (called shell or drum attemperators), the steam is isolated from
the cooling medium by a heat-transfer surface. In direct contact attemperators, which are more
common, the superheated steam is mixed with water; this is typically accomplished by the use of
sprays, as shown in Figure 2-3 [2-10]. Water is introduced into the steam line through spray
2-20
Design
nozzles at the throat of a venturi-sleeve section in the line. Because the steam flow is at high
velocity, the water vaporizes and cools the steam. The sleeve section of the attemperator is
important because it provides a shield to protect the pressure boundary pipe wall from thermal
shock that could result if water droplets contacted the pipe ID surface.
Figure 2-3
Contact Type (Spray) Attemperator Showing General Configuration
Source: ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code [2-10].
As with any superheated steam cycle, the temperature of the superheat requires monitoring to
ensure that it does not exceed the material limits of the steam turbine and other components.
Temperature control is achieved by admitting a fine spray of water into the steam line through an
attemperator or desuperheater. The attemperator delivers water from the boiler feedwater system
using a separate control valve and a nozzle that mixes the water with the process steam, thus
lowering the steam temperature. The water must be of high purity and free of nonvolatile solids
to prevent buildup in piping, tubes, and turbine blades. The spray attemperation process—
although it is convenient and has good control characteristics—reduces a unit’s thermal
efficiency because it takes heat away from the process steam.
2-21
Design
In most coal-fired power plants, the reheat attemperator is installed in the cold reheat piping
between the outlet of the high-pressure turbine and the reheat inlet header. A feedback control
scheme tied back to the spray water control valve is used to control the temperature of the HRH
steam. In combined-cycle plants, the reheat attemperator is usually installed between passes in
the reheat section; the most common installation point is between the two sets of reheater tube
banks.
When attemperator water comes from the boiler feedwater, provision for it must be made in
calculating system flows. The calculation is based on heat balance. The total enthalpy (heat
content) of the final superheat steam must be the mass-weighted sum of the enthalpies of the
initial superheat steam and the attemperation water.
References
2-1. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section I, Power Boilers. American Society of
Mechanical Engineers, New York. 2004.
2-2. ASME B31.1, Code for Pressure Piping Standards: Power Piping. American Society of
2-3. Metallurgical Guidebook for Fossil Power Plant Boilers. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:2005.
1004509.
2-4. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Rules for Construction of Nuclear
Power Plant Components. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York. 2004.
2-5. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section II, Materials. American Society of
2-6. Flow-Accelerated Corrosion in Power Plants. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 1998. TR-106611-R1.
2-7. Recommendations for an Effective Flow-Accelerated Corrosion Program
(NSAC-202L-R3). EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2006. 1011838.
2-8. Acceptance Criteria for Structural Evaluation of Erosion-Corrosion Thinning in Carbon
Steel Piping. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:1988. NP-5911M.
2-9. CHECWORKS™ Fossil Plant Application, Version 1.0. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 1998.
TR-103198-P5R1.
2-10. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New
York. 2004.
2-22
3
METALLURGY OF STEELS
Introduction
Because of their availability, range of mechanical and physical properties, and ease of
fabrication, steel and steel alloys are the most widely used materials of construction for high-
energy piping systems in fossil generation. This section provides an overview and general
background on the classification, microstructure, and mechanical properties of steels, including
those of carbon, low-alloy, creep-strength-enhanced ferritic, and stainless steels. In addition, a
list of the most widely used standard specifications for steel products in the United States is
presented along with comparisons to many of the international standards.
The majority of this chapter was adapted from Section 5 of the EPRI report Metallurgical
Guidebook for Fossil Power Plant Boilers (1011912) [3-1]. To complement the information
contained in EPRI report 1011912, a series of stand-alone handbooks is being prepared. These
handbooks provide details on the fabrication, microstructure, and performance of key individual
alloys and should be referred to for details regarding microstructures and properties of these
specific alloys. In addition, a large number of publications are available describing various
aspects of ferrous metallurgy [3-2–3-9]. These documents should be referred to as necessary.
Comparison of Material Standards
The standard specifications of ASTM International (formerly the American Society for Testing
and Materials) are the most widely used specifications for steel products in the U.S. electric
power generation industry (see summary in Table 3-1). The ASTM standards are complete
specifications suitable for procurement purposes and include such items as requirements for
composition, manufacturing methods, heat treatment, mechanical properties, testing, marking,
ordering information, and dimensional tolerances. The majority of the ASTM specifications are
based on performance characteristics, such as the mechanical properties, with considerable
latitude in compositional requirements.
3-1
Metallurgy of Steels
Table 3-1
Summary of ASTM Materials Used in Fossil Generation
Material Pipes and Tubes Plates Castings Forgings
A53, A106, A134,

A135, A139,A155, A283, A285,
A105, A181,
A178, A179, A299, A433,
A266, A350,
Carbon steel A192, A210, A443, A455, A27, A216, A352
A372, A465,
A214,A226, A333, A515, A516,
A508, A541
A334, A381, A537, A573
A524, A587
A161, A209,
A204, A302, A217, A352, A182, A336,
C 1/2 Mo A250, A335,
A533 A487 A541
A369, A426
A213, A335,
1-1/4 Cr 1/2 Mo A387 _ A182, A336
A369, A426
A199, A200,
2 Cr 1/2 Mo _ _ _
A213, A335, A369
A199, A213, A182, A336,

2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo A387, A542 A217, A487
A335, A369, A426 A357, A541
A199, A200,
3 Cr 1 Mo A213, A335, A387 - A182, A336
A369, A426
A199, A200,
5 Cr 1/2 Mo A213, A335, A387 A217 A182, A336
A369, A426
A199, A200,
7 Cr 1/2 Mo A213, A335, _ - A182
A369, A426
A199, A200,
9 Cr 1 Mo A213, A335, - A217 A182
A369, A426
A213, A249,
A268, A269,
Ferritic and A271, A312, A167, A176, A296, A297,
A182, A336,
austenitic A358, A362, A240, A412, A351, A447,
A473
stainless steels A376, A409, A457 A448
A430, A451,
A452, A511
3-2
ASME has adopted many of the ASTM standards with little or no modification. The ASME
material specifications are included in the ASME BPVC, Section II, Materials, and are
differentiated from the ASTM standards with an “S” prefix to the ASTM designation (for
example, the ASME counterpart to ASTM A182 is SA182) [3-10].
Alternative U.S. alloy designations include those of the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI),
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), and the Aerospace Materials Specifications (AMS).
The AISI and SAE standards are essentially equivalent for most compositions. These
specifications primarily address compositional requirements and are frequently used by
equipment manufacturers who must procure a material of known composition, machine or
otherwise manufacture a component part, and then heat treat the component to the required
mechanical properties. Many of the AISI and SAE grades have been incorporated into ASTM
standards.
Although ASTM and ASME specifications are the most widely used standard specifications for
steel products in the United States, there are also many international standards. For details on any
particular standard, refer to articles, reports, and other documents that describe the applicable
national or international standard. Some European and Japanese designation systems are the
following:
• DIN standards are developed by Deutsches Institut für Normung in the Federal Republic of
Germany. All West German steel specifications begin with the uppercase letters DIN
followed by an alphanumeric or numeric code. The latter code, known as the Werkstoff
number, uses only numbers, with a decimal point after the first digit.
• JIS standards are developed by the Japanese Industrial Standards Committee, which is part
of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry in Tokyo. The JIS steel specifications
begin with the uppercase letters JIS followed by an uppercase letter (G in the case of carbon
and low-alloy steels) designating the division (product form) of the standard. This letter is
followed by a series of numbers and letters that indicate the specific steel.
• British standards (BS) are developed by the British Standards Institute in London, England.
Similar to the JIS standards, each British designation includes a product form and an alloy
code.
• AFNOR standards are developed by the Association Française de Normalisation in Paris,
France. The correct format for reporting AFNOR standards is as follows: the uppercase
letters NF, a code consisting of an uppercase letter, a series of digits, and an alphanumeric
sequence.
• UNI standards are developed by the Ente Nazionale Italiano di Unificazione in Milan, Italy.
Italian standards begin with the uppercase letters UNI followed by a four-digit product form
code, followed by an alphanumeric alloy identification.
• Swedish standards (SS) are prepared by the Swedish Standards Institution in Stockholm.
Designations begin with the letters SS, followed by the number 14 (all Swedish carbon and
low-alloy steels are covered by SS14), followed by a four-digit numerical sequence similar to
the German Werkstoff number.
3-3
Table 3-2 provides a simple comparison of American, British, German, and Japanese standards for common piping specifications.
This table is only a guide; it should not be used for design. There is seldom an exact match between specifications in two different
standards. This table should be used only to find an approximate equivalent, and then the details of the specifications should be
compared to determine whether substitution is permissible. A more detailed comparison is provided in the Handbook of Comparative
World Steel Standards [3-11].
Table 3-2
Comparison of Selected Material Specifications for Piping Alloys
Product ASTM/ANSI BS DIN JIS

A106A 3602 HFS360 17155 St.35.8 G 3456 STPT320
A106B 3604 HFS410 17155 St.45.8 G 3456 STPT410
A335P1 - 16Mo5 G 3458 STPA12
A335P5 3604 HFS625 12CrMo19.5 G 3458 STPA25
A335P9 HFS629470 - -G 3458 STPA26
A335P11 3604 HFS621 17175 13CrMo44 G 3458 STPA23
A335P12 3604 HFS620/440 17175 13CrMo44 G 3458 STPA22
A335P22 3604 HFS622 17175 10CrMo9 10 G 3458 STPA24
A53S-A 3601 320 1629 St. 35, 37 G3454 STPG370
Piping Specifications
A53S-B 3601 410 1629 St. 42, 45 G3454 STPG410
A312-TP304 3605 304S18 17440 x5CrNi 18 9 G3459 SUS304TP
A312-TP304H 3605 304S59 - G3459 SUS304HTP
A312-TP304L 3605 304S14 17440 x2CrNi 18 9 G3459 SUS304LTP
A312-TP310 - - G3459 SUS310STP
A312-TP316 3605 316S18 17440 x5CrNiMo 18 10 G3459 SUS316TP
A312-TP316H 1501 304S15 17440 x5CrNi 18 9 G3601 SUS304
A312-TP316L 3605 316S14 17440 x2CrNiMo 18 10 G3459 SUS316LTP
A312-TP321 3605 321S18 17440 x10CrNiTi 18 9 G3459 SUS321TP
3-4
Table 3-2 (continued)


A312-TP347 3605 347S18 17440 x5CrNiNb 18 9 G3459 SUS347TP
A312-TP347H 3605 - G3459 SUS347HTP
Piping Specifications A333–1 - TT St.41N G4360 STBL380

(continued) A333–3 3603 HFS303 10Ni14 G4360 STBL450
A333–6 HFS3410 TT St.45N -
A333–8 3603 HFS590 X8Ni9 G4360 STBL690
A283-C 4360 40B 1775 Ust.37.2 G 301 SS400
A283-D 4360 43B 1775 St.44.3 G 3101 SS400
A285-A/B 360 1501–151 17155 H11 -
A285-C 400 1501–151 17155 H11 G 3101 SB410
Plates, Sheets, &
A299 - 17102 Wst.355 G 3115 SPV355
Strips
A515–55 360 1501–161 17155 H11 -
A515–60 400 1501–161 17155 H111 G 3103 SB410
A515–65 430 1501–161 17155 H11V G 3103 SB450
A515–70 - 17155 19Mn5 G 3103 SB480
A105 1503 221–490 17155 10Mn5 G3202 SFVA2A
A182-F1 1503 245–420 16Mo5 G3202 SFVAF1
A182-F5 1503 625–520 WBL-400/590 G3202 SFVAF58
Forgings A182-F9 - 12CrMo19.5 -
A182-F6a 1503 410S21 17440 x10Cr13 -
A182-F11 1503 621–460 17175 x13CrMo44 G3202 SFVAF11
A182-F12 1503 621–504 17175 x13CrMo44 G3202 SFVAF12
3-5


A182-F22 1503 622–560 17175 x10CrMo9 10 G3214 SFVAF22B
A182-F304 1503 304S31 117440 x5CrNi18 9 G3214 SUSF304
A182-F304H 1503 304S51 - G3214 SUSF304H
A182-F304L 1503 304S11 117440 x2CrNi18 9 G3214 SUSF304L
A182-F310 1503 304S31 - G3214 SUSF310S
A182-F316 1503 316S31 117440 x5CrNiMo18 10 G3214 SUSF316
Forgings
A182-F316H 1503 316S51 - G3214 SUSF316H
(continued)
A182-F316L 1503 316S11 117440 x2CrNiMo18 10 G3214 SUSF316L
A182-F321 1503–821 316S11 117440 x10CrNiMo18 9 G3214 SUSF321
A182-F347 1503 316S11 117440 x10CrNiMo18 9 G3214 SUSF347
A350-LF1 1503 221–430 TT41 G3205 SFL1
A350-LF2 1640 WPL-0 17102 TT St. E315 G3205 SFL2
A350-LF3 1640 WPL-3 10Ni14 G3205 SFL3
Carbon and alloy steel bolts and nuts are covered by specifications A193, A194, A320, A354, A432, A449, A453, A540, and A563.
3-6
Historical Perspective on Material Changes in the American Power Piping

Standards
In 1916, the Power Piping Society developed and published the first standard specifications for
power piping to meet industry needs. Then in 1924, the Ohio Society of Safety Engineers
completed a draft of Rules for Power Plant Steam and Water Piping. This was followed by a
draft Code for Safety Rules and Regulations Covering the Installation of High and Low Pressure
Steam Piping.
In March of 1926, project B31, Code for Pressure Piping, was initiated by the ASA at the request
of ASME. This work became the American Tentative Standard Code for Pressure Piping (B31.1)
in 1935 [3-12]. This code contained sections on power piping systems, air and gas piping, oil
piping, district heating piping, fabrication details, and materials.
To bring uniformity between sections and to eliminate divergent requirements and discrepancies,
a revision to this code was started in 1937. Final approval of this revision was given in
November of 1942, and it was subsequently designated the American Standard Code for Pressure
Piping [3-13].
Since 1942, this code has grown to meet industry changes in materials development, fabrication
techniques, and inspection techniques. New editions to ASME B31.1 are issued every three
years, with addenda issued annually. These revisions are developed and voted on by the
Sectional Committee B31. This committee comprises members from some 30–40 engineering
societies, government bureaus, trade associations, and various institutes with one or more
representatives plus members at large to represent general interests. Code activities are
subdivided according to the scope of the several sections and chapters, with general direction
resting with the sectional committee officers and an executive committee.
Concurrent with the evolution and development of the Power Piping code, several of the original
material specifications have been superseded by newer specifications. Table 3-3 shows a
representations of some of the more common ASTM/ASME steel specifications that have been
superseded and the steel specifications with which they have been replaced.
Table 3-3
Superseded ASTM/ASME Steel Piping Specifications
ASTM/ASME Description of ASTM/ASME Description of

Superseded Superseded Current Specification Current Specification
Specification Specification
Pipe, welded, and A53/SA53 Pipe, steel, black, hot-

ASTM A53 seamless for coiling, dipped, zinc-coated,
(see note) bending and other special welded, and seamless
uses
Material for forged and A105/SA105 Carbon steel forgings for

ASTM A105
bored carbon-steel pipe piping applications
3-7

Superseded ASTM/ASME Steel Piping Specifications
ASTM/ASME Description of ASTM/ASME Description of

Superseded Superseded Current Specification Current Specification
Specification Specification
Pipe, lap welded and A106/SA106 Seamless carbon steel

ASTM A106 seamless for high- pipe for high-
temperature service temperature service
Pipe, welded and A53/SA53 Pipe, steel, black, hot-

ASTM A120 seamless for ordinary use dipped, zinc-coated,
welded, and seamless
ASTM A136 Pipe, forge welded steel None/withdrawn No replacement
ASTM A137 Lock bar steel pipe None/withdrawn No replacement
Pipe, riveted steel and None/withdrawn No replacement

ASTM A138
wrought iron
Pipe, electric-fusion A139/SA139 Electric-fusion (arc)-

ASTM A139
welded, sizes 8 in. to, but welded steel pipe (NPS
(see note)
not including, 30 in. 4 and over)
Electric-fusion-welded A671/SA671 Electric-fusion-welded

steel pipe for high- steel pipe for
ASTM A155
pressure service atmospheric and lower
temperatures
Seamless ferritic alloy- A335/SA335 Seamless ferritic alloy-

ASTM A158 steel pipe for high- steel pipe for high-
Seamless ferritic alloy- A335/SA335 Seamless ferritic alloy-

ASTM A206 steel pipe for high- steel pipe for high-
Spiral-welded steel or None/withdrawn No replacement

ASTM A211
iron pipe
Engine bolt iron cast iron A377/SA377 Ductile-iron pressure

ASTM A44 pit-cast pipe for water pipe
other liquids
ASTM A72 Welded wrought-iron pipe None/withdrawn No replacement
Riveted steel and None/withdrawn No replacement

ASTM A138
wrought-iron pipe
Note: Designated an ASTM historical standard. A historical standard is a version of an ASTM standard that has
been superseded by a more current version. For example, an ASTM standard might have a designation and year of
F645-95. If this standard has been superseded by a new version (such as F645-99), the previous version, F645-95, is
considered historical.
3-8
In addition to changes in material specifications, the allowable stresses for specific materials at
select temperatures have been modified. Table 3-4 presents examples of one of the more notable
of these changes. Because condition assessment programs are frequently performed on units that
have been in service for 30 or more years, investigate the code of record used in construction of
each unit and be aware that changes in code stress allowables can impact the assignment of risk
to a specific unit or specific piping systems within that unit.
Table 3-4
Comparison of Select Allowables for Historic Editions of B31.1
Code Edition 950°F 1000°F 1050°F 1100°F
A335 P11
1955 11,000 7,800 5,500 4,000
1967 11,000 6,550 4,050 3,000
1998 9,300 6,300 4,200 2,800
A335 P22
1955 11,000 7,800 5,800 4,200
1967 11,000 7,800 5,800 4,200
1998 11,000 7,800 5,800 4,200
°C = (5/9) x °F – 32)
Steel Metallurgy
Iron-Carbon Systems
Steels can be defined as iron-carbon alloys containing less than 2.0 wt% C, with alloys
containing higher carbon levels defined as cast irons or pig irons (usually with approximately
2.0–3.5 wt% C). The microstructures of steels can be understood from the iron-iron carbide
(Fe-Fe3C) equilibrium diagram (see Figure 3-1).
• From the melting point, 1708K, to 1672K (2788°F–2550°F, 1534°C–1399°), δ-iron is
present. It has a body-centered cubic (BCC) structure.
• From 1663K to 1183K (2534°F–1670°F [1390°C –910°C]), γ-iron, called austenite, is
present. It has a face-centered cubic (FCC) structure.
• From 0 to 1183K (1670°F, 910°C), α-iron, called ferrite, is present. It has a BCC structure.
3-9
Figure 3-1
The Iron Carbon Equilibrium Diagram Showing How the Phases Change with Temperature
and Carbon Composition
Carbon dissolves interstitially in iron, but the interstices in FCC austenite (γ) are larger than
those in BCC ferrite (α), so the maximum solubility of carbon in austenite is 2.0% at the eutectic
temperature of 1403K (2066°F, 1130°C), whereas a maximum of 0.02% C dissolves in ferrite at
996K (1333°F, 723°C). This is called the eutectoid temperature. Above these solubility limits,
carbon usually exists as iron carbide (Fe3C, called cementite). Because steels contain less than
2.0 wt% C, the microstructures of steels cooled at equilibrium rates can be understood using only
the eutectoid region of the Fe-Fe3C diagram. This eutectoid region is similar to a simple eutectic
except that, at the eutectoid point (0.8 wt% C), the solid austenite changes to a two-phase
eutectoid of α-iron and Fe3C (whereas with a eutectic, a liquid changes to a two-phase solid).
The eutectoid structure is called pearlite; it consists of alternating fine platelets of ferrite and
cementite.
Figure 3-2 illustrates the microstructures present for equilibrium cooling for a 0.4 wt% C steel.
At point c, the temperature is greater than approximately 1470°F (800°C), and the microstructure
is fully austenitic. When cooled to just below point c, ferrite grains nucleate at austenite grain
boundaries. Continued cooling to a point just above point d increases the amount of ferrite; on
cooling below point d, the remaining austenite transforms to pearlite.
3-10
Figure 3-2
Detail of the Iron Carbon Diagram, Illustrating Microstructures Formed During Equilibrium
Cooling
At a given carbon level, the proportion of each equilibrium phase present can be calculated using
the Lever rule. As an example, for a 0.4 wt% C steel, at point a, the microstructure is essentially
100% austenite. At a temperature given by point c, the first ferrite begins to form along the
austenite grain boundaries. Throughout the temperature range from point c to point d, austenite is
transforming to ferrite. The ferrite that forms is referred to as proeutectoid ferrite. Immediately
above the eutectoid temperature represented by point d, the weight fraction of austenite is given
by Equation 3-1, and the weight fraction of ferrite is 0.51.
0.4 − 0.02
= 0.49 Eq. 3-1
0.8 − 0.02
Upon cooling to a temperature just below the eutectoid temperature, the remaining austenite has
transformed to pearlite; therefore, the weight fraction of pearlite is 0.49 and the weight fraction
of proeutectoid ferrite is 0.51.
Similarly, for a 1 wt% C steel, cementite begins to form on cooling to temperature c.

Immediately above the eutectoid temperature represented by point d, the weight fraction of
austenite is given by Equation 2-2, and the weight fraction of cementite is 0.03.
3-11
6.67 − 1.0
= 0.97 Eq. 3-2
6.67 − 0.8
This is referred to as proeutectoid cementite. Upon cooling to a temperature just below the
eutectoid temperature, the remaining austenite transforms to pearlite; therefore, the weight
fraction of pearlite is 0.97 and the weight fraction of proeutectoid cementite is 0.03.
Nonequilibrium Cooling of Steels
It is the existence of the austenite-to-ferrite transformation, combined with the marked change in
carbon solubility, that accounts for the enormous range of microstructures and properties
possible in steels. Equilibrium slow cooling from the austenitic range results in microstructures
containing either ferrite or cementite, together with pearlite.
Because ferrite is soft and ductile, whereas cementite is hard and brittle, the hardness and the
strength increase (but the ductility and the toughness decrease) with increasing carbon content as
the proportion of cementite increases. Unlike slow cooling from the austenite range (called
annealing), air cooling is called normalizing. Normalizing allows less than the equilibrium
proportions of ferrite or cementite to separate from the austenite, resulting in a higher proportion
of pearlite with decreased platelet size and spacing. With even more severe cooling procedures,
the eutectoid transformation can be suppressed; that is, quenching from the austenite range can
produce two entirely different types of structures: bainite and martensite.
Bainite is formed when austenite is quenched to temperatures around 356°F–800°F (180°C–

425°C) and held at the quench temperature for some time (or frequently, by quenching into oil).
Bainite consists of a fine submicroscopic dispersion of Fe3C particles in a highly strained α
matrix.
Martensite is formed following rapid quenching to lower temperatures than those involved in
forming bainite. In this case, the severe quench retains carbon in solid solution in a distorted
body-centered tetragonal iron lattice. Martensite is hard and brittle, but the toughness can be
improved with a corresponding reduction in hardness by tempering—that is, heating martensite
to 392°F–1330°F (200°C–720°C) allows transformation to a structure consisting of very small
Fe3C particles or precipitates in ferrite. The size and spacing of these cementite particles increase
with increasing tempering times and temperatures, giving a progressively softer but less brittle
product. Heat treatment of steels by quenching and tempering therefore offers a means of
optimizing strength and toughness.
The transformation of austenite to pearlite (at the eutectoid point, 0.77 wt% C) and the
transformation of austenite to bainite (at any carbon content) occur by diffusion-controlled
processes of nucleation and growth of the new phases so that, on quenching austenite to
temperatures that allow these transformations, some time elapses before the transformations
begin, and further time is needed before the transformations are complete. In contrast, the
transformation of austenite to martensite is diffusionless and almost instantaneous.
3-12
Continuous Cooling Transformations
Continuous cooling transformations (CCTs) are distinct from isothermal transformations in that
the time at temperature is dictated by the cooling rate that a sample has experienced. Welding is
a typical process in which an understanding of transformation behavior is important because the
practicalities of welding mean that isothermal transformations cannot be applied and weld and
heat-affected zone (HAZ) microstructures are thus a function of the time at peak temperature and
the subsequent cooling rate. The use of preheating can assist in controlling the cooling rate, and
the required conditions for given alloys are specified in applicable codes.
CCT diagrams show the transformations that take place in a continuously cooled sample of
material. These diagrams can predict the microstructure of a sample at any cooling rate covered
by the diagram.
CCT diagrams are generated from controlled heating and cooling experiments carried out while
monitoring the physical dimensions (diameter or length) of the sample. Because there will be a
change in dimensions when transformation from BCC ferrite-type microstructures to FCC
austenite occurs, the heating curve shows inflection points allowing the AC1 and AC3 temperatures
to be determined. Similarly, the dimensional changes on cooling allow the specific transformation
temperatures to be determined so that the transformation behavior can be established by
conducting a set of experiments on a selected alloy. The effect of heating and cooling cycles on
specimen dimensions is illustrated in Figure 3-3, with the CCT curves measured for carbon and 2-
1/4 Cr 1 Mo steel shown in Figures 3-4 and 3-5, respectively [3-7, 3-14, 3-15]. The additional
alloying elements present in 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo steel increase hardenability, allowing bainite and
martensite to form at slower cooling rates than for carbon steel.
3-13
Figure 3-3
Dimensional Changes That Occur on Heating and Cooling through the Temperature Range
in Which Microstructural Transformations Take Place
Source: D. T. Llewellyn and R. C. Hudd, Steels: Metallurgy and Applications, Third Edition [3-7].
3-14
Figure 3-4
Continuous Cooling Transformation Diagram for Carbon Steel
Source: Key to Steel database, www.key-to-steel.com [3-14].
3-15
Figure 3-5
Continuous Cooling Transformation Diagram for 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo Steel
Source: Babcock & Wilcox, Steam, Fortieth Edition [3-15].
CCT curves can be used to develop required microstructures through control of the applied
thermal cycles for a number of different manufacturing processes. However, it is important that
the thermal cycle used to produce the CCT curve is relevant to the particular process. One
important factor to be considered is the prior austenite grain size (that is, the grain size at the
time of the first transformation from austenite).
The austenite grain size can be controlled through a change in the temperatures used or through a
change in the time held at a single temperature. For example, a variation in the peak temperature
between 1751°F and 2534°F (955°C and 1390°C) for CrMoV piping steel results in an increase
in the grain size from 20 μm to 200 μm. For a given temperature, the grain size increases
parabolically with time. For any time and temperature combination, the grain size at a given time
(t), is given by Equation 3-3 [3-16].
⎛ − Qc ⎞
Dt2 − Do2 = Kt exp⎜ ⎟ Eq. 3-3
⎝ RT ⎠
Where:
Do is the initial grain size.
Dt is the final grain size.
K is a constant.
Qc is the activation energy.
3-16
R is the gas constant.

T is the temperature.
The influence of thermal cycles in modifying microstructure is most commonly noted in

weldments. Variations in peak temperature and cooling rate result in a range of grain sizes and
transformation microstructures within the weld metal and the HAZ (see Figure 3-6). Toward the
parent material, the temperature will result in zones in which partial reaustenitization takes place,
known as intercritical zones, followed by a tempered zone adjacent to the unaffected base metal.
Within the weld and HAZ, the cooling rate is relatively rapid, so the predominant microstructure
is bainite. However, because of the differing thermal histories, a wide range of prior austenite
grain sizes is present.
Figure 3-6
Peak Temperature Variations in the Weld and Heat-Affected Zone Result in a Range of
Prior Austenite Grain Sizes
Source: R. Viswanathan. Damage Mechanisms and Life Assessment of High-Temperature
Components [3-17].
3-17
Effects of Composition on Microstructure and Properties
This section provides background regarding the influence of composition on the microstructure
and mechanical properties of steel. This information is followed by general comments describing
selected physical and mechanical properties relevant to engineering issues in boilers and piping.
Elemental Effects
Classification of alloying elements according to their effect in the steel is difficult, because the
influence varies so widely with each addition, depending on the quantity used and other elements
present. A useful approach to grouping is based on the effect of the element on the stability of
carbides and the stability of austenite. With this approach, alloying elements are classified as
follows:
1. Elements that tend to form carbides: chromium, tungsten, titanium, columbium, vanadium,
molybdenum, and manganese. The mixture of complex carbides is often referred to as
cementite.
2. Elements that tend to graphitize the carbide: silicon, cobalt, aluminum, and nickel. Only a
small proportion of these elements can be added to the steel before graphite forms during
processing, with attendant ruin of the properties of the steel, unless elements from group 1
are added to counteract the effect.
3. Elements that tend to stabilize austenite: manganese, nickel, cobalt, and copper. These
elements alter the critical points of iron in a way similar to carbon by raising the A4 point
and lowering the A3 point, thus increasing the range in which austenite is stable, and they
also tend to retard the separation of carbides. They have a crystal lattice (FCC) similar to that
of γ-iron, in which they are more soluble than they are in α-iron.
4. Elements that tend to stabilize ferrite: chromium, tungsten, molybdenum, vanadium, and
silicon. These elements are more soluble in α-iron than in γ-iron. They diminish the amount
of carbon soluble in the austenite and thus tend to increase the volume of free carbide in the
steel for a given carbon content. On the binary equilibrium diagram of these elements with
pure iron, the A4 point is lowered and the A3 point is raised (although it might be lowered
initially), until the two points merge to form a closed gamma loop. Thus, with a certain
amount of each of these elements, the austenite phase disappears and ferrite exists from the
melting point down to room temperature. Adding elements from group 3 of the periodic
table, however, can counteract this effect. For example, 2% nickel is added to the 18 wt%
chromium stainless steel to enable it to be refined by normal heat treatment; carbon has the
same effect. Aluminum has the reverse effect in 12 wt% chromium steel.
3-18
The microstructure and properties of steels are determined primarily by composition and heat
treatment. Applicable references should be studied for detailed information regarding the
microstructure and properties of a specific alloy or alloy type. The general effects of individual
elements are summarized as follows:
• Aluminum (Al) is used to deoxidize steel and control grain size. Grain size control is
achieved by forming a fine dispersion with nitrogen and oxygen, which restricts austenite
grain growth. Aluminum is also an extremely effective nitride former in nitriding steels.
• Antimony (Sb) and arsenic (As) are trace elements that are believed to reduce ductility
through temper embrittlement.
• Boron (B) is added between 0.0005% and 0.003% to significantly increase hardenability,
especially for low-carbon steels. It does not affect the strength of ferrite, thus not sacrificing
ductility, formability, or machinability in the annealed state.
• Calcium (Ca) is used to control the shape, size, and distribution of oxide and sulfide
inclusions. Benefits of having fine, well-distributed inclusions include improved toughness
and machinability.
• Carbon (C) is the most important alloying element and is essential for the formation of
cementite, pearlite, bainite, and iron-carbon martensite. Compared to steels with similar
microstructures, the properties of strength, hardness, hardenability, and ductile-to-brittle
transition temperature are increased with increasing carbon content. Toughness and ductility
of pearlitic steels are decreased with increasing carbon content. The significant increase in
hardenability with increasing carbon content results in decreased weldability.
• Chromium (Cr) influences hardenability and is a carbide former and stabilizer. It is used in
low-alloy steels to increase the following:
– Resistance to corrosion and oxidation
– High-temperature strength
– Hardenability
– Abrasion resistance in high-carbon alloys
Straight chromium steels are susceptible to temper embrittlement and can be brittle, so
steels for elevated-temperature service tend to contain both chromium and molybdenum.
At composition levels of approximately 9% to 13% Cr, the increased hardenability is
such that, for normal cooling rates, martensite is formed. In the absence of nickel, high-
chromium steels (above approximately 18% Cr) are fully ferritic and are used where high
resistance to corrosion is required.
• Copper (Cu) is detrimental to hot workability and subsequent surface quality, and it can
reduce creep ductility. It is used in certain steels to improve resistance to atmospheric
corrosion.
• Lead (Pb) improves machinability. It does not dissolve in steel but is present as metallic
globules. Environmental concerns are resulting in a decreased usage of lead in the steel
industry.
3-19
• Manganese (Mn) is important because it controls transformation kinetics on cooling from

austenite, it deoxidizes the melt, and it facilitates hot working of the steel by reducing the
susceptibility to hot shortness caused by the presence of free sulfur—that is, it combines with
sulfur to form MnS inclusions. Manganese increases the tendency for trace elements to cause
temper embrittlement.
• Molybdenum (Mo) increases hardenability of steels and helps to maintain a specified
hardness. Even in small amounts (0.1% to 0.5%), molybdenum increases high-temperature
tensile and creep strengths, and it acts to reduce the effects of trace elements such as
phosphorus in causing temper embrittlement.
• Nickel (Ni) is used in low-alloy steels to reduce the sensitivity of the steel to variations in
heat treatment and to distortion and cracking on quenching. It also improves low-temperature
toughness and hardenability. In stainless steels, at levels above approximately 8% Ni, the
austenite is stabilized to room temperature.
• Niobium (Nb), also known as columbium (Cb), forms stable carbides that increase strength at
elevated temperatures and, by providing a finer grain size, lowers the fracture transition
temperature. Is added to austenitic stainless steels to form carbides in stabilized grades to
reduce risk of sensitization.
• Nitrogen (N) increases the strength, hardness, and machinability of steel, but it decreases the
ductility and toughness. In aluminum-killed steels, nitrogen combines with the aluminum to
provide grain size control, thereby improving both toughness and strength. Nitrogen can
reduce the effect of boron on the hardenability of steels.
• Phosphorus (P) is generally restricted to levels below 0.04 wt% to minimize its detrimental
effect on ductility and toughness. Certain steels can contain higher levels to enhance
machinability, strength, and atmospheric corrosion resistance.
• Silicon (Si) is one of the principal deoxidizers, with the amount used dependent on the
deoxidization practice. Silicon can increase high-temperature strength and reduce the amount
of surface scale formed during exposure to high temperature, but it has been shown to
increase temper embrittlement caused by segregation of trace elements in low-alloy steels.
• Sulfur (S) is detrimental to fracture strength, so manganese must be added to form inclusions.
These manganese sulfide stringers can reduce transverse strength and impact resistance, and
fine inclusions on grain boundaries can facilitate the formation of creep cavities.
• Tin (Sn) is a trace element that is believed to increase temper embrittlement and has been
shown to reduce creep ductility and accelerate creep damage development.
• Titanium (Ti) is added to steels containing boron because it combines preferentially with
oxygen and nitrogen, thus allowing the boron to increase hardenability. Titanium, as titanium
nitride, also provides grain size control at elevated temperatures.
• Tellurium (Te) can be added to modify sulfide-type inclusion size, morphology, and
distribution. The resulting sulfide-type inclusions are finer and remain ellipsoidal in shape
following hot working, thereby improving transverse fracture properties.
3-20
• Tungsten (W) increases hardenability and forms carbides. It acts in a similar manner to
molybdenum.
• Vanadium (V) additions of up to 0.05% increase hardenability, whereas larger amounts tend
to reduce hardenability because of extensive carbide formation. The presence of vanadium
carbides or carbonitrides improves elevated strength, provides resistance to tempering and
hydrogen attack, and inhibits grain growth during heat treatment. Proper application leads to
improved strength and toughness of hardened and tempered steels; however, excessive
strengthening can lead to reheat cracking associated with welds.
Mechanical Properties
The mechanical properties of a metal determine the range of usefulness of the metal and
establish the service that can be expected from it. They are of vital interest to the performance of
components and the associated welds because the weld must provide mechanical properties in
the same order as the base metals being joined. The performance of a welded joint depends on
whether it provides properties equal to or exceeding those of the metals being joined. The
following paragraphs explain why specific properties are important in the selection and
assessment of component performance.
Strength
Strength is often the primary consideration when manufacturing a component because it is

essential that loads are limited to a safe fraction of the material yield point. If the yield point is
exceeded, plastic deformation will be introduced. Tensile strength considerations ensure against
failure by plastic collapse. Other potential failure modes require consideration of different
material properties—for example, for a cyclically loaded structure, fatigue properties must be
taken into account; at high temperatures, creep performance might be important. Ductility refers
to the ability of an alloy to withstand plastic deformation without failure. Data are normally
presented as elongation for a standard gauge length in a laboratory tensile test (typically 2 in.
[5 cm]) or as a reduction in cross-sectional area. For many components and welds, a key property
is fracture toughness because toughness is a major factor in establishing critical crack size and
thus whether components will be subject to sudden brittle fracture. In the majority of cases, as
strength increases, ductility is reduced. In general, superior performance is achieved with alloys
that exhibit an appropriate balance between strength and ductility—that is, alloys that have
excellent toughness.
Fatigue
Fatigue is the phenomenon of damage accumulation caused by cyclic or fluctuating stresses.

Generally, it is manifested as the initiation and stable propagation of a crack. Final failure in a
component subjected to fatigue ensues when a critical crack size is reached and failure occurs by
fracture or by overload. In some situations in which crack growth is very rapid, failure can be
defined by the initiation of a crack. Fatigue depends on the frequency and magnitude of the stress
3-21
cycles and is generally independent of stress duration. However, at high temperatures at which
creep-fatigue interactions become important, the damage level depends on stress duration. Stress
cycling can be induced mechanically or thermally.
High-cycle fatigue consists of crack initiation or fracture brought about by fluctuating stresses of
low amplitude; it is generally defined as requiring more than 10,000 stress cycles to failure. The
examination of high-cycle fatigue fracture surfaces will usually reveal a relatively smooth, flat
surface with beach marks. In contrast, with low-cycle fatigue, in which failure occurs after fewer
than 10,000 stress cycles of higher amplitude, the fracture surface is somewhat rougher. Beach
marks can also be evident in low-cycle fatigue, depending on the range of stress intensity at the
crack tip. Fatigue cracks are usually transgranular.
The metallurgical variables having the most pronounced effects on the fatigue behavior of
carbon and low-alloy steels are strength level, ductility, cleanliness of the steel, residual stresses,
surface conditions, and aggressive environments. At least partly because of the characteristic
scatter of fatigue-testing data, it is difficult to distinguish the direct effects of other variables such
as composition on fatigue from their effects on the strength level of steel. For most steels with
hardness values below approximately 400 HB (excluding precipitation hardening steels), the
fatigue limit is approximately half the ultimate tensile strength. Thus, any heat treatment or
alloying addition that increases the strength (or hardness) of a steel can be expected to increase
its fatigue limit.
Creep
Creep is a time-dependent deformation and fracture that takes place at elevated temperatures
under the application of a load. For common engineering steels, creep becomes a significant
concern only at temperatures exceeding approximately 0.4 Tm, where Tm is the absolute melting
point. For the stress levels encountered in most power generating or petrochemical plants, creep
is not a concern for low-alloy steels below 752°F (400°C) and for austenitic alloys below 1000°F
(538°C).
The creep strain versus time curves have traditionally been described using three stages: primary,
secondary, and tertiary. Each stage can be characterized in terms of creep rate (the change in
strain with time). Primary creep is a period of relatively high but decreasing creep rate with time,
during which the material’s creep resistance increases by work hardening (that is, in the primary
stage, the strain rate is continuously changing). Secondary creep is a period of essentially
constant creep rate. Tertiary creep is a period of increasing creep rate, at the end of which the
material ultimately fails. Increasing creep rate can be a result of microstructural aging, void
development, or a combination of the two effects. Microstructural changes that occur during
creep in chromium-molybdenum steels include precipitation and growth of chromium and
molybdenum carbides (spheroidization). Low-strain failures are the result of the coalescence of
grain boundary microvoids into grain boundary cracks. Eventually, voids link up to form
microcracks. Local fracture occurs when the microcracks link to form macrocracks. For most
thick section components, the existence of even a macrocrack does not necessarily constitute the
end of life because a period of stable crack growth usually occurs until a critical crack size is
reached, which then leads to rapid failure.
3-22
Creep Crack Growth
In thick section components, such as main steam piping and secondary superheater headers, the
initiation of a crack is normally followed by a period of stable crack growth. Significant effort
has been expended toward understanding the factors that determine crack growth rate and
developing procedures for predicting behavior. Under the special conditions in which second-
stage creep deformation is widespread in the body, a parameter known as C* describes the crack
tip region. C* is an energy-rate line integral that is the creep analogue of the J-integral, in which
strain rates and displacement rates have been substituted for strains and displacements. C* can be
calculated by finite-element methods and used as a parameter to predict creep crack growth.
For the more general case in which significant creep strains occur only in the localized region
near the crack tip, at least in the beginning stages of crack growth, a parameter Ct has been
proposed. In the limit of widespread creep deformation, Ct = C*. These concepts have been
confirmed by applying them to explain the observed creep lifetime of cracked components such
as superheater outlet headers.
Creep-Fatigue
During elevated-temperature operation, components can be subjected to both creep and cyclic
loading. This condition is termed creep-fatigue, and the effects can be either interactive (they can
cause component damage to accumulate significantly faster than would be expected by
considering each mechanism separately) or simply additive.
The problem of material degradation under the combination of cyclic loading and high
temperatures is currently under intensive study in many laboratories. Increasing numbers of
components must operate under creep-fatigue conditions because power generating systems are
seeking maximum flexibility from available generating plants.
Classification of Steels Used in Power Plant Applications
In addition to containing carbon, all commercial steels contain varying amounts of manganese,
silicon, sulfur, phosphorus, gases, and other trace impurities that are present as a result of the
methods used during steel production. Consequently, steels are defined as plain carbon even
when they contain 1% or more manganese, up to 0.3 wt% Si, 0.06 wt% P and S, and so on.
However, the structure and properties of plain carbon steels depend not only on composition but
also on the heat treatment and on the hot and cold working operations before or after heat
treatment. Consequently, specifying only the composition is insufficient to provide an adequate
description of properties. Although there is no universally agreed system of steel specifications,
for most general purposes, plain carbon steels are grouped as follows:
• Low-carbon or mild steels (<0.25 wt% C)
• Medium-carbon steels (0.25–0.6 wt% C)
• High-carbon or plain carbon tool steels (>0.6 wt% C)
3-23
The low-carbon grades are used for sheet and strip manufacture for cans, pressings, and so on, in
which ductility and toughness combined with reasonable strength are required. The stronger mild
steels (0.2 wt% C) are used as weldable structural steels. Medium-carbon steels are chosen for
casting, forging, and so on of axles, gears, wire ropes, and springs. The hardness and strength of
high-carbon steels result in their selection for tools, ball bearings, and dies.
With plain carbon steels, the critical cooling rate needed to form martensite depends on the
carbon content; with less than 0.3 wt% C, even water-quenching austenite does not produce a
fully hard martensitic product. Even with higher carbon levels, the critical cooling rates are high,
which limits hardenability—that is, because of the relatively low thermal conductivities of steels,
there is a maximum section thickness that can be hardened from surface to center. With plain
carbon steel, this hardening depth is not more than approximately 1 in. (2–3 cm); with rapid
quenching, the volume change accompanying the austenite-martensite transformation can cause
severe distortion and cracking of higher-carbon steels.
Although plain carbon steels are perfectly satisfactory for most applications, there are distinct
limits to the combination of strength and toughness attainable, to the section sizes that can be
fully hardened, and to the temperatures at which even high-carbon steels can operate without
softening. These property limitations can be alleviated, and new property ranges introduced, by
alloying. No classification system is universally accepted for alloy steels, but excluding steels for
electrical and magnetic applications and certain other special products, it is possible to consider
the following three broad categories of alloy or special steels:
• Low-alloy structural steels are grades for which strength is a major criterion for selection.
The amount of any alloying element present is usually less than 2%, except that nickel can be
up to 4 wt%. The elements nickel, chromium, molybdenum, and vanadium improve strength
and toughness, hardenability, and so on; therefore, stronger but lighter components and
structures can be made without sacrificing some of the most desirable features of plain
carbon steels, such as easy workability, weldability, and cost.
• Tool and die steels must maintain strength and hardness at temperature, so elements such as
chromium, tungsten, tantalum, and vanadium are added to provide hard, stable carbide
dispersions in the steel. For example, a typical high-speed tool steel can contain 18 wt% W,
4 wt% Cr, l wt% V, 5 wt% Co, and 0.75 wt% C. The low diffusion rates of elements such as
tungsten, chromium, and vanadium in the iron alloy matrix minimize strength loss at high
temperatures.
• Corrosion- and heat-resistant steels usually rely on additions of chromium to provide
protection—for example, chromium oxidizes form a protective coating on the steel. This
category is dominated by the stainless steels. For example, austenitic stainless steels, which
combine corrosion resistance and ductility, usually contain 16–23 wt% Cr, 6–22 wt% Ni, and
0.03–0.2 wt% C. (It is the nickel that stabilizes the FCC structure so that austenite is present
at room temperature.) Martensitic stainless steels suitable for valves, turbine blades, and
bolts, which combine hardness and corrosion resistance, have compositions in the range of
12–18 wt% Cr and 0.15–1.2 wt% C.
3-24
Carbon and Low-Alloy Steels
Carbon and low-alloy steels are the most commonly used steels for power plant applications. The
strength of steel is affected by the following typical strengthening mechanisms:
• Grain refinement
• Solid-solution hardening
• Precipitation hardening
Of these various strengthening mechanisms, the refinement of grain size is unique—it is the only
strengthening mechanism that also increases toughness. Carbon steels typically exhibit mixed
ferrite and pearlite microstructures; the percentage of pearlite depends on the carbon level. These
steels can be used in applications in which operating temperatures do not exceed approximately
800°F (427°C). Above these temperatures, significant softening occurs; therefore, alloy steels
must be used at higher temperatures and when additional corrosion resistance is required.
The high-temperature strength of chromium-molybdenum steels is mainly derived from a

complex combination of solid-solution and precipitation effects. These steels experience a
progressive change in the type and size of the precipitates present. Detailed metallurgical
analysis has shown that the precipitates present in 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo steel change with time at high
temperature (Figure 3-7) [3-18, 3-19].
Figure 3-7
Changes That Occur in the Precipitates Present in Cr Mo Low-Alloy Steels with Exposure
to Elevated Temperatures
Source: J. Nutting. “The Structural Stability of Low-Alloy Steels for Power Plant Applications.”
Conference Proceedings: Advanced Heat-Resistant Steels for Power Generation. Institute of
Materials [3-18].
3-25
The most recently reported sequence is shown in Equation 3-4, where M denotes the metal
element (typically iron, chromium, or molybdenum, but complex combinations of elements can
be involved).
M3C → M3C + M2C → M3C + M2C + M7C3 → M2C + M7C3 + M6C + M23C6 Eq. 3-4
Equation 3-4 indicates that the number of carbide types present increases with time in elevated-
temperature service. However, the creep strength decreases because the carbides present after
long periods are less effective in terms of strengthening—that is, the dislocation slip processes
become easier. The changes that take place depend on time and temperature; indeed, this
microstructural instability limits the useful operating temperature for low-alloy steels to less than
approximately 1065°F (575°C).
CrMo-based steels have provided excellent service in a range of high-temperature applications.

However, to realize the benefits of more efficient operation at higher temperatures and pressures,
alloys with greater strength and ductility have been developed [3-20, 3-21]. Figure 3-8 provides
some historical background on these developments [3-4].
Figure 3-8
Historical Background of the Development of Power Plant Steels
Source: ASM. Metals Handbook, Volume 1, Properties and Selection: Iron and Steels [3-4].
3-26
These steels were developed in an effort to optimize performance through careful control of
composition and heat treatment. It is apparent that these new generation steels have been
successful in increasing strength. High strength and ductility are achieved only through careful
control of composition and heat treatment (see Figure 3-9).
Figure 3-9
Variation in Strength and Ductility for New 9 wt% and 12 wt% Cr Steels as a Function of
C + N and Chromium Equivalent (Based on Irving)
Source: F. Masuyama. History of Power Plants and Progress in Heat Resistant Steels. ISIJ
International. Vol. 41. No. 6 [3-21].
Ferritic and Advanced Ferritic Boiler Steels
The nominal compositions of ferritic boiler steels are shown in Table 3-5, and the development
stages are shown in Figure 3-10 [3-21].
3-27
Table 3-5
Nominal Compositions of Ferritic Piping Steels
Steels Chemical Composition (mass %)
C Si Mn Cr Mo W V Nb B Others
2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo 0.12 0.3 0.45 2.25 1.0 - - - - -

2%Cr
2-1/4 Cr 1.8 W V Nb 0.06 0.2 0.45 2.25 0.1 1.6 0.25 0.05 0.008 -
9 Cr 1 Mo 0.12 0.6 0.45 9.0 1.0 - - - - -
9 Cr 2 Mo 0.07 0.3 0.45 9.0 2.0 - - - - -
9 Cr 1 Mo V Nb 0.10 0.4 0.45 9.0 1.0 - 0.20 0.08 -
9 Cr 1/2 Mo 2 W V 0.07 0.06 0.45 9.0 0.5 1.8 0.20 0.06 0.004
9%Cr Nb
9 Cr 1 Mo 1 W V Nb 0.11 0.3 0.45 9.0 1.0 1.0 0.20 0.08 0.008
Low C 9 Cr 0.06 0.5 0.60 9.0 1.0 - 0.25 0.40 0.005

1 Mo V Nb
9 Cr 2 Mo V Nb 0.10 0.4 0.10 9.0 2.0 - 0.30 0.40 -
12 Cr 1 Mo V 0.20 0.4 0.60 12.0 1.0 - 0.25 - - 0.5Ni
12 Cr 1 Mo W V 0.20 0.4 0.60 12.0 1.0 0.5 0.25 - - 0.5Ni
12 Cr 1 Mo 1 W V 0.10 0.3 0.55 12.0 1.0 1.0 0.25 0.05 - -

Nb
12%Cr 12 Cr 0.4 Mo 0.11 0.1 0.60 12.0 0.4 2.0 0.20 0.05 0.008 1.0Cu
2 W Cu V Nb
11 Cr 2-1/2 W 2-1/2 0.08 0.2 0.50 11.0 0.2 2.6 0.20 0.07 0.004 -
Co V Nb B N
11 Cr 3 W 3 Co V 0.10 0.3 0.20 11.0 - 3.0 0.20 0.07 - 0.007Ta,

Nb Ta Nb N 0.04Nb
3-28
Figure 3-10
Development of High-Strength Boiler Steels
The high strength 9–12 wt% Cr steels exhibit relatively good corrosion resistance and can be
used as low-cost alternatives to l8%Cr-8%Ni steels. Furthermore, in comparison with the
conventional 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo steels, pipe wall thickness can be reduced, and oxidation and
corrosion resistances can also be enhanced. Alloy 9 Cr 2 Mo is a low-carbon steel that has been
used successfully in superheater and reheater tubes and piping. The creep rupture strength is
between those of 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo steels and TP304H. Low-carbon 9 Cr 1 Mo V Nb, 9 Cr 2 Mo V
Nb, and 9 Cr 1 Mo V Nb (ASME grade 91) are modified 9% Cr steels with high-temperature
strength enhanced by adding carbonitride-forming elements such as vanadium and niobium. Of
these, modified 9 Cr grade 91 steel has a high allowable stress and has already been used
extensively worldwide, not only for superheater tubes but also for thick-walled components such
as headers and main steam pipes. The emergence of this material made it possible to use ferritic
steels for fabrication of major pressure parts for ultrasupercritical pressure power plants using
temperatures up to 1099°F (593°C). Furthermore, 9% Cr steels (9 Cr 0.5 Mo 1.8 W V Nb
[ASME T/P92] and 9 Cr 1 Mo 1 W V Nb [ASME TP911]) with a higher allowable stress than
that of the grade 91 have been developed. These were obtained based on steels with molybdenum
content replaced by addition of tungsten. Molybdenum was decreased to 0.5% and 1.8% tungsten
was added to T/P91 in the case of T/P92, and 1% tungsten was added to T/P91 in the case of
TP911.
3-29
Of the 12% Cr steels, 12 Cr 1 Mo V (DIN X20CrMoV121) is used extensively in Europe for

superheater tubes, steam pipes, and so forth, and has a large amount of service experience.
However, because this steel has a carbon content as high as 0.2%, weldability is relatively poor,
and because high-temperature strength is not satisfactorily high, this material is hardly ever used
in Japan or in the United States. However, improved 12% Cr steels for boiler applications, for
example 12 Cr 1 Mo 1 W V Nb and 12 Cr 0.4 Mo 2 W Cu V Nb (ASME T122), have been
developed with improved performance.
Austenitic Steels
Chemical compositions of austenitic heat-resistant steels are shown in Table 3-6, and
development stages are presented in Figure 3-11 [3-21]. Because 18%Cr-8%Ni steels are used
for the highest-temperature boiler components, various improvements have been made to
enhance corrosion resistance while maintaining high creep strength. In addition, new steels with
chromium content of 20% or more have been developed for the purpose of improving creep
strength and corrosion resistance. The 18% Cr-8% Ni steels such as TP304H, TP32IH, TP316H,
and TP347H are still used for fossil-fired power plants operating under conventional steam
conditions. Steel TP347H, which has the highest allowable stress among these four types of
steels, has been produced with a fine-grained structure (ASTM grain size 8 and finer) for
improved steam oxidation resistance and creep strengthening; this alloy is designated as
TP347HFG by ASME. This steel is very useful for improved performance in superheater tubes
for ultrasupercritical pressure power plants operating at temperatures up to 1099°F (593°C).
3-30
Table 3-6
Chemical Compositions of Austenitic Heat-Resistant Piping Steels
Steels Chemical Composition (mass %)
C Si Mn Ni Cr Mo W V Nb Ti B Others
18 Cr 8 Ni 0.08 0.6 1.6 8.0 18.0 - - - - - - -
18 Cr 9 Ni Cu 0.10 0.2 0.8 9.0 18.0 - - - 0.40 - - 3.0Cu,

Nb N 0.10N
18 Cr 10 Ni Ti 0.08 0.6 1.6 10.0 18.0 - - - - 0.5 - -
18 Cr 10 Ni 0.12 0.6 1.6 10.0 18.0 - - - 0.10 0.08 - -

18% Cr- Nb Ti
8% Ni
16 Cr 12 Ni 0.08 0.6 1.6 12.0 16.0 2.5 - - - - - -
Mo
18 Cr 12 Ni 0.08 0.6 1.6 10.0 18.0 - - - 0.8 - - -

Nb
18 Cr 10 Ni 0.08 0.6 1.6 10.0 18.0 - - - 0.8 - - -

Nb (FG)
17 Cr 14 Ni 0.12 0.5 0.7 14.0 16.0 2.0 - - 0.4 0.3 0.006 3.0Cu
15% Cr- Cu Mo Nb Ti
15% Ni 15 Cr 10 Ni 6 0.12 0.5 6.0 10.0 15.0 1.0 - 0.2 1.0 0.06 - -
Mn V Nb Ti
25 Cr 20 Ni 0.08 0.6 1.6 20.0 25.0 - - - - - - -
25 Cr 20 Ni 0.06 0.4 1.2 20.0 25.0 - - - 0.45 - - 0.2N

Nb N
21 Cr 32 Ni Ti 0.08 0.5 1.2 32.0 21.0 - - - - 0.5 - 0.4Al

Al
20% to
25% Cr 22 Cr 15 Ni 0.05 0.4 1.5 15.0 22.0 - - - 0.7 - 0.002 0.15N
Nb N
20 Cr 25 Ni 0.15 0.5 1.0 25.0 20.0 1.5 - - 0.2 0.1 - -

Mo Nb Ti
22.5 Cr 18.5 0.10 0.1 1.0 18.0 23.0 - 1.5 - 0.45 - - 3.0Cu,
Ni W Cu Nb N 0.2N
30 Cr 50 Ni 0.06 0.3 0.2 50.0 30.0 2.0 - - - 0.2 - 0.08Zr

High Mo Ti Zr
Cr-High
Ni 23 Cr 43 Ni W 0.08 0.4 1.2 43.0 23.0 - 6.0 - 0.18 0.08 0.003 -
Nb Ti
3-31
Figure 3-11
Development of High-Strength Boiler Steels
Carbon Steels
Carbon steels are the predominant materials in tubing, piping, and pressure vessel components
because of their low cost, versatile mechanical properties, and availability in a wide range of
product forms. They are the most common materials used in noncorrosive environments in the
temperature range of -20°F to 800°F (-29°C to 425°C) in power plants, refineries, and chemical
plants. Although the ASME code gives allowable stresses for temperatures greater than 800°F
(425°C), it also notes that prolonged exposure at these temperatures can result in the carbide
phase of the carbon steel being converted to graphite. Steel P1, with 0.15% carbon and 0.50%
molybdenum, is used for piping and superheater tubes operating at metal temperatures to
approximately 850°F (455°C). Graphitization can occur with both these alloy types, depending
on details of initial manufacture and on the time that the material is at or above 800°F (425°C).
The result is a potential loss of strength combined with a significant decrease in toughness of the
steel after high-temperature exposure.
3-32
Microstructure
Classified according to various deoxidation practices, carbon steel is designated variously as rimmed, capped, semikilled, or killed
steel. The deoxidation practice and the steelmaking process affect the properties of the steel. However, variations in carbon have the
greatest effect on mechanical properties, with increasing carbon content leading to increased hardness and strength. Therefore, carbon
steels are generally categorized according to their carbon content. In the vast majority of boiler applications, carbon levels are below
0.3% (see Tables 3-7 and 3-8), and the microstructure is predominantly ferrite and pearlite (see Figure 3-12).
Table 3-7
Specified Composition and Tensile Properties for Selected Carbon Steels
Chemical Composition Tensile Properties Hardness
Alloy Yield UTS

Elongation
C Mn P S Si (ksi) (ksi) HRB / HB
(%)
(note 1) (note 1, 2)
0.005 0.045
SA 53 0.25–0.35 0.95–1.20 - 26 30–35 - 77 / 137
max max
0.035 0.035 0.10

SA 106 0.25– 0.35 0.27–1.06 30–40 48–70 25 79 / 143
max max max
Notes:
1. 1 ksi = 6.895 MPa
2. UTS = Ultimate tensile strength
3-33
Table 3-8
Specified Composition and Tensile Properties for Representative Pipe Alloys
Chemical Composition Tensile Properties Hardness

ASTM Yield UTS
Grades Elongation
C Cr Mo Mn P S Si (ksi) (ksi) HRB / HB
%
(note 1) (note 1, 2)
0.44– 0.045 0.045 0.1–
P1 0.1–0.2 NA 0.3–0.8 30 55 30 80 / 146
0.65 max max 0.5
0.025 0.025 0.1–
P2 0.1–0.2 0.5–0.81 NA 0.3–0.61 30 60 30 85 / 163
max max 0.3
0.05– 0.44– 0.025 0.025 0.5
P12 0.8–1.25 0.3–0.61 30 60 30 85 / 163
0.15 0.65 max max max
0.05– 0.44– 0.30– 0.025 1.15–
P15 NA 0.025 30 60 30 85 / 163
0.15 0.65 0.60 max 1.65
0.05– 0.44– 0.025 0.025 0.5–
P11 1.0–1.5 0.3–0.60 30 60 30 85 / 163
0.15 0.65 max max 1.0
0.05– 0.87– 0.025 0.025 0.5
P22 0.9–2.6 0.3–0.60 30 60 30 85 / 163
0.15 1.13 max max max
0.05– 2.65– 0.80– 0.30– 0.025 0.025 0.5
P21 30 60 30 85 / 163
0.15 3.35 1.06 0.60 max max max
0.15 0.45– 0.025 0.025 0.5
P5 4.0–6.0 0.3–0.60 30 60 30 85 / 163
max 0.65 max max max
0.15 0.45– 0.025 0.025 0.5–
P9 6.0–8.0 0.3–0.60 30 60 30 89 / 179
max 0.65 max max 1.0
0.08– 8.00– 0.85– 0.30– 0.020 0.010 0.20–
P91 30 60 30 89 / 179
0.12 9.50 1.05 0.60 max max 0.50
0.15 0.025 0.025 0.25–
P92 8.0–10.0 0.9–1.1 0.3–0.60 30 60 30 89 / 179
max max max 1.0
Notes:
1. 1 ksi = 6.895 MPa.
2. UTS = ultimate tensile strength.
3-34
Figure 3-12
Typical Micrographs of Carbon Steel, Showing (a) Predominantly Ferrite with
Approximately 10% Pearlite and (b) Detail of the Pearlitic Microstructure
For plain-carbon steels and carbon-1/2 Mo steels, the expected microstructure is ferrite (nearly
pure iron) and pearlite, as shown in Figure 3-12a. Details of the lamellar structure of alternating
layers of ferrite and iron carbide in pearlite are shown in Figure 3-12b. This structure, called the
normalized structure, is produced by slowly cooling the finished product from approximately
1650°F (899°C). In this condition, the steel will meet all specification requirements and is as
strong as it will ever be. The microstructural changes that might occur during service will
decrease the strength of this pearlitic structure.
Plain carbon steels include SA210, SA192, and SA178 for boiler tubes and SA106 for piping and
headers. The measured Rockwell B hardness varies with the specific carbon level, but it is
usually approximately 75. The pearlite is made up of alternating layers of iron carbide and
ferrite, referred to as a lamellar structure (see Figure 3-12b). The amount of pearlite depends on
the carbon content, with the spacing of the individual platelets related to the specifics of the
thermal treatment. The individual plates of iron carbide or cementite in the pearlite are shaped
like playing cards, long in two dimensions and short in the thickness direction. Each cluster is
referred to as a pearlite colony. The apparent spacing or thickness of the iron carbide and ferrite
layers depends on how the pearlite colony is sliced. When sliced perpendicularly to the colony,
the spacing is close, perhaps too fine to be resolved by optical microscopy. However, when cut at
an angle, the apparent thickness between the lamellae is greater.
The wide range of microstructures and the associated strengths of steels are largely a result of the
significant effect of carbon. In particular, increasing the carbon content leads to significant
increases in strength (see Figure 3-13) [3-4]. However, increases in strength are typically
associated with reductions in ductility.
3-35
Figure 3-13
Changes in Strength and Ductility with Increasing Carbon Levels for a Simple Carbon
Steel
Much work has been carried out to develop empirical equations for ferrite-pearlite steels that
relate strength and toughness to microstructural features—for example, grain size and percentage
of pearlite as well as composition. One such equation for ferrite-pearlite steels under 0.25%
carbon is shown in Equation 3-5.
Yield Strength = 53.9 + 32.34(Mn) + 83.2(Si) + 354.2(Nf) + 17.4(d-1/2) Eq. 3-5
Where:
Mn is the manganese content (%).
Si is the silicon content (%).
Nf is the free nitrogen content (%).
d is the ferrite grain size (mm).
Equation 3-5 shows that manganese, silicon, and nitrogen have a pronounced effect on yield
strength, as does grain size. However, in most ferrite-pearlite steels, nitrogen is quite low
(<0.010%) and thus has minimal effect on yield strength.
3-36
The regression equation for tensile strength for the same steels is shown in Equation 3-6.
Tensile Strength = 294.1 + 27.7(Mn) + 83.2(Si) + 3.9(Pl) + 7.7(d-1/2) Eq. 3-6
The tensile strength is in MPa, and Pl is the pearlite content (%). Thus, in distinction to yield
strength, the percentage of pearlite in the microstructure has an important effect on tensile
strength.
Toughness of ferrite-pearlite steels is also an important consideration in their use. It has long
been known that the absorbed energy in a Charpy V-notch test is decreased by increasing carbon
content. In Figure 3-14, showing the variation of impact energy with test temperature, the shelf
energy decreases from approximately 200 J (150 ft-lbf) for 0.11% carbon steel to approximately
35 J (25 ft-lbf) for 0.80% carbon steel. Also, the transition temperature increases from
approximately -60°F to 300°F (-50°C to 150°C) over this same range of carbon content [3-22].
Figure 3-14
The Influence of Increasing Carbon Level on Charpy Impact Tests for Carbon Steels
Source: K. W. Burns and F. B. Pickering, Deformation and Fracture of Ferrite-Pearlite Structures.
Journal of the Iron and Steel Institute, Vol. 202, No. 110 [3-22].
The effect of carbon is due mainly to its effect on the percentage of pearlite in the microstructure.
This is reflected in the regression equation for transition temperature (for temperature in °C)
shown in Equation 3-7.
Transition Temp = -19 + 44(Si) + 700(Nf) + 2.2(Pl)—11.5(d-1/2) Eq. 3-7
3-37
It can be seen in all these relationships that ferrite grain size is an important parameter in
improving both strength and toughness. Although pearlite is beneficial for increasing tensile
strength, and nitrogen is beneficial for increasing yield strength, both are harmful to toughness.
Allowable Stress Values
The allowable stress values according to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section II,
Materials, are presented in Table 3-9 [3-10]. At lower temperatures, these allowable stresses are
based on the tensile properties; therefore, no variation of allowable stress is recommended.
However, above approximately 700°F (371°C) for the carbon steels and approximately 750°F
(399°C) for the carbon-1/2 Mo steel, diffusion processes begin to become significant, and the
allowable stress is reduced. With further increases in temperature, the allowable stress is further
reduced, as creep damage development becomes the dominant process.
3-38
Table 3-9
ASME BPVC Section II Maximum Allowable Stress for Selected Carbon Steels
Metal Temperature (°F) (note 1)

Alloy
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
Carbon Steels (note 2)
SA 53 13.7 13.7 13.7 12.5 9 5 — — — —
SA 106 13.7 13.7 13.7 12.5 9 5 1.5 — — —
Low-Alloy Steels (note 2)
P1 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.5 12.7 4.8 — — —
P2 15 15 14.7 14.2 13.5 12.8 5.9 — — —
P12 15 15 15 15 14.8 13.1 6.6 2.8 1 —
P11 15 15 15 15 15 13.1 6 3 1.2 —
P22 15 15 15 15 15 13.1. 7.8 4.2 1.6 —
P5 14.4 14.4 14.1 13.7 12.8 10.9 5.8 2.9 1.3 —
P9 14.4 14.4 14.2 13.7 12.3 11.4 7.4 3.3 1.5 —
Austenitic Stainless Steels (note 2)
304 13 12.2 11.4 11.1 10.6 10.2 9.8 8.9 6.1 3.7
316 13.4 12.5 11.8 11.3 11 10.8 10.6 10.3 7.4 4.1
321 17.1 17.1 16.4 15.8 15.5 15.3 13.8 6.9 3.6 1.7
321H 17.1 17.1 16.4 15.8 15.5 15.3 14 9.1 5.4 3.2
347 15.5 14.9 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.7 14 9.1 4.4 2.2
347H 15.5 14.9 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.4 13 7.9 4.4
Martensitic Steels (note 2)
P91
21.2 21.1 20.8 20 18.7 16.7 14.3 10.3 4.3 —
(note 3)
P91
— — — 22.9 21.3 19.1 10.0 9.6 4.3 —
(note 4)
P92
— — — 22.4 21.4 20.1 18.3 12.3 5.9 —
(note 5)
Notes:
1. °C = (°F - 32) x 5/9.
2. Units = ksi. 1 ksi = 6.895 MPa.
3. Values according to ASME Section I [3-23]
4. Values for thickness >3 in. (7.62 cm) from Vallourec Mannesmann Tubes. The T91/P91 Book [3-24].
5. Values from ASME Code Case 2179-6 [3-25].
3-39
Creep Properties
The Larson-Miller parameter (LMP) is frequently used to represent the variation of creep life
with stress and temperature, T. The LMP is given by Equation 3-8.
LMP = (T + 460)(constant + log time) Eq. 3-8
The normal value of the constant for the majority of power plant steels is 20. The approach is
based on the assumption that tests performed under accelerated temperature conditions can be
used to define the long-term performance at service conditions. For a given alloy, the available
dataset values of LMP are typically plotted against stress, allowing minimum and average
behavior to be described. In Table 3-10, the results available from API STD 530, Calculation of
Heater Tube Thickness in Petroleum Refineries, for carbon and carbon-1/2 Mo steel have been
assessed to provide a representation of average behavior [3-26].
Table 3-10
Larson-Miller Parameters for Stress Rupture Properties
Alloy Stress (ksi)
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
Carbon Steels
SA 53 32200 32650 33100 33600 34150 34800 35500 35400 —
SA 106 33900 34300 34750 35200 35750 36400 37100 38000 —
Low-Alloy Steels
P1 35900 36100 36400 36700 37050 37450 38000 38650 —
P2 36350 36650 36950 37300 37800 — — — —
P12 36850 37200 37600 38200 — — — — —
P11 36550 36850 37150 37500 37900 38350 38950 39700 —
P22 36950 37350 37800 38350 38900 39550 40250 41000 —
P5 36500 36950 37400 37900 38500 39250 40100 41200 —
P9 37600 37900 38250 38650 39150 39700 40400 41300 42550
Austenitic Stainless Steels
304 33600 34000 34500 35050 35700 36450 37400 38600 —
316 33700 34100 34450 34900 35400 36050 36800 37750 39150
321 32700 33050 33400 33850 34300 34900 35600 36500 37750
321H 33300 33700 34100 34650 35250 35950 36800 37900 39500
347 33900 34050 34650 35100 35600 36250 37000 37950 39300
347H 33900 34050 34650 35100 35600 36250 37000 37950 39300
3-40

Larson-Miller Parameters for Stress Rupture Properties
Alloy Stress (ksi)
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
Martensitic Steels
P91 — — — — — — — — —
P92 — — — — — — — — —
Note: 1 ksi = 6.895 MPa.
Aging Effects
At temperatures above approximately 800°F (427°C), the plate-like shape of the pearlite is
unstable and will change to a sphere-like shape. Changing its shape to a sphere reduces the
internal energy of the carbide. The excess surface energy is the driving force for the change. The
process that leads to the new shape is known as spheroidization. Another factor in addition to
temperature that will promote spheroidization is high stress. For plain carbon (SA53, SA106)
steels, the iron carbide itself is unstable and will transform to graphite and ferrite. Thus, a further
step in the microstructural changes is the formation of graphite particles within the steel, a
process known as graphitization. Graphitization is a well-known phenomenon; in fact, the
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section II, Materials, Part D, Table 1A warns of the
change in iron carbide to graphite for plain carbon steels and carbon-1/2 Mo steels.
Spheroidization and graphitization are competing processes (see Figure 3-15) [3-27]. At
temperatures above approximately 1000°F (538°C), graphite will appear after spheroidization.
At temperatures below approximately 1000°F (538°C), graphitization occurs before the steel is
fully spheroidized.
3-41
Figure 3-15
Variation of Microstructural Changes Resulting from Spheroidization and Graphitization
with Time at Elevated Temperature
Source: W. L. Hemingway. The Study of Graphitization [3-27].
Graphitization occurs when iron carbide decomposes into ferrite and graphite, its true
equilibrium structure. The formation of graphite particles or nodules, if they are dispersed
throughout the metal, is not considered a problem; however, if they form a continuous zone, the
resulting embrittled material can fail catastrophically by brittle fracture.
Carbide spheroidization is also a mechanism of pearlite decomposition. Of the two,

graphitization is less common, but because it results in embrittled material, it is more serious
when it does occur. Because of the difference in activation energies of the two processes, it has
generally been considered that graphitization is preferred at temperatures below approximately
1020°F (550°C). However, recently it has been observed from field experience with degraded
materials that the graphitization-to-spheroidization temperature can differ somewhat from the
accepted value, it can be dependent on steel composition and microstructure, and it can occur in
a manner that is not completely predictable.
Pearlite decomposition tends to become unstable when the steel has been heated briefly above
the A1 temperature, approximately 1340°F (725°C). Such a temperature regime occurs during
the welding process, which is the reason that graphitization damage is mostly associated with the
HAZs of welds, usually at a characteristic distance from the weld. Recent field investigations
have identified graphitization that has occurred in base metal removed from the influence of
welds [3-28]. This phenomenon, referred to as non-weld-related graphitization, seems to be
associated with locations that have been subjected to large plastic deformations. A complete
explanation of this second type of graphitization is not yet in hand. Boiler tubes are among the
power plant components in which this recently recognized form of graphitization has led to
failure.
3-42
The propensity toward graphitization damage has also been considered to depend on the
steelmaking practice used. Aluminum-killed steels, once in common usage, have been shown to
be more susceptible than steels deoxidized with silicon or titanium, unless the aluminum content
is restricted to <0.025%.
The use of carbon-molybdenum steel has been largely discontinued for higher temperatures
because of problems associated with graphitization. Chromium-containing steels are highly
resistant to graphitization and are therefore preferred for service above 850°F (455°C).
The effect of spheroidization on the rupture strength of a typical carbon-molybdenum steel

containing 0.17% C and 0.42% Mo, at 900°F and 1000°F (480°C and 540°C), is shown in
Figure 3-16 for several initial metallurgical structures (normalized or annealed). In these tests,
the structure of the steel affected the rupture strength; for example, the stress for failure of a
spheroidized structure in a given time was sometimes only half that of a normalized structure
[3-29].
At 900°F (480°C), a coarse-grain normalized structure was the strongest for both short-time and
long-time tests. The spheroidized structures were weaker than the normalized or annealed
structures for short-time tests at both 900°F and 1000°F (480°C and 540°C). As the test time
increased, the rupture values for all the structures tended to approach a common value.
Although the spheroidized structure is weaker than the normalized pearlitic microstructure, a
greater life in cyclic fatigue loading has been observed (see Figure 3-17) [3-4]. This is because
the platelets of cementite in pearlite are relatively brittle and therefore offer planes of relatively
rapid fracture within the pearlitic microstructure.
Chromium-Molybdenum Steels
Chromium-molybdenum heat-resistant steels encompass a number of different alloys that contain

between approximately 0.5%–10% chromium and 0.5%–1.2% molybdenum. The carbon content
is usually below 0.2%. The specified alloy compositions for selected steels within the
classification are given in Table 3-6. The chromium provides improved oxidation and corrosion
resistance, and the molybdenum increases strength at elevated temperatures. These alloys are
generally supplied in the normalized and tempered, quenched and tempered, or annealed
condition. Chromium-molybdenum steels are widely used in the oil and gas industries and in
fossil-fuel and nuclear power plants. The greatest creep strength is found in 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo steels
(see Figure 3-18) [3-30]. However, the resistance to oxidation increases with increasing
chromium level.
3-43
Figure 3-16
Effect of Spheroidization on the Rupture Strength of Carbon-Molybdenum Steel
(0.17 C 0.88 Mn 0.20 Si 0.42 Mo)
Source: S. H. Weaver. The Effect of Carbide Spheroidization Upon the Rupture Strength and
Ductility of Carbon Molybdenum Steel. Proceedings of the ASTM, Vol. 46 [3-29].
3-44
Figure 3-17
Differences in Fatigue Behavior for Carbon Steels with a Pearlitic or a Spheroidized
Microstructure
Figure 3-18
Variation of Creep Strength with Chromium Content for a Series of Low-Alloy Steels
Source: G. H. Harth and T.P. Sherlock, in Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 107. pp. 226–229
[3-30].
The 1 Cr 1/2 Mo steel is used for piping and tubes for boilers with service temperatures to 950°F
or 1000°F (510°C or 540°C). The similar 1-1/4 Cr 1/2 Mo steel is used at up to 1100°F (590°C)
and has stress-rupture and creep properties comparable to those of the 1 Cr 1/2 Mo steel. The
2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo steel has better oxidation resistance and creep strength than 1 Cr 1/2 Mo and
1-1/4 Cr 1 Mo steels. Thus, this alloy has been used at temperatures up to approximately 1200°F
(650°C) without the presence of hydrogen or to approximately 900°F (480°C) in a hydrogen
environment. The 5%, 7%, and 9% chromium steels are generally lower in stress rupture and
3-45
creep strength than the lower-chromium steels because the strength at elevated temperatures
typically drops off with an increase in chromium. The main advantage of these steels is the
improved oxidation resistance from the increased chromium content.
Microstructure
The microstructures present depend on both the composition and the thermal history. Guidance
regarding the specific microstructures developed is obtained from the CCT diagram, which
presents information on the structures formed for particular cooling rates. The CCT diagram for
2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo steel is shown in Figure 3-19 [3-15]. For samples that are cooled slowly, the
microstructure will be ferrite and pearlite, with bainitic structures formed at faster rates. Under
intermediate conditions, the structure will contain ferrite with a range of transformation products.
Figure 3-19
Continuous Cooling Transformation Diagram for 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo Steel
Source: Babcock & Wilcox, Steam, Fortieth Edition [3-15].
The effect of differences in thermal cycles in modifying microstructure is most commonly noted
in weldments. Variations in peak temperature and cooling rate result in a range of grain sizes and
transformation microstructures within the weld metal and the HAZ. A macrograph of a typical
CrMo low-alloy steel weld is shown in Figure 3-20a, and details of typical weld metal and HAZ
microstructures are presented in Figures 3-20b and 3-20c, respectively [3-1]. As shown, within
the weld and heat-affected zone, the cooling rate is relatively rapid; therefore, the predominant
microstructure is bainite. However, because of the differing thermal histories, a wide range of
prior austenite grain sizes is present. Relatively slow cooling rates in the parent result in a
predominantly ferritic microstructure; however, for parent sections that have been cooled
rapidly, mostly bainitic structures will be present.
3-46
Figure 3-20
Typical Weld Microstructures in Cr Mo Low-Alloy Steel Shown in (a) Macrosection, (b) with
Details of Typical Microstructures in the Weld Metal, and (c) Heat-Affected Zone
Source: EPRI 1011912. Metallurgical Guidebook for Fossil Power Plant Boilers [3-1].
Clean steelmaking practices have significantly improved the toughness of CrMo steels over the
last 15 years by reducing the content of residual elements responsible for some types of
embrittlement. Refinement of grain size and shape control of inclusions have produced
additional improvements in toughness. Typically, the procurement specifications for the CrMo
steels require that the room-temperature elongations meet or exceed values in the range of 18%
to 22%, depending on the strength and other factors related to the specific grade. A maximum
ultimate strength or hardness is sometimes specified to ensure adequate toughness in the
delivered product. For thick-section products, such as plates, a supplementary requirement for
toughness is available when needed. Toughness criteria derived from the Charpy V-notch or
other types of toughness tests are often invoked for nuclear applications.
The allowable stress values according to the ASME Boiler Pressure and Valve Code, Section II,
Materials, are presented in Table 3-9. At the lower temperatures, these allowable stresses are
based on the tensile properties; therefore, no variation of allowable stress is recommended.
However, above approximately 750°F (399°C) for the majority of steels and above
approximately 800°F (427°C) for the grades 11 and 22 steels, diffusion processes begin to
become significant, and the allowable stress is reduced. With further increases in temperature,
3-47
the allowable stress is further reduced, as creep damage development becomes the dominant
process. For a particular temperature, the highest values of allowable stress are given for grade
22 material.
The recommended allowable stress values can be changed as further information becomes
available. For example, the values for grade 11, 1-1/4 Cr Mo steel were reevaluated during the
1960s, and the allowable stress recommendations were reduced. Figure 3-21 shows the reduction
in allowable stress that resulted from reevaluation of appropriate creep data [3-30]. Therefore, it
is important to be aware of the recommended allowable stress values that were used during plant
design and construction and of any changes that might have occurred.
Figure 3-21
Variation of Allowable Stress Values for Grade 11, 1-1/4 Cr Mo Steel at Different Metal
Temperatures
Source: G. H. Harth and T.P. Sherlock, in Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 107, pp. 226–229 [3-30].
Creep Properties
The LMP is frequently used to represent the variation of creep life with stress and temperature,
T. The LMP is given by the following relationship: LMP = (T + 460)(constant + log time). The
normal value of the constant for the majority of power plant steels is 20. The approach is based
on the assumption that tests performed under accelerated temperature conditions can be used to
define the long-term performance at service conditions. For a given alloy, the available dataset
values of LMP are typically plotted against stress, allowing minimum and average behavior to be
described. In Table 3-10, the results available from API STD 530 for selected chromium-
molybdenum steels have been assessed to give a representation of average behavior [3-26]. The
3-48
initial heat treatment condition affects relatively short-term creep life. Thus, normalized and
tempered material will exhibit higher creep strength than annealed material, for example. Indeed,
even within the classification of normalized and tempered steel, greater short-term strength will
be noted for material with the highest tensile strength. (See Figure 3-22. The mean line in the
figure is a representation of the lives for annealed material, with the data shown by the symbols
representing results obtained for normalized and tempered steel heat treated to different tensile
strengths [3-31].) However, microstructural changes occur with exposure to high temperatures.
Because the most stable microstructure is independent of initial structure, any differences in
creep strength early in life will gradually be reduced as a result of long-term aging during
service.
Figure 3-22
Variation of the Larson-Miller Parameter with Creep Stress for 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo Steel
Source: G. V. Smith, Supplemental Report on the Elevated-Temperature Properties of
Chromium-Molybdenum Steels (An Evaluation of 2 Cr 1 Mo Steel) [3-31].
3-49
Aging Effects
Carbide Changes and Coarsening
The types of precipitates formed depend on the composition, the temperature history during
fabrication, and the time and temperature of in-service exposure. Different carbide types will be
present depending on service conditions. It is generally agreed that the sequence of precipitation
will be as shown in Equation 3-9, where M denotes the metal element (typically iron, chromium,
or molybdenum, but complex combinations of elements can be involved).
M3C → M3C + M2C → M3C + M2C + M7C3 → M2C + M7C3 + M6C + M23C6 Eq. 3-9
Not only does the type of carbide present change with time but also the size and distribution of
carbides are modified. Thus, the initial regular distribution of relatively fine precipitates changes.
Typically, preferential growth of precipitates at grain boundaries cause the precipitates in regions
adjacent to the boundaries to dissolve. (Figure 3-23 shows an optical micrograph from a section
of P22 material after long-term service, showing the precipitate coarsening that had taken place.)
Networks of relatively coarse-grain boundary carbides will be developed. These changes reduce
strength and can also lead to reductions in ductility through carbide embrittlement or temper
embrittlement.
Figure 3-23
Optical Micrograph Showing Precipitate Coarsening of P22 Material
The changes in microstructure occurring with time at temperature have been monitored in a
number of studies. For example, it has been shown that the changes in precipitate type, size, and
distribution lead to a gradual reduction in creep strength. It has been suggested that tracking
changes in microstructure either directly (using metallographic evaluation) or indirectly (using
3-50
hardness measurements) is a useful approach to aid in condition assessment evaluations. An

example of the microstructural changes and reductions in properties for a set of 1CrMo steel
samples is shown in Figures 3-24 and 3-25. In Figure 3-25, stage A is new material before
entering service. Stages B through F indicate progressively increased levels of microstructural
change, as shown in the typical micrographs presented in Figure 3-25 [3-32].
Figure 3-24
Progressive Changes in the Microstructure of 1 Cr Mo Steel
Source: L. H. Toft and R. A. Mardsen, The Structure and Properties of 1%Cr-0.5%Mo Steel after
Service in CEBG Power Stations. Proceedings of the Conference on Structural Processes in
Creep [3-32].
3-51
Figure 3-25
Variation in Creep Strength of 1 Cr Mo Steel Samples as Microstructural Aging Progresses
Source: L. H. Toft and R. A. Mardsen, The Structure and Properties of 1%Cr-0.5%Mo Steel after
Service in CEBG Power Stations. Proceedings of the Conference on Structural Processes in
Creep [3-32].
Carbide Embrittlement
The influence of carbides on the fracture appearance transition temperature (FATT) of

2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo steel has been evaluated in a series of aging experiments using an alloy that was
very low in trace elements. Step-cool heat treatment typical of the type used to evaluate temper
embrittlement revealed that relatively low temperature exposure did not change FATT. In
contrast, significant reductions in FATT were found after aging at 1022°F (550°C), 1112°F
(600°C), and 1157°F (625°C).
The complete transition curves both for the virgin steel (at implementation into service) and for
samples heat treated under laboratory conditions to increase the size of the carbides are shown in
Figure 3-26 [3-33]. This figure also includes data from an ex-service sample that had
experienced 88,000 hours at 1022°F (550°C). The points representing samples of steel aged at
1112°F (600°C) for 10,000 hours simulate the change in FATT measured after prolonged
service.
3-52
Figure 3-26
Charpy Impact Transition Curves for 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo Steel
Source: S. Wignarajah, I. Masumoto, and T. Hara, Evaluation and Simulation of the
Microstructural Changes and Embrittlement In 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo Steel Due to Long-Term Service.
ISIJ International, Vol 30 [3-33].
Temper Embrittlement
Temper embrittlement is a major cause of degradation of toughness of ferritic steels. Numerous

components become candidates for retirement if they are severely embrittled because under these
conditions, the critical crack size can become very small. The problem is encountered as a result
of exposure of a range of alloy steels in the temperature range 650°F to 1000°F (345°C to
540°C). Slow cooling following tempering or post-weld heat treatment (PWHT), or service
exposure in this temperature range, can lead to embrittlement.
This problem has been identified in a wide range of alloys, including low-alloy steels, higher-
strength alloy steels, and stainless steels, and it is traditionally of greater risk with components
manufactured using older methods. This increased susceptibility is related both to higher
normalizing temperatures, because these higher temperatures result in larger grain sizes, and to
steelmaking practices that lead to higher levels of impurities, particularly involving elements
such as phosphorus, tin, antimony, and arsenic. Temper embrittlement occurs when these trace
elements diffuse to grain boundaries so that, with respect to the behavior observed during Charpy
impact testing, intergranular fracture rather than cleavage occurs in the brittle lower shelf region
and the brittle-to-ductile transition takes place at a higher temperature—that is, there is an
increase in FATT, which under extreme situations can be as much as 572°F (300°C).
3-53
Austenitic Steels
Austenitic steels have excellent corrosion resistance and excellent high-temperature tensile and
creep strength. However, because of their susceptibility to halide stress corrosion cracking, these
alloys are not commonly used for piping applications at temperatures above approximately
150°F (66°C). In contrast, austenitic steels have been used in superheaters and reheaters for
approximately 35 years and have provided excellent performance.
For high-temperature boiler applications, three general grades—304, 321, and 347—are the most
widely used. Within these classifications are other grades, designated by a following capital
letter, L (low carbon, C ≤ 0.035%) or H (high carbon, C 0.04–0.10%). The differences lie only in
the carbon content. For use at temperatures above 1000°F (538°C), the ASME Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Code, Section II, Part D requires a minimum of 0.04% carbon for adequate creep
strength [3-10]. For superheater and reheater applications, the H grade is preferred, as this
ensures the proper carbon content and solution heat treatment for use at temperatures where
creep strength is the important design consideration. There are two other grades, 304N and
304LN. The N indicates a nitrogen content of 0.10%–0.16% (for improved strength), and the L
again signifies a maximum carbon content of 0.035%. The 304, 321, and 347 grades are all in the
classification of 18% chromium and 8% nickel, with some slight variations in the range of these
alloying elements.
There are different ASME specifications, depending on the form in which the material is used.
Tubes are covered in SA213, pipes are covered in SA376, and plates are covered in SA240. Each
product form has a slightly different composition range.
Other differences among these three grades are the addition of titanium in 321 and the addition
of columbium and tantalum in grade 347. For 321, the titanium is 0.60% maximum, and for 347,
the columbium plus tantalum cannot exceed 1.0%. There are other requirements for the
minimum amount of these alloying elements, based on the carbon content. There are also some
other minor differences in the nickel range, depending on the product form. However, except for
these relatively minor differences, they all fall within the broad classification of the 18-8
austenitic stainless steels.
The material specification requires all of these materials to be provided in the solution-annealed
condition. That is, the final heat treatment is performed at a temperature of 1900°F–2000°F
(1038°C–1093°C), depending on the particular grade. For the 321H grade, there is a further
requirement: a grain size of ASTM No.7 or coarser is specified to ensure adequate creep
strength. A solution anneal at 2000°F (1093°C) minimum is usually sufficient to meet this
specification requirement.
3-54
Microstructure
After the high-temperature solution anneal, the microstructure will be equiaxed austenite. The
word equiaxed means that the dimensions of an individual austenite grain will be essentially the
same, regardless of orientation or direction. The material is in the fully annealed condition and is
a single-phased material with only some nonmetallic inclusions, which are inherent to
steelmaking, apparent within the microstructure.
Unlike the ferritic steels, which have dramatic microstructural changes depending on the peak
operational or failure temperature, there are no abrupt microstructural changes in the austenitic
stainless steels. The microstructural changes that do occur take place at high temperature. The
austenitic grades will form chromium carbides along the austenite grain boundaries. The
formation of these carbides reduces the chromium content of the austenite grains at the boundary
and therefore reduces the local corrosion resistance along the grain boundaries.
To prevent sensitization, additions of titanium to make the alloy 321 and additions of columbium
and tantalum to make the alloy 347 were introduced. If these alloys are given a second heat
treatment, called a stabilization anneal, at 1600°F–1650°F (871°C–899°C) after the solution
anneal, titanium carbide or columbium-tantalum carbide will form preferentially to chromium
carbide. With all of the carbon removed as innocuous carbides, no chromium carbide can form.
There is no loss of chromium at the grain boundaries, no loss of corrosion resistance, and thus no
sensitization. However, because 321 and 347 in boiler applications are not given a stabilization
anneal, these two alloys will sensitize just the same as 304.
The allowable stress values according to the ASME BPVC, Section II, are presented in Table 3-9
[3-10]. Even at the relatively low temperatures at which the allowable stresses are based on the
tensile properties, there is a gradual decrease in recommended stress. This gradual decrease
occurs because the microstructure of austenitic alloys is FCC; with this crystallographic
structure, as temperature increases, there is a gradual loss of strength. However, above
approximately 1000°F (540°C), diffusion processes begin to become significant, and the
allowable stress is reduced dramatically as creep damage development becomes the dominant
process.
Creep Properties
The LMP is frequently used to represent the variation of creep life with stress and temperature,
T. The LMP is given by the following relationship: LMP = (T + 460)(constant + log time). The
normal value of the constant for the majority of power plant steels is 20. The approach is based
on the assumption that tests performed under accelerated temperature conditions can be used to
define the long-term performance at service conditions. For a given alloy, the available dataset
values of LMP are typically plotted against stress, allowing minimum and average behavior to be
described. In Table 3-10, the results available from API STD 530 for selected austenitic stainless
steels have been assessed to give a representation of average behavior [3-26].
3-55
The details of the creep failure mode of austenitic stainless steels change with stress and
temperature. See Figure 3-27, which shows the four unique stress rupture cracking mechanisms
as a function of stress, temperature, and time to failure [3-34]. The weak heat contained a high
(0.047 wt%) aluminum content, which led to precipitation of aluminum nitride associated with
the grain boundary sigma phase. This caused a reduction in life or strength as a result of early
formation of cracks in the sigma phase.
Figure 3-27
Stress Rupture Curves for a Weak Heat (Heat A) and an Average Heat (Heat B) of Type 304
Stainless Steel Tubing Material
Source: EPRI Report 1004517. Remaining Life Assessment of Austenitic Stainless Steel
Superheater and Reheater Tubes [3-34].
3-56
Long-term creep-rupture failures of stainless steel tubes that have operated at conditions
moderately above the normal design stress and temperature initiate creep cavities at the interface
between the sigma phase and the austenite matrix. Figure 3-28 illustrates the etched surface of a
service-degraded Type 304H stainless steel tube sample, showing stained sigma-phase particles
with fully developed microvoids (the arrow in the figure marks a carbide).
Figure 3-28
Etched Surface of a Service-Degraded Type 304H Stainless Steel Tube Sample
In these cases, the rupture life is controlled primarily by growth of these creep cavities. Tube
degradation and creep damage accumulate in the following sequence [3-34]:
1. Sigma phase precipitates at grain boundaries.
2. Creep cavities nucleate at the interface between the sigma phase and the austenitic matrix.
3. Creep cavities grow to crack-like voids along the grain boundaries.
4. Fracture occurs as a result of interlinking of the crack-like voids.
Although cavitation is considered the primary controlling and recognizable feature in tubing that
has been degraded by elevated temperature, metallographic evaluation of the sigma phase can
provide useful information regarding the lifetime average tube metal temperature before
cavitation becomes the dominant metallographic feature. Combined with tube stress and creep-
rupture material properties, this information can provide an approximate indication of the tube
service exposure and degradation relative to the accumulation of creep damage. However, some
uncertainty is introduced into this analytical method because, in addition to time and
temperature, compositional differences influence sigma formation.
3-57
Aging Behavior
Exposure to elevated temperatures for long periods can cause microstructural changes to take
place. Typical changes are shown in micrographs in Figure 3-29 (321H stainless steel) and
Figure 3-30 (347H stainless steel) and described in the following sections [3-35].
Figure 3-29
Microstructural Changes That Occurred in 321H Stainless Steel After Exposure at Elevated
Temperatures for Different Times
Source: Y. Minami, H. Kimura, and Y. Ihara, in Materials Science and Technology, Vol 2,
pp. 795–806 [3-35].
3-58
Figure 3-30
Microstructural Changes That Occurred in 347H Stainless Steel After Exposure at Elevated
Temperatures for Different Times
pp. 795–806 [3-35].
Sigma Phase
In ferritic stainless steels, the sigma phase is composed of iron and chromium alone. In austenitic
stainless alloys, it is much more complex and includes nickel, manganese, silicon, niobium, and
so on, in addition to iron and chromium. Sigma phase forms in ferritic and austenitic stainless
steels from ferrite or metastable austenite during exposure at 1100°F–1700°F (593°C–927°C).
(See Figure 3-31 [3-35].) It causes loss of ductility and toughness at temperatures below 250°F–
300°F (120–150°C) but has little effect on properties in the temperature range where it forms,
unless the material has been put into service with considerable residual cold work. In this case,
creep strength can be adversely affected. Otherwise, as long as the component continuously
operates at the elevated temperature, there will be little consequence. However, care must be
taken to avoid impact or suddenly applied high stress when the unit cycles to the lower
temperature range. Cracking can occur if the component is impacted or stressed during
maintenance work. Formation of the chi phase during exposure in the 1100°F to 1700°F
temperature range also causes low-temperature embrittlement. Both of these phases can be
redissolved by holding the material at 1850°F–1950°F (1010°C–1066°C) for one to four hours,
depending on the thickness and the amount of sigma that has formed.
3-59
Figure 3-31
The Development of Sigma Phase for Different Austenitic Stainless Steels Exposed at
1292°F (700°C)
pp. 795–806 [3-35].
Over time, sigma phase formation is unavoidable in many of the commercial alloys used within
the temperature range where it forms. Fortunately, few failures have been directly attributed to it.
However, if a component is to be exposed in the critical temperature range and subsequently
subjected to extensive cyclic conditions or shock loadings, an immune or more stable material
should be used. Increased resistance or immunity is achieved by selecting a composition that is
balanced with respect to austenite versus ferrite-forming elements so that no free ferrite is
present. This can be determined using the Schaeffler diagram or the more recently developed
DeLong diagram.
Sensitization
Another form of elevated temperature degradation of austenitic stainless steels is sensitization

(see Figure 3-32). Sensitization is caused by the precipitation of chromium carbides
preferentially at grain boundaries. The immediately adjacent chromium-depleted zone is
susceptible to accelerated corrosion in some aqueous corrodents.
Sensitization can occur during fabrication from the heat of welding, from improper heat
treatment, or through service exposure in the temperature range of 900°F–1500°F (482°C–
815°C). This condition results in a chromium-depleted region along the grain boundaries. In this
sensitized condition, the material has increased susceptibility to intergranular corrosion,
intergranular stress corrosion cracking, and creep cavitation. With increased levels of dissolved
carbon, the rate and temperature range over which sensitization occurs increases.
3-60
Sensitization has little or no effect on mechanical properties, but it can lead to severe
intergranular corrosion in aggressive aqueous environments such as polythionic acid. Polythionic
acid can form during downtime on equipment that has been even mildly corroded by hydrogen
sulfide at elevated temperature. The iron sulfide corrosion product combines with air and
moisture to form the acid and induces intergranular corrosion and cracking.
Figure 3-32
When Austenitic Stainless Steels Are Exposed to Prolonged Exposure to Temperatures in
the Range of 805°F–1650°F (430°C–900°C), Chromium Carbides Form on the Grain
Boundaries
To minimize the chance of sensitization during fabrication, carbide-forming stabilizers are

added. The most common are titanium (Type 321) and niobium (Type 347). As long as their
lower strengths are taken into account, another alternative is to use low-carbon grades (Types
304L, 316L) with carbon <0.03%. To minimize the effects of frequent or continuous exposure
within the susceptible temperature range, a thermal stabilization treatment of Type 347 at
1600°F–1650°F (870°C–900°C) for four hours is recommended. (Type 321 does not respond
acceptably to this treatment.) Use of the low-carbon grades would be better still, on the basis of
stability. However, their lower strength or code limitations can preclude this alternative.
The higher carbon content of heat-resistant alloys and the presence of other elements cause these
alloys to age during exposure to elevated temperatures. Aging results from formation of
secondary carbides and other precipitates. This usually results in higher strength, but it also
causes loss of ductility at ambient temperature, leading to potential fabrication problems. This is
more of a problem with cast than wrought heat-resistant alloys because of the typically higher
original carbon content.
3-61
Recovery from all of these forms of degradation is possible by solution annealing the material at
temperatures appropriate for the alloy grade, followed by rapid cooling. For the 300 series
stainless steels, annealing can be done at 1950°F (1066°C), while the high-carbon heat-resistant
alloys can require treatment as high as 2150°F (1177°C). Recovery is not permanent. Reexposure
to the causative conditions will result in redegradation of microstructure and properties.
Grain Growth
Another change in the microstructure that will occur over long periods of time is grain growth.
Depending on the time and temperature, grain growth can begin at temperatures as low as
1150°F–1200°F (621°C–649°C) if the time is long enough. For a conventional fossil-fuel-fired
plant, the metal temperature will typically be below the temperatures at which grain growth will
be significant. Although grain size can play a role in the number and distribution of creep
microvoids, the effect is relatively minor.
Advanced Ferritic Steels
Concerning creep strength, the biggest change in boiler materials has been the introduction of the
martensitic steels. (See Figure 3-33 [3-35]). The first martensitic steel used in boiler construction
was the 12Cr German X20 steel. However, this alloy has a relatively high carbon content, and
problems were encountered with welding. The development of P91 (or 9CrMoVNb) at Oak
Ridge from the traditional grade 9 chromium-molybdenum steel involved relatively low levels of
carbon and specified nitrogen contents. This steel has been considered more weldable than X20,
and it is now in use in many countries around the world. Other steels based on 9% Cr have been
developed, including P92 (also known as NF616) and E911 (see Table 3-11). These steels in
general seek to improve high-temperature strength by ensuring that the fine dispersion of
precipitates present stabilizes a relatively high dislocation substructure.
Figure 3-33
Typical Micrographs of Grade 91 Martensitic Steel Shown in (a) an Optical Micrograph and
(B) a Transmission Electron Micrograph
pp. 795–806 [3-35].
3-62
Table 3-11
Typical Composition for Selected Advanced Ferritic Steels
Composition (%)
Grade
C Cr Mo Mn P S Si W V Cb N B Al Ni
0.08– 0.85– 0.3– 0.02 0.01 0.2– 0.18– 0.4 0.4

T/P91 8.0–9.5 NA 0.06–0.1 0.03–0.07 NA
0.12 1.05 0.6 max max 0.5 0.25 max max
0.07– 0.3– 0.3– 0.02 0.01 0.5 1.5– 0.15– 0.001– 0.4 0.4
T/P92 8.5–9.5 0.04–0.09 0.03–0.07
0.13 0.6 0.6 max max max 2.0 0.25 0.006 max max
0.04– 0.05– 0.1– 0.03 0.01 0.5 1.45– 0.0005– 0.3

T23 1.9–2.6 0.2–0.3 0.02–0.08 0.03 max NA
0.1 0.3 0.6 max max max 1.75 0.006 max
T24
0.05– 0.9– 0.3– 0.02 0.01 0.15– 0.012 0.0015– 0.2
(note 2.2–2.6 NA 0.2–0.3 NA NA
0.1 1.1 0.7 max max 0.45 max 0.007 max
1)
0.09– 0.90– 0.30– 0.020 0.010 0.10– 0.90– 0.18– 0.060– 0.040– 0.003– 0.40 0.40
TP911 8.5–9.5
0.13 1.10 0.60 max max 0.50 1.10 0.25 0.100 0.090 0.006 max max
0.07– 10.00– 0.25– 0.70 0.020 0.010 0.50 1.50– 0.15– 0.040– 0.005 0.40 0.50
TP122 0.04–0.10
0.14 12.50 0.60 max max max max 2.50 0.30 0.100 max max max
Note 1. T24 also contains between 0.05% and 0.10% Ti.
3-63
Welding consumables have been developed for P91, and data have been accumulated, but
difficulties have been encountered with the following:
• The fabrication of welds between new grade 91 material and previously exposed chromium-
molybdenum steel.
• Cracking near the weld fusion line in welds that did not have PWHT immediately after
welding.
• Creep-related problems known as Type IV cracking, which can reduce the cross-weld
properties to approximately 60% of that of the parent. The actual cross-weld strength varies
with material and temperature; it is also believed to vary from weld to weld. This type of
failure occurs at the rear of the visibly transformed HAZ and is associated with a region of
reduced hardness.
Both P92 and E911 also exhibit Type IV cracking. There is considerable debate about the
advantages and disadvantages of these alloys. Both show parent properties better than P91, but
P92 has higher design stresses than does E911.
An additional difficulty that has been encountered with grade 91 tubing is the corrosion and
oxidation resistance. As the operating temperature of the tube wall increases, so does its
oxidation rate. For the 9% Cr steels, evidence has accumulated that at higher temperatures the
rate of oxidation in steam can lead to problems. Essentially, the temperature of a heat transfer
component such as a superheater or reheater tube is controlled by the rate at which the fluid (in
this case, steam) within the tube can absorb the heat being absorbed by the tube from the boiler
gases. As the internal oxide on the steam side of the tube increases in thickness, it acts as a
barrier to heat flow, increasing the tube temperature. This in turn increases the rate of oxide
growth, giving a runaway effect. In practice, the problem is more complex, involving scale
exfoliation potentially leading to tube blockage, turbine damage, and tube thinning.
Two advanced ferritic steels that are variants of 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo steel have been developed (see
Table 3-11). Microalloying systems capable of increasing the creep strength of steels have been
extensively used in the development of the martensitic (9%–12% Cr) steels. The addition of
similar microalloying to the base 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo system has led to considerable increases in the
creep strength of the materials; therefore, TP23 and TP24 now approach the strength values of
the martensitic steels at lower temperatures. P23 was developed in Japan. It was originally
designated as HCM2S and is still widely identified by this name. P24 is a European steel,
originally designated as 7CrMoVTiB 9 10, developed by Mannesmann. Of the two alloys, only
TP23 is presently approved for ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section I, Power
Boilers, Code Case 2199 [3-36].
For boiler manufacturers, the real importance of these steels lies in their relatively low chromium
content and hardenability. These factors will allow thinner wall components to be designed, for
example in membrane waterwalls, and then to be fabricated without PWHT. For supercritical
boiler designs, where temperatures at the top of the boiler wall can reach 1112°F (600ºC), this
offers a commercially viable route for membrane wall manufacture.
3-64
Microstructure
As illustrated in Figure 3-34, the microstructure of the 9%–12% Cr alloys developed following
normal cooling rates will be martensite [3-24]. To overcome the severe brittleness associated
with martensitic microstructure, heat treatment must be carried out to temper the structure and
thereby improve ductility. Under normal conditions, the microstructure of grade 91 steel consists
of tempered martensite, with carbide precipitates present on the prior austenite grain boundaries
and within the grains. Typically, this microstructure will exhibit a hardness of approximately
250 HV. Problems with the heat treatment can lead to a range of problems, including the
following:
• Very slow cooling, leading to the formation of relatively coarse carbides in a ferrite matrix
(see Figure 3-35). This microstructure is soft and significantly weaker than the hardness and
strength achieved for the normal tempered martensitic microstructure.
• Reheating above the A1 temperature during either tempering or PWHT. Exceeding A1 leads
to partial transformation back to austenite and then retransformation upon cooling. Again, the
properties are inferior to normal strength and ductility.
• Failure to cool below the MF temperature so that significant fractions of austenite are
retained.
Aging produces no obvious changes in microstructure that could be determined from optical
microscopy. To monitor microstructural changes, the higher resolution of electron optics must be
used.
3-65
Figure 3-34
Continuous Cooling Transformation Results for Grade 91 Steel
Source: Vallourec Mannesmann Tubes. The T91/P91 Book [3-24].
Figure 3-35
Ferrite and Coarse Carbides Formed in Grade 91 Steel
3-66
The tempered martensitic microstructure provides excellent strength with good ductility (see
Table 3-12). The strength is retained even at elevated temperatures—for example the ultimate
tensile stress at 1112°F (600°C) is 43.5 ksi (300 MPa). Furthermore, Charpy impact energies
above 111 ft-lb (150 J) are typically obtained for Grade 91 material at room temperature.
Problems with the advanced steels have been noted when control of composition, heat treatment,
or fabrication processes has been inadequate.
Table 3-12
Tensile Properties and Hardness for Selected Advanced Ferritic Steels
Grade Yield Minimum UTS Minimum Elongation Hardness (HB)

(ksi) (ksi) Minimum (%) Maximum
(note 1) (note 2)
P/T91 60 85 20 250
P/T92 64 90 20 250
T23 58 74 20 220
T24 65 85 20 250
T911 64 90 20 —
T122 58 90 20 —
Notes:
1. 1 ksi = 6.895 MPa.
2. UTS = Ultimate tensile strength.
The allowable stress values for selected steels are given in Table 3-13. The strength of these
alloys is markedly greater than noted for the traditional creep-resistant chromium-molybdenum
steels.
Table 3-13
Allowable Stress Values for Selected Advanced Ferritic Steels (Units: ksi)
Grade Metal Temperature (°F)
100 300 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
T/P91 24.3 24.3 24.3 24.2 24.1 23.7 22.9 21.3 19.1 16.3 10.3 4.3
T/P92 25.6 25.7 25.3 24.5 23.8 23.2 22.4 21.4 20.1 18.3 13.6 6.9
T122 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.0 23.7 23.1 22.5 21.6 20.3 18.5 12.9 6.2
T911 25.7 25.7 25.1 24.1 23.6 23.2 22.7 21.7 20.1 17.7 11.4 —
3-67

Allowable Stress Values for Selected Advanced Ferritic Steels (Units: ksi)
Grade Metal Temperature (°C)
20 100 200 300 400 450 500 525 550 575 600 650
T23 18.6 18.6 18.3 18.1 18.0 17.0 16.1 15.2 12.6 10.3 8.1 (3.6)
T24 21.2 21.2 20.2 19.6 19.0 18.3 17.0 16.2 13.8 9.7 5.6 —
Notes:
1 ksi = 6.895 MPa
°C = (°F - 32) x 5/9
°F = (°C x 9/5) + 32
Creep Strength
The advanced ferritic steels have excellent strength (see, for example, Figure 3-36).
Figure 3-36
Comparison of the Creep Strength of Grade 91 with P22 and X20
Source: Vallourec Mannesmann Tubes. The T91/P91 Book [3-24].
3-68
Aging Behavior
Aging of tempered martensitic microstructures typically produces no changes in microstructure

that can be determined from optical microscopy. However, the greater resolution of electron
microscopes makes it possible to see that phase changes and coarsening of precipitates do take
place. An example of this trend in behavior is summarized in Figure 3-37 [3-37]. Of particular
importance are the formation of the Laves phase, which can introduce embrittlement, and the
Z-phase, which removes significant amounts of vanadium and niobium and significantly reduce
the strength.
Figure 3-37
Summary of the Microstructural Changes Noted During Long-Term Aging of Grade 91
Material at 1112°F (600°C)
Source: E. Letofsky and H. Cerjak. Proceedings of the International Conference on Microstructure
and Performance of Joints in High-Temperature Alloys [3-37].
These microstructural observations appear to provide an explanation for an earlier investigation,

which indicated that after approximately 130,000 hours in service, the strength of grade 91 was
below the minimum data for as-tempered material. Moreover, the creep rate measured in a
postexposure test was 10 times that for an unexposed specimen under the same conditions (see
Figure 3-38 [3-38]).
3-69
Figure 3-38
Results of Postexposure Testing on Grade 91 Material, Showing the Decrease in Strength
Compared to Unexposed Material
R. W. Swinderman, P. J. Maziasz, and C. R. Brinkmann. Proceedings of the International Joint
Power Conference [3-38].
References
3-1. Metallurgical Guidebook for Fossil Power Plant Boilers. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2006.
1011912.
3-2. A. K. Sinah. Ferrous Physical Metallurgy. Butterworths, Boston, MA, 1989.
3-3. H. K. D. H. Badheshia. Bainite in Steels. Institute of Materials, London, 1992.
3-4. Metals Handbook, Volume 1, Properties and Selection: Iron and Steels. American
Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH, 1979.
3-5. R. W. K. Honeycombe. Steels—Microstructure and Properties. American Society for

Metals, Metals Park, OH, 1982.
3-6. R. Viswanathan. Damage Mechanisms and Life Assessment of High-Temperature

Components. ASM International, Metals Park, OH, 1989.
3-7. D. T. Llewellyn and R. C. Hudd. Steels: Metallurgy and Applications, Third Edition.
Butterworth-Heinemann, 1998.
3-8. W. C. Leslie. The Physical Metallurgy of Steel, First published by Hemisphere Publishing
Corporation, 1981. Reprinted by TechBooks, Herdon, PA. 1991.
3-70
3-9. G. Krauss. Steels Heat Treatment and Processing Principles. American Society for
Metals, Metals Park, OH, 1990.
3-10. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section II, Materials. American Society of
Mechanical Engineers, New York.
3-11. John E. Bringas, Ed. Handbook of Comparative World Steel Standards, Third Edition.
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2004. DS67B.
3-12. ASA B31.1, American Tentative Standard Code for Pressure Piping. American Standards
Association, 1935.
3-13. ASA B31.1, American Standard Code for Pressure Piping. American Standards
Association, 1942.
3-14. Key to Metals Group. Key to Steel database. http://www.key-to-steel.com.
3-15. Steam, Fortieth Edition. Babcock & Wilcox, Barberton, OH, 1992.
3-16. P. J. Alberry and W. K. C. Jones, “Diagram for the Prediction of Weld Heat Affected
Zone Microstructure,” Metals Technology, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 360–364 (1977).
3-17. R. Viswanathan. Damage Mechanisms and Life Assessment of High-Temperature
Components. ASM International, Metals Park, OH, 1989
3-18. J. Nutting, “The Structural Stability of Low-Alloy Steels for Power Plant Applications.”
Conference Proceedings: Advanced Heat-Resistant Steels for Power Generation.
Institute of Materials, London, 1999, pp. 12–30.
3-19. N. Fujita and H. K. D. H. Badheshia, “Modelling Simultaneous Alloy Carbide Sequences

in Power Plant Steels,” ISIJ International, Vol. 42, No.7, pp. 760–769 (2002).
3-20. Materials for Ultra Supercritical Fossil Power Plants. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2000.
TR-114750.
3-21. F. Masuyama, “History of Power Plants and Progress in Heat Resistant Steels,” ISIJ
International, Vol. 41, No. 6, pp. 612–625 (2001).
3-22. K. W. Burns and F. B. Pickering, “Deformation and Fracture of Ferrite-Pearlite

Structures,” Journal of the Iron and Steel Institute, Vol. 202, No. 110, pp. 899–906.
Mechanical Engineers, New York, 2004.
3-24. The T91/P91 Book. Vallourec Mannesmann Tubes, 2002.
3-25. ASME Code Case 2179-6. Seamless 9Cr-2W Material, Section I and Section VIII,
Division I. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Case 2179-5. 2006.
3-71
3-26. API STD 530. Calculation of Heater Tube Thickness in Petroleum Refineries. American
Petroleum Institute. 2003.
3-27. W. L. Hemingway. The Study of Graphitization. Edwards Valve Co., 1952.
3-28. J. R. Foulds and R. Viswanathan, “Graphitization of Steels in Elevated Temperature

Service,” in Microstructures and Mechanical Properties of Aging Materials. The
Minerals, Metals, & Materials Society, Warrendale, PA, 1993, pp. 61–69.
3-29. S. H. Weaver, “The Effect of Carbide Spheroidization Upon the Rupture Strength and
Ductility of Carbon Molybdenum Steel,” Proceedings of the ASTM, Vol. 46, pp. 856–866
(1946).
3-30. G. H. Harth and T. P. Sherlock, in Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 107, pp. 226–229
(1985).
3-31. G. V. Smith, Supplemental Report on the Elevated-Temperature Properties of

Chromium-Molybdenum Steels (An Evaluation of 2Cr-1Mo Steel), American Society for
Testing and Materials, March 1971. DS6S2.
3-32. L. H. Toft and R. A. Mardsen, “The Structure and Properties of 1%Cr-0.5%Mo Steel
after Service in CEGB Power Stations,” Proceedings of the Conference on Structural
Processes in Creep. JISI, JIM (London), 1963, p. 275.
3-33. S. Wignarajah, I. Masumoto, and T. Hara, “Evaluation and Simulation of the

Microstructural Changes and Embrittlement in 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo Steel Due to Long-Term
Service,” ISIJ International, Vol. 30, 1990, pp. 58–63.
3-34. Remaining Life Assessment of Austenitic Stainless Steel Superheater and Reheater Tubes.
EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2002. 1004517.
3-35. Y. Minami, H. Kimura, and Y. Ihara, in Materials Science and Technology, Vol. 2,
pp. 795–806 (1986).
3-36. ASME Code Case 2199. 2.25Cr-1.6W-V-Cb Material, Section I. American Society of
Mechanical Engineers. Case 2199-3. 2006.
3-37. E. Letofsky and H. Cerjak, in Proceedings of the International Conference on

Microstructure and Performance of Joints in High-Temperature Alloys. Institute of
Materials, London, 2002.
3.38. R. W. Swinderman, P. J. Maziasz, and C. R. Brinkmann, in Proceedings of the

International Joint Power Conference, ASME, 2000, pp. 1–4.
3-72
4
WELDING FUNDAMENTALS
Introduction
A variety of joining methods are allowed for use in the fabrication of fossil piping systems,
including the following:
• Flanged joints
• Threaded joints
• Flared, flareless, and compression joints (for tube sizes ≤2 in. [50 mm] outside diameter [OD])
• Brazed and soldered joints
However, the most common method for joining high-energy fossil piping systems is welding.
ASME B31.1 allows the use of butt welds, socket welds, and fillet welds as long as they comply
with the additional restrictions listed within the standard. Seal welds can be used to avoid joint
leakage but shall not be considered as contributing any strength to the joint.
Welding Processes
Several welding processes can be used in the fabrication and erection of fossil piping systems,
• Shielded metal arc welding (SMAW)
• Gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW)
• Submerged arc welding (SAW)
• Gas metal arc welding (GMAW)
• Flux cored arc welding (FCAW)
ASME B31.1 does not place a restriction on the selection of welding process, as long as it is
qualified in accordance with the requirements of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,
Section IX, Welding and Brazing Qualifications [4-1] However, from a practical standpoint,
most welding is accomplished using SMAW, GTAW, and SAW processes. SAW is primarily
limited to shop welding; GTAW and SMAW welding can be used for both field and shop
applications. Although GMAW and FCAW welding can be used in both field and shop
applications, the increased equipment requirements associated with these processes inhibit
widespread field application.
4-1
Welding Fundamentals
Shielded Metal Arc Welding
Figure 4-1 shows the basic equipment and set up for SMAW, which is also known as manual
metal arc welding. In terms of equipment, SMAW is the simplest, requiring a power supply, a
welding lead incorporating an electrode holder at one end, a grounding cable, and a consumable
shield electrode. The arc is struck between the tip of the consumable electrode and the
workpiece. The intense heat of the arc locally melts the surface of the base metal and the end of
the electrode. The welder feeds the electrode into the weld pool while maintaining an appropriate
arc length and progressing along the weld. Tiny droplets of molten weld filler metal are
transferred through the arc stream into the molten weld pool.
Figure 4-1
Schematic of Shielded Metal Arc Welding Process
The filler metal for the SMAW process consists of individual electrodes that typically range from
9 in. to 18 in. (230 to 455 mm) long. The core of the covered electrode consists of a solid metal
rod of drawn or cast material or one that has been fabricated by encasing metal powders in a
metallic sheath. The standard diameters of the electrode core ranges from 1/16 in. to 5/16 in.
(1.6 mm to 8 mm). Alloying additions can be incorporated into the wire material or incorporated
as ferroalloys or pure metal powders.
The primary function of the electrode covering is to provide shielding to the molten weld pool to
prevent excessive atmospheric contamination of the molten filler metal; however, the electrode
covering can also perform one or more of the following functions:
• Provide deoxidizers, fluxing agents, and scavengers to cleanse the weld
• Provide ionizing elements to alter electrical characteristics and improve arc stability
4-2
• Provide alloying elements to modify the composition of the weld metal

• Provide a slag blanket to protect the solidifying weld pool, assist in shaping the weld contour,
and improve weldability
• Provide iron powder to improve deposition rates when welding ferrous alloys
The equipment for SMAW is relatively simple and inexpensive. It is also readily portable,
making it well suited for use in field welding. Because this process does not require an auxiliary
shielding gas, it is less sensitive to wind and draft. The simplicity of the equipment lends this
process to applications offering limited access. Depending on the selection of electrode size,
electrode covering, and welding parameters, SMAW can be suitable for welding in all positions
and progressions for both open root welds and welds with backing.
For heavy wall piping, SMAW is frequently used in combination with a GTAW root pass. This
combination of processes is capable of producing high-quality production welds suitable for both
shop and field welding of fossil power piping.
Gas Tungsten Arc Welding
Figure 4-2 shows the basic equipment and setup for GTAW. Unlike the other welding processes
used in the production of fossil power piping, GTAW uses a nonconsumable tungsten electrode
to maintain the electric arc. Filler metal is added to the welding arc from an external source in
the form of a bare rod (manual process), a spool of wire (semiautomated and automated
processes), or a consumable insert. Protection of the molten weld pool and adjoining base metal
is provided by means of a shielding gas, which also contributes to arc stability and improved
welding characteristics.
Figure 4-2
Schematic of Gas Tungsten Arc Welding Process
4-3
GTAW is also referred to as tungsten inert gas welding and Heliarc welding. The initial
widespread use of GTAW was for welding magnesium and aluminum aircraft components using
helium (an inert gas) as the shielding gas, which is the reason for the alternative names for this
process. As the use of this process expanded, additional shielding gasses such as argon, argon-
oxygen mixtures, nitrogen, argon-helium mixtures, and argon-hydrogen mixtures were used.
GTAW is a low heat input, high cleanliness, relatively low deposition process. The primary
application of GTAW in fossil power piping fabrication is for welding the root pass of butt welds
where the root area is inaccessible for back gouging and back welding or where the use of
backing rings is to be avoided.
While carbon and low-alloy steels can be butt welded without the use of a backing gas, a
nitrogen or argon backing gas is generally used for stainless steel and high-alloy materials. In
addition, the use of a backing gas on carbon and low-alloy steels can improve the quality of the
root pass and should be considered for thin wall or critical applications.
Because of the dependence on shielding (and possibly backing) gas, use of GTAW in windy or
drafty locations is limited unless external shielding can be provided. Although the equipment for
GTAW is somewhat bulkier and more complex than that for SMAW, it is still reasonably
portable and allows access for most fossil pipe welding applications. GTAW is suitable for all-
position welding and can be used to weld almost all metals.
Submerged Arc Welding
Process Description
The submerged arc welding process joins metals by heating them with an arc that is formed
between a bare metal electrode and the workpiece. Unlike other arc welding processes, the
welding arc is not visible during SAW because it is submerged beneath a mound of granular flux
particles. The flux mound is partially melted during welding and serves to protect the molten
weld pool from the ambient atmosphere and to act as a fluxing agent for the weld pool, assisting
in the removal of dissolved oxygen and sulfur. In addition, the welding flux can contain alloying
additions or supplemental iron powder to modify the composition of the weld deposit and
increase deposition rates.
The arrangement of the SAW welding process is shown in Figure 4-3. The weld filler metal is a
bare wire supplied on a spool that is fed to the workpiece through the contact tip on the welding
gun. The granular welding flux is contained in a hopper adjacent to the welding gun and is
continuously added in front of the arc as weld travel progresses. Because of the requirement for
the granular flux, this welding process is best suited for groove welding in the flat position (1G)
and fillet welding in the flat and horizontal positions (1F and 2F).
4-4
Figure 4-3
Schematic of Submerged Arc Welding Process
While single electrode welding is the most common, multiple electrodes (two or three) can be
used to increase deposition rates. However, the microstructural effects of the higher heat input
and coarse solidification structure should be considered. For ferrous alloys, deposition rates can
also be increased by adding iron powder to the flux. In practice, supplemental filler metal is
generally used only in welding mild carbon steel because the recovery of alloying elements can
be greatly affected by variations within welding parameters.
Consumables
During SAW, flux and electrode wire feed simultaneously to the joint. The flux shields, cleans,
and shapes the weld bead. The electrode wire is the main component of the weld metal; however,
supplemental filler metal can be included with the flux.
The welding electrode is a bare wire that is provided on spools or in drums for a continuous wire
feed. The electrode diameter ranges from 1/16 in. to 1/4 in. (1.6 mm to 6.4 mm). Alloy additions
can be incorporated through the use of an alloy wire or through a cored wire consisting of a low-
carbon metal sheath surrounding a core of alloy material. SAW fluxes are classified as fused or
bonded, active or neutral, and acidic or basic.
To manufacture a fused flux, the raw materials are melted together and cooled to produce a
glassy flux that is crushed and screened for size. Fused fluxes have good chemical homogeneity,
have low moisture pickup during storage and use, and can be readily recycled and reused without
a significant change in particle size or composition.
4-5
Bonded fluxes are manufactured by dry-mixing powders of the various raw materials and
bonding them with either potassium silicate, sodium silicate, or a mixture of the two. After
bonding, the wet mix is palletized and baked. Finally the backed and bonded flux is broken up
and screened to size. An advantage to bonded flux is the ability to easily add deoxidizers and
alloying elements. However the disadvantages to bonded flux include possible change in flux
composition due to segregation, possible gas evolution from the molten slag, and a tendency for
some fluxes to absorb moisture from the atmosphere.
The basicity of the SAW flux plays an important role in governing the composition of the weld
metal. The basicity of a flux (BI) is given by the ratio of the sum of the weight percentages of
basic oxides to the sum of the weight percentages of the acidic oxides, as shown in Equation 4-1.
1
CaO + CaF2 + MgO + K 2O + Na2O + Li2O + BaO + SrO + (MnO + FeO )
BI = 2 Eq. 4-1
1
SiO2 + ( Al2O3 + TiO2 + ZrO2 )
2
BI typically has values ranging from 0.5 to 3.0. Fluxes with a basicity index greater than 1.5 are
considered basic, while those less than 1.0 are considered acid. The basicity index is essentially
an estimate of the oxygen content of the weld metal, and it has an impact on the weld
composition and total inclusion content. Basic weld fluxes tend to produce welds with lower
oxygen content, a finer grain structure, and improved impact toughness. Acid fluxes have higher
oxygen content, increased numbers of oxide inclusions, and a coarser microstructure. Typical
weld metal oxygen contents for various welding processes are shown in Table 4-1.
Table 4-1
Summary of Measured Weld Metal Oxygen Contents
Source: Ø. Gröng, Metallurgical Modeling of Welding [4-2].
Welding Process Material Oxygen Content (ppm)
SMAW—basic electrode Low-alloy steel 250–440
SMAW—rutile electrodes Low-alloy steel 500–1300
SMAW—acid electrodes Low-alloy steel 700–1400
GTAW—Ar or He Shielding Low-alloy steel 50–100
GMAW—Ar-O2 mixtures Low-alloy steel 200–1300
GMAW—CO2 Low-alloy steel 500–800
FCAW—self shielded cored wire Low-alloy steel 130–200
SAW—calcium silicate flux (acid) Low-alloy steel 450–2600
SAW—basic fluxes Low-alloy steel 180–350
4-6
Neutral fluxes contain little or no deoxidizers such as manganese and silicon and will not
produce any significant change in the weld metal composition as a result of a large change in arc
voltage. Neutral fluxes are primarily used for multipass welds. In contrast, active fluxes readily
transfer manganese and silicon to the weld metal, and they improve resistance to porosity.
However, the increased inclusion content associated with active fluxes can degrade impact
toughness and creep resistance. Active fluxes are frequently used for single-pass applications.
The consideration of flux characteristics is particularly critical for SAW welds operated at
elevated temperatures (within the creep range). The majority of in-service HRH seam-welded
piping failures have occurred in seam welds produced using the SAW process and an acid or
neutral flux. Studies have indicated that the creep rupture properties of SA welds made using
acid or neutral fluxes can be inferior to those of the base metal [4-3]. This effect has been
attributed to a higher inclusion content (volume percentage) and inclusion density. Fluid flow
patterns within the weld pool can result in localized increases in inclusion density.
Gas Metal Arc Welding
GMAW uses a continuous wire-fed consumable electrode to maintain the arc and supply the
weld deposit with filler metal. A schematic of the GMAW process is shown in Figure 4-4.
GMAW was originally developed as a process to improve production on welds that were being
performed by GTAW. Because these initial welding applications were primarily limited to
magnesium and aluminum using inert shielding gas, the term metal inert gas welding was used.
As the application of this process has expanded to other metals and the use of a wide range of
active as well as inert shielding gases, the process has become known as GMAW.
Figure 4-4
Schematic of Gas Metal Arc Welding Process
4-7
GMAW is a highly adaptable process used for semiautomatic manual and machine welding as
well as fully automatic robotic welding. GMAW is used for low heat input, low deposition
welding on thin sheet-metal applications and for high heat input, high deposition welding on
heavy wall components.
The characteristics of GMAW can be varied depending on the transfer mode selected. GMAW
can be performed in the following four primary transfer modes:
• Spray transfer
• Globular transfer
• Short circuiting transfer
• Pulsed
Spray Transfer
For high quality, high deposition weld deposits on heavy wall components, the primary transfer
mode is spray. In spray transfer, a very stable arc is established between the consumable
electrode and the workpiece, and a relatively spatter free process occurs. The high heat input
results in high deposition rates. The high deposition rates, along with the continuous wire feed,
result in increased productivity. However, the relatively large welding gun and the requirement
for gas bottles and wire feed equipment limits the application of this process in the field.
In spray transfer, very small, discrete droplets are formed and accelerated across the arc by arc
forces at velocities that can overcome the effects of gravity; therefore, depending on the specific
welding parameters, spray transfer can be used for out-of-position welding. Because the
individual droplets are smaller than the arc length, short circuiting does not occur and spatter is
minimal.
Short Circuiting Arc Transfer
In the short circuiting arc transfer mode, a stable welding arc is never established. Instead, the
welding wire is fed across the gap between the contact tip and the workpiece until it actually
short circuits against the base metal as shown in Figure 4-5 [4-4]. The short circuit results in
resistance heating of the tip of the consumable electrode, which is melted off. In short circuiting
mode, this tip of the electrode touches and short out against the base metal several (20 to 250)
times per second. This process results in a characteristic sound reminiscent of a sewing machine
or sizzling bacon.
4-8
Figure 4-5
Schematic of Short Circuit Cycle in Gas Metal Arc Welding
Source: Miller Electric Manufacturing Co., Gas Metal Arc Welding [4-4].
In the short circuiting transfer, wire feed speed, voltages, and deposition rates are lower than
with other types of metal transfer. Because of the lower heat input and low deposition rates, short
circuiting arc transfer is used for out-of-position welding and welding of sheet metal. In heavy
wall applications, it is sometimes used to place the root pass in noncritical applications; however,
the low heat input increases the likelihood of poor penetration and the occurrence of lack-of-
fusion defects.
The selection of the shielding gas has a significant impact on welding characteristics, and an
active gas is normally used for short circuiting arc transfer. Carbon dioxide generally produces
high spatter levels, but it also promotes base metal penetrations. To achieve a good compromise
between spatter and penetration, mixtures of argon and carbon dioxide gas are frequently used. A
common mixture is 75% Ar and 25% CO2.
Globular Transfer
Globular transfer represents a condition between that of spray and short circuiting arc transfer. In
globular transfer, a stable arc is established between the consumable electrode and the
workpiece. Initially the electrode shorts out against the base metal; however, after that, molten
drops form on the end of the electrode, grow in size, and are eventually transferred across the
arc. Globular transfer is characterized by a drop size with a diameter greater than that of the
electrode. This large droplet size is easily acted on by gravity making this process difficult for
out-of-position welding.
While globular transfer can be obtained with an essentially inert shielding gas, if the arc length is
too short, the droplet can become so large that it will short out against the workpiece. In that
case, the welding process becomes unstable and excessive spatter is produced. If carbon dioxide
is used as the shielding gas, a randomly directed globular transfer can occur when the welding
current and arc voltage are significantly greater than those used for short circuiting arc transfer.
Under these conditions, the arc becomes unstable, and droplets can short circuit against the base
metal.
4-9
Pulsed-Arc Spray Transfer
Pulsed-arc spray transfer mode is a variation in GMAW in which a pulsed current is used, as
shown in Figure 4-6 [4-5]. Metal transfer occurs in spray mode at the peak current, and the
background current is set at a level that will maintain the arc but is too low for metal transfer to
occur. Because there is no metal transfer during the background portion of the cycle, the weld
puddle cools slightly. Because of the lower average current, the resulting heat input is lower than
an equivalent spray transfer procedure. As a result of the lower heat input, pulsed-arc spray
transfer can be suitable for out-of-position welding and for root passes. However, because weld
metal transfer occurs near the peak current, there is little or no spatter with relatively high
deposition rates.
Figure 4-6
Pulsed-Spray Arc Welding Current Characteristic
Source: American Welding Society, Welding Handbook, 8th ed., Vol. 2 [4-5].
Flux Cored Arc Welding
Similar to GMAW, FCAW uses a continuous wire-fed consumable electrode to maintain the arc
and supply the weld deposit with filler metal. Power sources, wire feeders, and welding guns are
also similar to those for GMAW. However, unlike GMAW, FCAW uses a tubular filler metal
with a core that contains flux. A schematic of the FCAW process is shown in Figure 4-7. FCAW
can be performed with or without shielding gas. In self-shielded applications, shielding is
obtained from vaporization of flux ingredients to form a gaseous atmosphere around the weld arc
and, along with slag that covers the molten droplets, protect the molten weld pool during
welding. While self-shielded FCAW can be beneficial for outdoor welding when drafts or mild
breezes are present, the effect of the additional deoxidizers on weld metal properties must be
considered. Typically, self-shielded FCAW is limited to welding carbon steel. The use of a
shielding gas is normally required for radiographic-quality welds.
4-10
Figure 4-7
Schematic of Flux Cored Arc Welding Process
Similar to GMAW, the application of FCAW to field welding is limited because of the increased
complexity of the equipment and the frequent requirement for shielding gas. FCAW, and in
particular the self-shielded process, produces copious fumes, and weld spatter can be a problem.
However, deposition rates are typically higher than all other processes other than SAW, and the
flux assists with forming the weld shape, making out-of-position welding easier than with GMAW.
Weld Design
ASME B31.1 allows the use of butt welds, socket welds and fillet welds for the fabrication of
fossil piping. Although the use of backing rings is permitted—except in those applications where
their presence will result in severe corrosion or erosion, in which case the ring must be
removed—from a practical standpoint, the application of backing rings has been limited. Most
butt welds are fabricated using a GTAW (or GMAW) root pass or when access permits, the root
is back gouged and back welded. For high-pressure and high-temperature applications that
require radiographic inspection of the weld, GTAW root pass presents a distinct advantage in
that there is no backing ring to distort or mask the image. Common butt weld end preparation
dimensions are contained in ASME B16.25, Buttwelding Ends; however, any end preparation
that meets the applicable welding procedure specification is acceptable [4-6].
The selection of weld end preparation for butt welds primarily depends on weld thickness. For
wall thickness up to 3/4 in. (19 mm), a 37-1/2°, double-bevel weld (as shown in Figure 4-8) is
commonly used [4-7]. The relatively wide included groove angle allows complete access for
4-11
welding; however, the volume of filler metal increases rapidly with increasing pipe wall
thickness, and from a practical standpoint, the application of this joint geometry is limited to
3/4 in. (19 mm) or less.
Figure 4-8
Standard 37-1/2° Weld Bevel
Source: Navco Piping Datalog [4-7].
With increasing wall thickness, a J bevel (see Figure 4-9) or compound bevel (see Figure 4-10)
can be used. These joint designs allow access to the root area while reducing the overall volume
of weld metal required to complete the weld.
Figure 4-9
J-Bevel Weld End Preparation
4-12
Figure 4-10
Compound Bevel Weld End Preparation
When piping components of unequal wall thickness or differing OD are to be welded together,
ASME B31.1 requires the weld end of the component with the larger OD to fall within the
envelope defined by the solid lines in its Figure 127.4.2 (see Figure 4-11). The weld is required
to form a gradual transition not exceeding a slope of 30° from the smaller to the larger diameter
component. When both components to be welded (other than pipe-to-pipe) have a transition from
a thicker section to the weld end preparation, the included angle must be greater than 150°.
4-13
Figure 4-11
Allowable Weld End Transition for Components With Different Wall Thickness or Outside
Diameter
Source: ASME B31.1, Power Piping, Figure 127.4.2 [4-8].
4-14
To limit internal misalignment, circumferential butt welds are frequently counterbored. If

component ends are bored, the extent of boring shall not result in the finish wall thickness after
welding being less than the minimum design thickness. In addition, the transition from the
counterbored region to the original pipe ID shall not exceed 30°.
Microstructural Development
Solidification Structure
Numerous investigations over the past two to three decades have demonstrated the significant
impact of microstructure on the performance, in particular creep and creep-fatigue performance,
of welds. The development of the weld metal microstructure begins with solidification. The
solidification structure impacts the property development through grain orientation, formation
and development of oxide and other nonmetallic inclusions, and compositional segregation.
Reviews by Davies and Garland and David and Vitek provide a comprehensive overview of the
microstructural development in fusion welding [4-9, 4-10]. This section reviews those factors
contributing to the development of carbon and low-alloy steel microstructures.
Much of the knowledge base regarding weld metal solidification has come from studies on
solidification in castings; however, there are significant differences that can be expected to
modify the behavior of weld deposits. For example, the welding process involves rapid, localized
melting and freezing. Cooling rates experienced by castings are on the order of 10-2 to 10-3 °Ks-1,
whereas weld deposits for conventional welding processes such as SMAW, GMAW, and SAW
range from 10 to 103 °Ks-1. Fluid flow behavior is also expected to be different. Unless
artificially stirred, fluid flow in castings is primarily controlled by buoyancy effects, whereas
fluid flow behavior in the weld pool is controlled by several, sometimes competing, processes
including buoyancy effects, electromagnetic forces, and surface tension forces.
Buoyancy and Electromagnetic Effects
Variations in temperature across the weld pool result in variations in liquid density. These
variations in density result in convective fluid flow through buoyancy effects.
In addition to convective fluid flow, the molten weld pool is subjected to electromagnetic effects
from the welding arc. These electromagnetic effects result from the interaction between the
divergent current path and the resultant magnetic fields. Electromagnetic forces are
approximately opposite in effect to those resulting from buoyancy forces. Buoyancy effects tend
to promote a broad, shallow deposit (see Figure 4-12), whereas the electromagnetic effects force
deeper, narrow cross sections (see Figure 4-13).
4-15
Figure 4-12
Weld Metal Fluid Flow as a Result of Buoyancy Effects
Figure 4-13
Weld Metal Fluid Flow as a Result of Electromagnetic Force
Surface Tension
The surface tension of molten metal depends on temperature and composition. The temperature
variations across the weld pool surface, because of the presence of the arc, result in gradients in
surface tension. Compositional variations across the surface of the weld pool also affect the
surface tension. For iron, the surface tension decreases with increasing temperature. This effect
will result in an outward flow away from the arc, tending to promote a broad weld pool with
limited penetration (see Figure 4-14a). Surface active impurities such as oxygen and sulfur result
in a positive temperature coefficient of surface tensions, so that surface tension increases with
increasing temperature. This reversal in the temperature coefficient of surface tension promotes
an inward flow along the surface, toward the center of the arc, promoting deeper penetration (see
Figure 4-14b).
4-16
Figure 4-14
Weld Metal Fluid Flow as a Result of the Variation of Surface Tension of (a) Iron and (b)
Surface Active Elements (Such As Sulfur and Oxygen) As a Function of Temperature
In addition to fluid flow transverse to the weld direction, fluid flow occurs along the weld
direction, as shown in Figure 4-15. Arc forces create a depression at the forward edge of the
pool, which forces the melted metal to flow underneath and on both sides of the depression.
Behind the arc, toward the rear of the weld pool, the flow direction is reversed, and the metal
flows back along the metal surface.
Figure 4-15
Weld Metal Fluid Flow Along the Direction of Welding
4-17
The fusion zone grain structure is determined in large part by the structure of the base metal
HAZ. Because the base metal melts during the welding process, there is always a region of solid
metal in contact with the molten weld pool. In most welding applications, the base metal and
molten weld pool have similar compositions. This significantly lowers the barrier to nucleation,
and epitaxial growth from the partially melted grains at the fusion line is expected. A coarse
grained HAZ will promote a coarse grain structure in the weld, and vice versa.
Low-carbon and low-alloyed steel weld deposits begin to solidify as BCC δ-ferrite at
temperatures of approximately 2732°F to 2822°F (1500°C to 1550°C). In more highly alloyed
weld deposits, or if the cooling rate is high enough (as can be experienced with high-energy
welding processes such as electron beam or laser welding), the liquid can solidify directly as
FCC austenite, although this is not the usual case for conventional arc welding processes. The
solidifying grains tend to grow in the direction of the maximum thermal gradient; however, both
δ-ferrite and austenite have preferred easy-growth directions. Solidification tends to proceed
along the easy-growth direction that is most favorably oriented with the thermal gradient. Those
grains that are most favorably oriented will grow rapidly, eventually inhibiting less favorably
oriented grains. On further cooling, austenite forms either within the δ-ferrite grains or at the
δ-ferrite–liquid interface as shown in Figure 4-16. Figure 4-16a illustrates a case in which the
material solidifies completely to δ-ferrite, then austenite forms through a solid-state
transformation. Figures 4-16b and 4-16c illustrate the cases in which the peritectic temperature is
reached before solidification to δ-ferrite is complete. Under the conditions represented by
Figures 4-16b and 4-16c, austenite forms in the boundary between the δ-ferrite and liquid iron.
Figure 4-16d illustrates the case in which the material solidifies completely as austenite.
Figure 4-16
Different Solidification Processes in an Iron Base Alloy
4-18
For weld pools made at low to moderate speeds, the two-dimensional appearance of the weld
pool (looking down on the surface of the weld) is an ellipse (see Figure 4-17a), and the
corresponding isotherms are elliptically shaped. Under these conditions, no one grain
experiences favored growth throughout solidification; therefore, more of the fusion line
nucleated grains survive to reach the center of the weld. In addition, any grain that survives over
any great distance in an elliptical weld pool will exhibit significant curvature. While the
crystallographic orientation of the curved grain does not change, curvature is generated by
repeated side-branching of the solidification substructure. In contrast, welds made at higher
travel speeds can take on a tear-drop shape (see Figure 4-17b). The direction of the thermal
gradients is nearly invariant along the edge of the pool. The invariant thermal gradient allows
those grains growing with the most favorable orientation to continue to grow and widen across
the deposit. This growth behavior results in fewer grains surviving to reach the weld center line.
Figure 4-17a shows the columnar grain development in an elliptical weld pool where the
progressive change in direction of the maximum thermal gradient is reflected by the survival of
many more columnar grains. Figure 4-17b shown the columnar grain development in a tear-drop-
shaped weld pool where the direction of the maximum thermal gradient is almost invariant along
the edge of the pool.
Figure 4-17
Two-Dimensional Appearance of the Weld Pool Showing the Columnar Grain Development
Source: G. J. Davies and J. G. Garland, in International Metallurgical Reviews, Vol. 20, pp. 83–
106 [4-9].
The effect of primary solidification mode on inclusion distribution has been investigated by
Sugden and Bhadeshia and Kluken et al. [4-11, 4-12]. Sugden and Bhadeshia proposed that
because the distribution of inclusions in the weld microstructure is determined during
solidification when inclusions are mobile, they can be pushed by the solid–liquid interface,
perhaps to the columnar grain boundaries. For steel solidifying as δ-ferrite, subsequent austenite
transformation causes the inclusions to end up near the center of the columnar grains (see Figure
4-18a). In contrast, if solidification occurs with austenite as the primary phase, the inclusions
tend to remain at the austenite grain boundaries (see Figure 4-18b). Sugden and Bhadeshia
produced a series of carbon-manganese SMA welds designed to produce welds with primary
4-19
ferrite and welds with primary austenite solidification. They observed that large (1 to 3 μm)
inclusions tended to concentrate along the grain boundaries of the first phase to solidify, and they
attributed this to a surface tension effect (Marangoni effect) at the solidification front or a
pushing of the inclusions by the solid–liquid interface.
Figure 4-18
Schematic Illustration of Location of Inclusions in the Microstructure of a Weld Solidifying
As (a) δ-Ferrite and (b) Austenite
Source: A. A. B. Sugden and H. K. D. H. Bhadesia, in Metallurgical Reviews A, Vol. 8A, pp.
1107–1115 [4-11].
The distribution of oxides, especially those forming at temperatures above the liquidus (before
any solid formation) can be influenced by their interaction with the solid–liquid interface. When
a solidification front intercepts an insoluble particle, it can either push it or engulf it. Numerous
studies have shown that there is a critical growth velocity of the solidification front below which
particles are rejected [4-13–4-16]. It has been proposed that oxide and other nonmetallic
inclusions can play a critical role in the performance of weld metal properties. At low
temperatures, inclusions can serve as potential crack nucleation sites; at elevated temperatures,
they can assist in the development of creep cavities and result in a reduction of creep and creep-
fatigue performance.
4-20
Inclusion Formation
During arc welding processes, the high arc plasma temperatures—on the order of 18,000°F
(10,000°C) or higher—result in dissociation of oxygen in the shielding gas or arc atmosphere.
For slag-protected processes, the flux is the primary source of oxygen. The dissociated oxygen is
adsorbed into the weld pool. As the welding arc passes and the weld pool cools, the solubility of
oxygen is decreased, and it will be removed as oxygen-rich phases and compounds. Oxygen can
be expected to react with a variety of elemental species present in the weld metal, including
carbon, iron, silicon, manganese, and aluminum. To reduce weld metal porosity, deoxidizing
elements such as silicon, manganese, and aluminum are added to the filler metal to react with the
oxygen.
The presence and nature of nonmetallic inclusions—which are predominantly oxides but can also
include sulfides, oxysulfides, nitrides, and carbides—can have a profound effect on weld metal
microstructure and properties.
At relatively low temperatures, the presence and nature of inclusions can alter the toughness of
the weld. Tweed and Knot and Almond et al. have shown that oxides can be detrimental to weld
metal toughness by initiating brittle fracture [4-17, 4-18]. In contrast, the optimum weld metal
toughness is not associated with very low oxygen levels. Finer prior austenitic grain boundaries
and the presence of certain intragranularly nucleated microstructural constituents (that is,
acicular ferrite) can be promoted by the presence of nonmetallic inclusions.
In contrast, Henry et al. have attributed the degradation of creep rupture properties to the
presence of significant densities of nonmetallic inclusions [4-3]. Both the composition and the
distribution of these inclusions are likely to impact creep performance.
The maximum temperature of the weld pool is primarily controlled by the boiling point of iron,
which is approximately 5400°F (3000°C). As expected, the solubility of oxygen in pure liquid
and solid iron decreases with decreasing temperatures. For liquid iron, the solubility of oxygen is
approximately 8000 ppm at 3992°F (2200°C) and 1600 ppm at the eutectic temperature of
2781°F (1527°C). This solubility continues to decrease upon solidification to 82 ppm in δ-ferrite
upon solidification. The maximum solubility of oxygen in γ-iron (austenite) is 28 ppm at 2534°F
(1390°C). In the presence of deoxidizing elements such as silicon, manganese, and aluminum,
the equilibrium level of oxygen in liquid iron at the melting point is reduced to low levels. Thus,
upon cooling, a supersaturation with respect to the products of various oxidation reactions
occurs, providing the driving force for the nucleation of oxides. Typical steel weld metals
contain 200 to 400 ppm of oxygen, primarily in the form of μm-sized oxide inclusions, with
oxide densities in the range of 107 to 108 oxides per mm3 of weld metal. The remainder of the
dissolved oxygen from the molten weld pool will have been removed as slag.
It is generally accepted that nonmetallic inclusions in steel weld metals are complex and of a
heterogeneous chemical nature [4-19–4-21] and that, depending on alloy deposit composition,
they can be composed of a wide variety of elemental species including aluminum, silicon,
manganese, titanium, copper, calcium, magnesium, sulfur, and iron. Kluken and Gröng proposed
4-21
that inclusions will have a heterogeneous structure composed of an oxide core that is formed
during the primary deoxidation stage [4-22]. The composition of the oxide core will vary
depending on the specific deoxidizing species present and the resulting thermochemistry. It has
frequently been observed that the oxide core is partly covered by secondary reaction products
such as MnS (see Figure 4-19).
Figure 4-19
Transmission Electron Microscopy Images of Weldment Oxides Exhibiting MnS Caps on
the Surface of the Oxide
Microstructure of the Heat Affected Zone
When components are joined together by welding, the surfaces of the adjoining base metals must
be heated to their respective melting points; however, as the welding arc passes, the base metal is
rapidly cooled. The server thermal cycle results in an alteration of the microstructure of the base
metal immediately adjacent to the fusion line. This volume of metal, or zone, is referred to as the
HAZ.
The microstructure of the HAZ depends on the specific metal being joined. The HAZ is
commonly divided into a number of subzones. The number of subzones depends on the material
being fabricated. For carbon and low-alloy steels that undergo an allotriomorphic transformation,
a complex range of microstructures develop as shown in Figure 4-20. The major zones include
grain growth (or coarse grained), recrystallized (or fine grained), partially transformed
(intercritical), and tempered zones.
4-22
Figure 4-20
Schematic Diagram of the Various Subzones of the Heat-Affected Zone Approximately
Corresponding to a Carbon Steel Containing 0.15 Wt% Carbon
Source: K. Easterling, Introduction to the Physical Metallurgy of Welding [4-23].
Each of the microstructural zones within the HAZ can be expected to exhibit mechanical
properties specific to that zone. In addition, the constraint affects from surrounding
microstructures will affect the composite performance of the joint.
Welding Defects
Welding is subject to a wide range of discontinuities, including the following:

• Slag inclusions
• Porosity
• Incomplete fusion or lack of fusion
• Lack of penetration
• Cracks
• Undercut
• Underfill
4-23
These discontinuities can occur within the weld metal or in the base metal adjacent to the weld
(in particular the HAZ). Most discontinuities develop during the welding process; however,
certain forms of cracking can develop a significant period of time after completion of the weld
(hydrogen cold cracking) or during heat treatment after welding (reheat cracking).
In the strictest sense, all materials (including weldments) contain intrinsic defects. These intrinsic
defects include grain boundaries, dislocations, substitutional and interstitial alloying elements,
and nonmetallic inclusions. In fact, the free surface of a part is a defect in the structure of the
metal. However, in a macro sense, the term defect is used to identify imperfections or
discontinuities that exceed an established acceptance criteria or that otherwise impair the
function of the component.
Each industry uses specific codes or standards that identify the acceptable limits for
discontinuities. Typically, these codes and standards are adopted by and enforced by local
jurisdictions. After the acceptance criteria are exceeded, the discontinuity is classified as a
defect.
For fossil power piping systems in the United States, inspection methods and acceptance criteria
are established in ASME B31.1. Similar criteria exist in equivalent EN, BS, DIN, and JIS
standards.
Most code-based acceptance criteria are not deterministic (stress and fracture mechanics-based);
they are developed empirically, and they represent a quality standard. When the early fabrication
codes (ASME BPVC and B31.1) were first developed, NDE methods such as liquid penetrant,
magnetic particle, radiography, eddy current, and ultrasonic testing were not available. Proof
testing (hydrostatic testing) and visual inspection were the only tests required; however, with
agreement between the purchaser and the contractor, early versions of B31.1 allowed the
following:
…welded joints may be given a hammer or impact test where such a test is
feasible. This hammer or impact test shall consist of striking the pipe at 6-
in. intervals on both sides of the welded joint. The weight of the hammer
in pounds shall be approximately equal to the thickness of the pipe wall in
tenths of an inch, but shall not exceed 10 lb.
In addition, although the concept of fracture-tolerant designs are based on the initial work of
C. E. Inglis in 1913 and A. A. Griffith in 1920, modern analytical fracture mechanics methods
did not enter into code design until the early 1970s. Therefore, most code acceptance criteria
(including those of B31.1) represent a quality standard based on the philosophy that a qualified
welder using a qualified welding procedure is capable of producing a weld meeting the intended
design. The primary purpose of NDE is to ensure that the welder continues to produce a quality
weld.
4-24
Cracks
Cracks (and crack-like indications) are considered the most detrimental of all weld
discontinuities and are generally unacceptable. Cracks are characterized as linear, with sharp
ends. Cracks are described by their primary length direction with respect to the longitudinal axis
or the weld. Those lying parallel to the longitudinal axis are referred to as longitudinal cracks,
and those lying perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the weld are called transverse cracks.
Cracks that form as a result of fabrication in either the weld metal or the HAZ can be the result
of a number of mechanisms. The key cracking mechanisms are the following:
• Solidification cracking (hot cracking). Solidification cracks most often occur in the weld
metal, although a similar mechanism called liquation cracking can occur in the HAZ of some
materials. Solidification cracks occur near the end of the weld and are the result of residual
stress development during solidification before the weld metal obtains sufficient strength to
resist the stress. A weld metal with a wide solidification range or that contains sulfur or
phosphorous promotes solidification cracking. If there is insufficient filler metal to
compensate for shrinkage in the terminal weld pool, a form of hot cracking referred to as
crater cracking can result. Crater cracking can be eliminated by using a welding technique
that backfills the terminal weld pool.
• Hydrogen cracking (cold cracking). The presence of hydrogen can promote the formation of
cracking in the weld metal or HAZ. Hydrogen cracking can be either transgranular or
intergranular, although intergranular fracture along the prior austenitic grain boundaries is the
most common. Hydrogen cracking can be transverse or longitudinal to the weld axis; the
direction is determined by the combined effect of the highest stress and the most susceptible
microstructure. While the specific mechanism has been the subject of extensive research, no
single mechanism adequately describes the process and the observed characteristics. A state-
of-the-art review of the mechanism’s damage is provided in “Hydrogen Trapping in Steel
Weld Metal,” an International Materials Review paper by Maroef and Olson [4-24].
In order for hydrogen cracking to occur, monatomic hydrogen must first diffuse the crack
site. Depending on the total amount of available diffusible hydrogen, the residual stress, and
ambient temperature, this form of cracking can take more than 72 hours to develop; however,
it generally occurs within 8 hours. Susceptibility to hydrogen cracking increases with
increasing hardness, constraint, and hydrogen levels. The use of low-hydrogen welding
practices greatly reduce the likelihood of hydrogen cracking. These low hydrogen practices
include proper filler metal control, adequate preheat, and cleanliness of the weld preparation.
• Reheat cracking. Reheat cracking develops during stress relief or when heating the weldment
after welding. This mechanism is most prevalent in austenitic steels, creep-enhanced ferritic
steels, and certain microalloyed steels. The phenomenon tends be more associated with the
HAZ and is thought to be closely related to creep rupture.
4-25
An alternative classification scheme for cracks in steam pipe weldments was developed by
Schuller, Hagan, and Woitscheck [4-25]. In this system, the damage type is denoted by a Roman
numeral, with values of I to IV. Type I damage is either longitudinal or transverse and is located
and remains within the weld metal. Type II damage is similar to Type I, but propagates out of the
weld metal into the adjacent HAZ and base material. Type III damage is located in the coarse-
grained region of the HAZ. This system was initially used for girth welds in 1/2 Cr 1/2 Mo 1/4 V
piping made with 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo weld metal that experienced solidification cracks in the weld
metal (classified as Type I) and stress relief cracks in the coarse-grained HAZ (classified as
Type III). Type IV damage is typically service-induced and develops in the fine-grained and
intercritical regions of the HAZ. This crack classification system is shown in Figure 4-21.
Figure 4-21
Classification Scheme For Cracks in Steam Pipe Weldments
Source: W. Chan, R. L. McQueen, J. Prince, and D. Sides, Metallurgical Experience with High-
Temperature Piping in Ontario Hydro, Service Experience in Operating Plants [4-26].
Incomplete Fusion
Incomplete fusion between adjacent layers of weld metal or between weld metal and base metal
can occur at any point in the welding groove. A nonstandard term for incomplete fusion is cold
lap. Incomplete fusion can be caused by the following:
• Improper technique
• Improper joint configuration
• Excessive contamination
4-26
Incomplete Joint Penetration
Incomplete joint penetration is a discontinuity associated only with groove welds, in which the
weld metal does not extend entirely through the joint thickness. It is located adjacent to the weld
root. Several nonstandard terms for incomplete joint penetration are inadequate penetration or IP
and lack of penetration or LP. Incomplete joint penetration can be caused by the same conditions
that result in incomplete fusion.
Inclusions
Inclusions are foreign solid material entrapped in the weld. Inclusions could be slag, flux,
tungsten, or oxide; they can be either metallic or nonmetallic. Slag inclusions can result only
when the welding process uses some type of flux shielding, such as the SMAW process. They
are caused by improper manipulation of the welding electrode and insufficient cleaning between
weld passes.
Tungsten inclusions are almost always associated with the GTAW process, which uses a
tungsten electrode to produce an arc. The tungsten electrode makes contact with the weld puddle,
the arc is interrupted, and molten metal solidifies around the tip of the electrode. The tip of the
electrode breaks off and remains embedded in the final weld.
Porosity
Porosity can occur on or near the surface of the weld. It is characterized by a rounded or
elongated shape resulting from gas being entrapped during solidification of the weld. Porosity is
typically classified as follows:
• Scattered porosity—randomly or uniformly scattered throughout the weld
• Cluster porosity—cavities grouped together
• Linear porosity—cavities that are grouped in a straight line
Porosity is normally caused by contaminants or moisture on the surface to be welded or in the

welding consumables. In the extreme temperature of the arc, these contaminants decompose and
are absorbed into the weld metal. The solubility of gasses is much greater in liquid metals than in
solid metals; therefore, the weld solidifies the excess dissolved gasses and can form porosity in
the weld. Porosity is normally considered to be the least detrimental discontinuity because of the
characteristically spherical shape and the lack of sharp end conditions.
Undercut
Undercut consists of a groove melted into the base metal adjacent to the weld toe. Undercut is
generally the result of improper welding technique or parameters, although the complete
elimination of undercut can be difficult.
4-27
References
4-1. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section IX, Welding and Brazing
Qualifications. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York. 2004.
4-2. Ø. Gröng. Metallurgical Modeling of Welding. The Institute of Materials, London, 1994.
4-3. J. F. Henry, F. V. Ellis, and C. D. Lundin. “The Effect of Inclusions, as Controlled by

Flux Composition, on the Elevated Temperature Properties of Submerged-Arc
Weldments,” WELDTECH 88, International Conference on Weld Failures, London,
November 1988.
4-4. Gas Metal Arc Welding. Miller Electric Manufacturing Co., Appleton, WI, 1994.
4-5. R. L. O’Brien, ed. Welding Handbook, Vol. 2: Welding Processes, 8th ed., American
Welding Society, Miami, 1991. p. 116
4-6. ASME B16.25, Buttwelding Ends. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New
York, 2004.
4-7. Navco Piping Datalog, Ed. 11-1984. National Valve and Manufacturing Co., Pittsburgh,
PA. Ed.11-1984. BASIC-PSA, Inc., Construction Trades Press, Clinton, NC, 1984.
4-9. G. J. Davies and J. G. Garland, in International Metallurgical Reviews. Vol. 20, pp. 83–
106 (1975).
4-10. S. A. David and J. M. Vitek, in International Materials Reviews. Vol. 34, No. 5, pp. 213–
245. (1989)
4-11. A. A. B. Sugden and H. K. D. H. Bhadeshia, in Metallurgical Transactions A. Vol. 19A,

pp. 669–674 (March 1988).
4-12. A. O. Klueken, Ø. Gröng, and G. Rorvik, in Metallurgical Transactions A. Vol. 21A,

pp. 2047–2058 (July 1990).
4-13. J. Cisse and G. F. Bolling, in Journal of Crystal Growth, Vol. 10, pp. 67–76 (1971).
4-14. G. F. Bolling and H. Cisse, in Journal of Crystal Growth, Vol. 10, pp. 56–66 (1971).
4-15. J. Cisse and G. F. Bolling, in Journal of Crystal Growth, Vol. 11, pp. 25–28 (1971).
4-28
4-16. D. R. Uhlmann and B. Chalmers, in Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 35, No. 10, pp.
2986–2993 (October 1964).
4-17. J. H. Tweed and J. F. Knott, in Metal Science, Vol. 17, pp. 45–54 (February 1983).
4-18. E. A. Almond, D. H. Timbres, and J. D. Embury. “Influence of Second Phase Particles on

Brittle Fracture,” Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Fracture,
Brighton, April 1969, pp. 253–264.
4-19. B. R. Keville. Welding Journal, Welding Research Supplement, Vol. 62, pp. 253s-260s
(1983).
4-20. A. R. Mills, G. Thewlis, and J. A. Whiteman, in Materials Science and Technology, Vol.
3, pp. 1051–1061 (December 1987).
4-21. J. M. Dowling, J. M. Corbett, and H. W. Kerr, in Metallurgical Transactions A, Vol.

17A, pp. 1611–1623 (September 1986).
4-22. A. O. Klueken and Ø. Gröng, in Metallurgical Transactions A, Vol. 20A, pp. 1335–1349
(August 1989).
4-23. K. Easterling. Introduction to the Physical Metallurgy of Welding, 2nd ed. Linacre
House, Jordan Hill, Oxford. 1992.
4-24. I. Maroef, D. L. Olson, M. Eberhart, and G. R. Edwards, “Hydrogen Trapping in Steel
Weld Metal,” International Materials Review, Vol. 47, No. 4, pp. 199–223 (August
2002).
4-25. H. J. Schulleer, L. Hagan, and A. Woitscheck, “Cracking in the Weld Region of Shaped
Components in Hot Steam Pipe Lines—Materials Investigations,” Der Masinenschaden,
Vol. 47, pp. 97–105 (1991).
4-26. W. Chan, R. L. McQueen, J. Prince, and D. Sidey, D. “Metallurgical Experience with
High Temperature Piping in Ontario Hydro,” Service Experience in Operating Plants,
ASME, New York, pp. 97–105 (1991).
4-29
5
MANUFACTURE, FABRICATION, AND ERECTION
Introduction
Fabrication applies to the cutting, threading, bending, forming, and welding of individual
materials into integral pieces of piping (spool pieces) ready for assembly. Fabrication can be
performed in the shop or in the field. Commercial pipe fabrication shops generally have
specialized equipment for bending and heat treatment; that equipment is not readily available in
the field. In addition, certain welding processes, such as submerged arc welding (SAW) and
many automated processes, require a fixed-position application and are more suitable for shop
fabrication. As a rule, piping systems smaller than nominal pipe size (NPS) 2 are frequently
field-fabricated and erected whereas piping systems NPS 2-1/2 and larger are shop-fabricated
into subassemblies for field erection.
Assembly applies to the joining of piping components into their installed location as specified by
the engineering design. Erection refers to the complete installation of a piping system; it consists
of field assembly, fabrication, testing, and inspection.
A variety of materials are used in the construction of fossil piping systems, including pipe,
forged fittings (such as Weldolet and Sockolet fittings), flanges, valves, elbows, tees, wyes,
laterals, sweeps (3D/5D bends). These materials can be forged, cast, or fabricated by welding.
Historically, there has been a preference to use seamless pipe and components for high-pressure
and high-temperature service; however ASME B31.1 does not have a penalty associated with the
allowable stress for the use of seam-welded piping or fittings. With larger-diameter piping
(typically larger than 24-in. (61-cm) diameter) and as the result of scheduling impacts associated
with obtaining seamless piping during construction, seam-welded piping was regularly used for
the HRH system and occasionally for the main steam link piping (boiler external piping) from
the 1960s into the early 1980s.
Many substitutions of seam-welded piping for the specified seamless piping occurred during
construction of units, and this change might not have been reflected on the original engineering
documents. Therefore, positive confirmation by etching or other means of positive verification of
the use of seamless components is recommended, even when engineering drawings indicate
seamless piping was used.
5-1
Manufacture, Fabrication, and Erection
Piping
Piping materials are commonly produced in standard schedules that are defined in ASME
standards B36.10 and B36.19 [5-1, 5-2]. Although standard schedule pipe is frequently used for
small-diameter application, for large-diameter heavy wall applications, such as main steam and
HRH piping, special wall pipe is frequently used. The general requirements for pipe are
contained in ASME specifications SA-530 (for carbon and alloy steel) and SA-999 (for alloy and
stainless steel) [5-3, 5-4]. NPS ranges from 1/8 to 80. For NPS 14 and larger, the outside
diameter in inches is equivalent to the nominal pipe size. For pipe sizes up to and including NPS
12, the outside diameter is larger than the nominal pipe size, in accordance with B36.10. For
example, NPS 8 has a nominal outside diameter of 8.625 in. (219.1 mm).
Two systems are commonly used to describe standard wall thicknesses. The first system uses the
following designations:
• STD, standard
• XS, extra strong (also called extra heavy)
• XXS, double extra strong (also called double extra heavy)
The second system developed from an attempt to establish a set of schedules (Sch) from Sch 5 to
Sch 160. From Sch 10 through Sch 40, the schedules increase in increments of 10; from Sch 40
through Sch 160, the schedules increase in increments of 20. Each schedule corresponds to a
specific wall thickness for each pipe size so the pressure-carrying capacity (pressure stress) is the
same, regardless of size.
Standard wall and Sch 40 are the same through NPS 10. For sizes NPS 12 and greater, standard
wall thickness is 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) and Sch 40 wall thickness increases with diameter. Extra
strong and Sch 80 are the same wall thickness for pipe sizes through NPS 8. For pipe sizes
greater than NPS 8, extra strong pipe has a wall thickness of 1/2 in. (12.7 mm) and Sch 80 wall
thickness increases with diameter.
Functionally, pipe and tube are equivalent, and most codes allow the design of either to be
selected by the sizing equation of choice by the designer. The major distinctions between pipe
and tube are in the method of specifying the outside diameter, wall thickness, and tolerances.
Possibly the greatest difference between the two product forms is the magnitude of the tolerance
for wall thickness. For pipes, the tolerance applies to a nominal wall thickness; for tubes, it
applies to a minimum wall thickness. For ASTM/ASME piping materials, the permissible
variation in wall thickness for pipe is shown in Table 5-1. Because the designer must use the
minimum specified wall thickness to ensure conservatism, for seamless pipe and pipe fabricated
by welding the under-tolerance always controls the selection of wall thickness. These broad
tolerances can also allow pipes to be produced with poor concentricity or with multiple lobes on
the ID. These geometric anomalies are more prevalent for thick-walled pipe than for thin-walled
pipe.
5-2
Table 5-1
Permissible Variation in Wall Thickness for Pipe Made to NPS Schedules
Product Minimum Wall Thickness
12.5% under nominal unless a minimum wall thickness is specified and

Seamless and welded
then there shall be no variation under the specified wall thickness
Forged and bored No variation under the specified thickness
Cast No variation under the specified thickness
The OD of pipe is controlled to reasonably close tolerances (see Table 5-2). Ovality in thin-
walled pipe (t/D≤3%) in any single cross section is limited to a maximum of 1.5%. Additional
controls are placed on variations in mass per unit length and straightness.
Table 5-2
Permissible Variation in Outside Diameter for Pipe Made to NPS Schedules
Permissible Variations In Outside Diameter
NPS Over Under
in. mm in. mm
1/8 to 1-1/2, inclusive 1/64 0.4 1/32 0.8
> 1-1/2 to 4, inclusive 1/32 0.8 1/32 0.8
> 4 to 8, inclusive 1/16 1.6 1/32 0.8
> 8 to 18, inclusive 3/32 2.4 1/32 0.8
> 18 to 26, inclusive 1/8 3.2 1/32 0.8
> 26 to 34, inclusive 5/32 4.0 1/32 0.8
> 34 to 48, inclusive 3/16 4.8 1/32 0.8
Piping can be purchased by specifying any of the following:

• NPS and Sch
• Outside diameter and nominal or minimum wall thickness
• Inside diameter and nominal or minimum wall thickness.
If piping is purchased based on inside diameter, there will be considerable variation in outside
diameter between the straight pipe runs, the elbows, and the sweeps (long radius bends). This
variation in outside diameter can have an impact on the hanger clamp fit.
5-3
Historical Perspective on Piping Codes—Boiler Proper, Boiler External, and

Power Piping
Piping in fossil power plants can be divided into four distinct sections: boiler proper piping,
boiler external piping, nonboiler external piping, and turbine piping.
Piping that is integral with the boiler, such as downcomers, risers, and piping between headers, is
classified as boiler proper piping.
Boiler external piping refers to the piping that begins where the boiler proper terminates at any of
the following points:
• The first circumferential joint for welding end connections
• The face of the first flange in bolted flanged connections
• The first threaded joint in that type of connection
It extends up to and including the code-required valves, which for the main steam piping system,
is the steam isolation valve or, in the absence of an isolation valve, the turbine stop valves.
Historically ASME Section I maintained responsibility for the boiler proper and boiler external
piping and made no distinction regarding these two portions of piping; all of it was just treated as
piping. However, Section I never developed sophisticated design rules associated with piping
flexibility analyses and hanger design. These additional considerations were the responsibility of
the boiler manufacturer, who was free to use design approaches based on experience and good
engineering practices. In the late 1960s, it became apparent the piping rules of ASME Section I
were no longer adequate to cover the design of modern steam piping systems. In 1972, the
responsibility of most aspects of the construction of boiler external piping was transferred to
ASME B31.1.
Nonboiler external piping (piping from the boiler to the Section I code boundary) is designed and
fabricated in accordance with ASME B31.1. The primary difference between boiler external and
nonboiler external piping is that the quality control requirements (including authorized
inspection and stamping) of Section I still apply to boiler external piping. For additional
differences, refer to the specific codes.
Turbine piping is generally limited in scope, but it is the design and fabrication responsibility of
turbine manufacturers as a portion of the mechanical equipment supplied by them.
Development of ASME B31.1
In July 1935, the American Tentative Standard Code for Pressure Piping (B31.1) was published.
This code contained sections on power piping systems, gas and air piping, oil piping, and district
heating piping. In 1942, the American Standard Code for Pressure Piping (ASA B31.1) [5-5, 5-6]
was first published. Since 1942, this code has grown to meet industry changes in materials
development, fabrication techniques, and inspection techniques. Revisions to this code are
typically issued every three years (early editions were not issued on this schedule). The
5-4
American National Standards Institute (ANSI) coordinates the development and use of voluntary
consensus standards in the United States, including B31.1. However, the responsibility for this
standard rests with the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).
Throughout the history of B31.1, materials acceptance, design, fabrication, and inspection have
evolved to reflect changes, while still setting forth the minimum engineering requirements
deemed necessary for safe design and construction of pressure piping. As technology has
advanced, so has this standard. In particular, changes in materials or improved understanding of
material properties have necessitated the inclusion of these new materials or changes in
allowables for existing materials.
There have also been significant advances in the choice and availability of NDE techniques. In
the American Tentative Standard Code for Pressure Piping (B31.1) issued in 1935, testing of
welds consisted of a hydrostatic test at twice the normal service pressure and visual examination.
If there was any reasonable doubt of the satisfactory quality of a weld, the weld could be checked
by trepanning out a coupon large enough to show a clear cross section of the weld. In contrast,
inspection of welds under the current edition of ASME B31.1 might require radiography, liquid
penetrant, and magnetic particle testing, in addition to the specified hydrostatic test and visual
examination. The specific testing methods are established based on weld type (butt weld, branch
connection, or fillet weld) and service conditions (temperature and pressure).
Fabrication of Piping Components
Section 3 of this report provides an overview of the applicable material specifications for piping
and piping system components. ASME B31.1 references numerous ASTM specifications and a
limited number of American Petroleum Institute (API) and American Water Works Association
(AWWA) standards. ASTM standards are listed as “A” (such as A335) for ferrous materials and
“B” (such as B167) for nonferrous materials. ASME Section II lists “SA” and “SB” counterparts
to many of the ASTM specifications. Similar material standards have been published by various
international organizations such as DIN, JIS, and BSI. Specific fabrication methods are listed
within these reference standards; however, this section provides a summary of fabrication
methods.
ASME Section I and B31.1 draw a distinction between boiler external and nonboiler external
piping [5-7, 5-8]. Both the boiler external and nonboiler external piping are fabricated in
accordance with ASME B31.1; however, for boiler external piping, only materials approved for
use by Section I, all of which appear in B31.1 as their ASTM counterparts, can be applied.
Boiler external piping is defined by ASME B31.1 as the piping that begins where the boiler
proper terminates at any of the following points [5-8]:
• The first circumferential joint for welding end connections
• The face of the first flange in bolted flanged connections
• The first threaded joint in that type of connection
5-5
It extends up to and including the main steam isolation valve or, in the absence of an isolation
valve, the turbine stop valves. In addition to the design requirements of ASME B31.1, boiler
external piping is to be fabricated and installed by manufacturers or contractors authorized to use
the appropriate ASME symbol as defined in paragraphs PG-105.1 through PG-105.3 of ASME
Section I [5-7]. All data reports, inspection, and stamping required by Section I are to be
provided for boiler external piping.
A brief description of the fabrication methods for piping components is provided. The specific
method of manufacture applicable to each material is addressed by the specific material
specification (for example, ASTM A335).
Pipe can be seamless or seam welded. In general, welded pipe is predominately manufactured in
large outside diameters (typically greater than 24 in. [61 cm]). Historically, engineers and
designers favored the use of seamless pipe for main steam and HRH piping; however, because of
the greater flexibility of production facilities, seam-welded pipe was often available with shorter
lead times. Frequently, the substitution of seam-welded pipe for seamless pipe occurred during
the construction phase and might not be reflected in the design documents.
Seamless Pipe
Seamless piping can be produced by a number of processes, including the following:

• Pierce and pilger rolling
• Plug rolling
• Pierce and draw
• Extrusion
• Forged and bored
• Centrifugally cast
Pierce and Pilger Rolling Process
The pierce and pilger (or Mannesmann) process is commonly used for production of seamless
carbon and low-alloy steel pipe up to 26 in. (660 mm) diameter and wall thicknesses up to 5 in.
(125 mm). Larger diameter piping can be produced by hot working the pipe, by pulling through a
plug, or by rolling on a becking mill; however, this results in a reduction of wall thickness.
For large diameter pipe sizes, the starting material is frequently a polygonal ingot, often with
weights in excess of 1 ton (900 kg). After the ingot is heated to the rolling temperature, it is
inserted in a round die on a vertical piercing press. The solid ingot is then pierced by a
cylindrical punch of approximately half the diameter of the die, to produce a hollow shell with a
closed base. The wall thickness of the hollow shell is then reduced in a cross roll mill and the
closed end is pierced. Finally, the hollow shell is elongated in a pilger mill, followed by final
sizing on a sizing mill. The basic sequence of the process is shown in Figure 5-1.
5-6
Figure 5-1
Pilger Mill Process for Seamless Pipe Manufacture
Plug Rolling Process
The plug rolling (or Stiefel) process is commonly used for the production of seamless pipe up to
approximately 16 in. (406 mm) diameter. In plug rolling, the bloom is heated to the forming
temperature; following high-pressure water jet descaling, the bloom is pierced in a cross roll
piercing mill. For larger diameters, a second plug mill can be used. A schematic of the plug
rolling process is shown in Figure 5-2.
5-7
Figure 5-2
Plug Rolling Process for Seamless Pipe Manufacture
5-8
Pierce and Draw Process
The pierce and draw process, also referred to as hollow forging or the Erhardt process, is used
for the production of seamless carbon, low-alloy, and stainless steel pipe up to approximately
60 in. (1500 mm) diameter and wall thicknesses up to 10 in (250 mm). This process was
developed by Heinrich Erhardt in Germany in 1891. The application of this process is limited
because of the low rate of production.
The starting material is frequently a mold-cast ingot weighing up to 28 tons (25 tonne) which is
heated to the forming temperature in a soaking pit, followed by forming a hollow shell with a
closed base in a vertical piercing press as shown in Figure 5-3. After the vertical press, the
hollow cylinder is elongated to final size on a horizontal drawing press with a mandrel
corresponding to the final inside diameter. After the horizontal drawing press, the mandrel and
hollow shell are pushed through a sequence of drawing dies of decreasing diameter until the
desired outside diameter is obtained. Depending on the number of drawing steps, it might be
necessary to reheat the material before additional drawing is accomplished. Typically five passes
are possible before reheating.
Figure 5-3
Pierce and Draw Process for Seamless Pipe Manufacture
When the drawing is completed, the finished component is stripped from the mandrel. After the
material has cooled, the integral bottom is cut off.
5-9
Extrusion Process
The extrusion process, also referred to as the Ugine Sejournet extrusion process, is used for high-
alloy pipe. In this process, a descaled billet is heated to the forming temperature and placed in a
vertical press with an extrusion die at its bottom. The billet is pressed with a hydraulic ram and
then pierced with a mandrel to produce a cylinder. Finally a ram is activated to apply pressure to
the billet and extrude it through the annulus formed between the mandrel and the die. This
process can be used to produce heavy wall pipe with diameters up to approximately 48 in.
(1220 mm) with wall thicknesses up to approximately 6 in (152 mm).
Forged and Bored
In the forged and bored process, a billet is heated to the forging temperature and forged to make
a hollow shell using heavy presses or forging hammers. The ID and OD of this forging will be
slightly smaller and larger, respectively, than the finished dimensions. The rough forged cylinder
is then lathe turned to the desired OD, and the ID is bored to the specified inside dimension.
At least one major boiler manufacturer frequently lathe turned the OD of seam-welded pipe used
for link (boiler external) piping. Because forged and bored piping is also lathe turned, the
presence of turn marks on the OD surface of the pipe might not be sufficient to indicate the pipe
is seam welded.
Centrifugally Cast
Centrifugally cast pipe is made by pouring molten metal into a rotating mold and continuing to
spin the mold as the metal cools and solidifies. Subsequently the pipe is machined on both the
inner and outer surfaces.
Welded Pipe
Welded pipe is produced by forming a cylinder from a plate and fusion welding the seam. The
earliest method of pipe production was forge welding, which was originally patented by James
Whitehouse in 1825. In forge welding, the cylinder is formed, the mating edges are heated and
mechanically brought together in a draw bench. With the development and improvement of
electric arc welding following World War II, these processes quickly gained acceptance and
became widely used for the production of large diameter pipe. A number of welding processes
can be used in the production of seam-welded pipe, including GTAW and GMAW; however, the
primary welding process for heavy wall power piping is SAW.
The production of seam-welded pipe starts with the formation of a cylinder from plate. The
forming can be accomplished using a C-ing press, U-ing and O-ing press, or a three-roll bending
process. The U-ing and O-ing presses are the most common for large-diameter heavy wall pipe.
5-10
As described in Section 4, SAW is an electric fusion welding method performed using a

concealed arc. The wire is spool-fed through a contact tube, and an arc is struck between the
workpiece and the bare wire electrode. The tip of the arc is covered (submerged) in flux that is
supplied by hopper mounted to the side of the welding torch. The arc melts a portion of the flux
Pipe Bends
There are multiple processes for pipe bending, including furnace bending, incremental bending,
rotary draw bending, ram bending, roll bending, and induction bending. Of these processes,
furnace, incremental, and induction bending are hot bending processes; rotary draw bending, ram
bending, and roll bending are cold bending processes. These bending methods, along with
tolerances and process and material requirements are covered in the Pipe Fabrication Institute
(PFI) Standard ES-24, Pipe Bending Methods, Tolerances, Process and Material Requirements
[5-9].
In the general sense, cold forming occurs below the recrystallization temperature, and hot
forming occurs above the recrystallization temperature. ASME B31.1; however, defines hot
bending or forming as occurring at a temperature above Tcrit - 100°F (56°C) where Tcrit is the
lower critical temperature of the material. Cold bending or forming is performed at a temperature
below Tcrit - 100°F (56°C). The approximate lower critical temperatures for key alloys listed in
ASME B31.1 are given in Table 5-3. The following sections describe the key bending methods.
Table 5-3
Approximate Lower Critical Temperatures As Given in ASME B31.1
Approximate Lower Critical Temperature

Material
°F °C
Carbon steel (P No. 1) 1340 725
Carbon-molybdenum steel (P No. 3) 1350 730
1 Cr 1/2 Mo (P No. 4, Gr. No. 1) 1375 745
1-1/4 Cr 1/2 Mo (P No. 4, Gr. No. 2) 1430 775
2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo, 3 Cr 1 Mo (P No. 5A) 1480 805
5 Cr 1/2 Mo (P No. 5B, Gr. No. 1) 1505 820
9 Cr 1/2 Mo (P No. 5B, Gr. No. 2) 1490 810
5-11
Furnace Bending
The traditional method of hot bending is performed on a bending table. Depending on the ratio of
the diameter to the thickness, the pipe can be sand packed to provide rigidity. Sand packing is
typically used for diameter-to-thickness ratios greater than approximately 10:1; however, when
the diameter-to-thickness ratio exceeds 30:1, sand packing will lose effectiveness and buckles
can begin to appear. Sand packing is generally not effective in preventing buckling at pipe sizes
larger than NPS 24.
When the pipe has been firmly packed with sand, it is heated in a furnace to approximately
2000°F (1093°C). The furnace is usually gas fired through ports along its length that are placed
to direct the flames around the pipe and avoid direct flame impingement. After the pipe has
attained the required temperature throughout, the pipe is removed from the furnace and placed on
a bending table. One end of the pipe is retained by holding pins, and a bending moment is
applied at the other. The radius of the bend is controlled by dies, stops, or templates.
There are limits to the combinations of diameter, thickness, and bend radius that can be
accommodated by the furnace bending method. These limits are graphically outlined in PFI
ES-24.
Incremental Bending
The equipment used for the incremental bending process (originally developed by M. W.
Kellogg Co. and refined by Pullman Power Products Corp.) consists of an anchor box and a
hydraulic cylinder. The heating device, usually a gas torch ring burner, heats a narrow
circumferential band (approximately one to two times the wall thickness in length) to the proper
bending temperature. The incremental length is selected to be less than the buckling wave length
of the pipe. A force is then applied by a hydraulic cylinder to bend the small increment a
predetermined amount. The heated band is then cooled as required by the bending procedure, the
heating device is moved to the next successive increment, and the process is repeated.
Induction Bending
For hot bending, induction bending has recently achieved prominence because of its adaptability
to a wide range of pipe sizes and bend radii. Induction bending is a technologically advanced and
largely automated process in which the pipe is gradually bent in consecutive narrow
circumferential zones heated by an inductor ring to a temperature of 800°F–2200°F (425°C–
1205°C). The bending force pushes axially on the pipe; the front end of the pipe is clamped to a
pivoting arm. The bending arm, set to the desired radius, describes a circular arc around the pivot
point, and the pipe conforms to the desired radius as it is incrementally pushed through the
inductor. The induction bending process does not require any forming tools. An induction-bent
pipe attains high accuracy of shape. Bend radius-to-diameter (R/D) ratios of 1.5 to 10 are typical,
depending on diameter and thickness. Depending on equipment, pipe diameters in the range of
3.5 in. to 64 in. (89 mm to 1626 mm) can be bent [5-10].
5-12
The left side of Figure 5-4 is a sketch of an induction bending machine. This particular machine
is equipped with two bending arms, one for small-diameter pipe and one for large-diameter pipe
[5-11]. The right side of Figure 5-4 is a photograph showing the hot circumferential band
produced by the inductor. After passing through the inductor, the pipe can be either forced to
cool or naturally cooled, as required by the metallurgical characteristics of the material.
Figure 5-4
Induction Bending
The advantages of induction bending should not be allowed to obscure the fact that pipe
undergoes a complex process of heating, deformation and cooling as it passes through the
bending machine, creating changes to the metallurgical and mechanical properties. In the early
development, specific problems were encountered in bends made with low-alloy steels such as
1-1/4 Cr 1/2 Mo Si (P11) and 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo (P22) [5-12]. The forming issues included a
ductility trough in the range of 1650°F–1800°F (900°C–980°C) that limited the formability and
resulted in the occurrence of grain boundary microfissures that looked like creep. Such effects
are not unique to induction bending; they are typical of any hot bending process that stretches the
material within its low ductility temperature range. Both of these problems can be overcome by
selecting the right induction bending temperature, radius, bending speed, and material chemistry.
Prudence dictates that preproduction test bends be made using prototype material and process
parameters followed by laboratory examination to demonstrate bend integrity. Tube & Pipe
Association, International, has prepared a recommended standard dealing with induction bending
[5-13].
5-13
Ram Bending
In ram bending, two pressure dies, which are free to rotate, are mounted in a fixed position on
the machine frame (Figure 5-5). A hydraulic ram then presses a forming die against the pipe, and
the pressure dies rotate on their mounting pins so that they follow the piping and maintain
support.
Figure 5-5
Ram Bending Process
Rotary Draw Bending
In rotary draw bending, the pipe is secured to a bending die by a clamping die. As the bending
die rotates, it draws the pipe against the pressure die to form the bend. An internal die can be
used, if necessary, to prevent wall collapse.
Figure 5-6
Rotary Draw Bending Process
5-14
Roll Bending
In roll bending, three power-driven rolls of approximately the same diameter, usually arranged
in a pyramid, are used. The two fixed rolls oppose an adjustable center roll. The pipe is passed
through the rolls, with the position of the adjustable roll controlling the bend radius (see
Figure 5-7).
Figure 5-7
Roll Bending Process
Figure 5-8 shows the approximate bend radius as a function of diameter-to-wall thickness ratio
for the various cold bending processes [5-9].
Figure 5-8
Cold Bending Ranges
Source: Pipe Fabrication Institute. Standard ES-24, Pipe Bending Methods, Tolerances, Process
and Material Requirements [5-9].
5-15
Pipe Fittings
Fittings for pipe can be wrought (seamless and welded construction), forged, or cast. Fittings can
include short radius elbows, bifurcations (wyes), laterals, and tees.
Forgings are typically manufactured in accordance with ASME/ASTM SA182/A182. This

standard covers carbon-molybdenum and chromium-molybdenum low-alloy steels as well as
martensitic, ferritic, duplex, and austenitic stainless steels. Depending on the grade, post-forging
heat treatment can consist of annealing, normalizing and tempering, or solution treating and
quenching. Carbon steel forgings are manufactured in accordance with ASME/ASTM
SA105/A105. Depending on the application, carbon steel forgings can be left as forged or can be
heat treated by annealing, normalizing, normalizing and tempering, or quenching and tempering.
Wrought fittings are typically manufactured in accordance with ASME/ASTM SA234/A234.

This standard covers carbon, carbon-molybdenum, and chromium-molybdenum alloy steels.
Wrought austenitic stainless steel fittings are manufactured in accordance with ASME/ASTM
SA403/A403. The material for fittings can consist of forgings, bars, plates, and seamless or
fusion-welded tubular products. Welded tubular products can contain one or two welds
depending on the method of manufacture. Clam-shell elbows contain a seam weld along both the
extrados and intrados of the elbow. If seam-welded pipe was used, it might contain only a single
weld. For elbows, this weld is typically located along the intrados, but there are no specific
requirements specifying this location, and the weld can be located at any position
circumferentially. Depending on the grade, post-forming heat treatment can consist of hot-
formed, annealed, normalized, normalized and tempered, subcritically stress relieved, or solution
annealed.
References
5-1. ANSI B36.10, Welded and Seamless Wrought Iron Pipe. American National Standards
Institute. Washington, DC.
5-2. ANSI B36.19, Stainless Steel Pipe. American National Standards Institute. Washington,
DC.
5-3. ASME SA530, ASME Standard Specification for General Requirements for Specialized
Carbon and Alloy Steel Pipe. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. New York.
5-4. ASME SA999, General Requirements for Alloy and Stainless Steel Pipe, American
Society of Mechanical Engineers. New York.
5-5. ASA B31.1, American Tentative Standard Code for Pressure Piping. American Standards
Association, 1935.
5-6. ASA B31.1, American Standard Code for Pressure Piping. American Standards
Association, 1942.
5-16
5-9. PFI ES-24, Pipe Bending Methods, Tolerances, Process and Material Requirements. Pipe
Fabrication Institute, New York, 2003.
5-10. M. L. Nayyar. Piping Handbook. Seventh Edition, McGraw-Hill, 2000.
5-11. B. Hahn, B. Vandenberghe, J. C. Valliant, and W. Bendick. The WB 36 Book

(15NiCuMo) for Feedwater Systems. Vallourec & Mannesmann Tubes, 2002.
5-12. John Reason, “Watch Materials Properties During Induction Bending.” Power Magazine,
December 1987, pp. 33-34.
5-13. Recommended Standards for Induction Bending of Pipe and Tube. Tube & Pipe
Association, International, Rockford, IL, 1998.
5-17
6
OPERATION
This section will be included in a future update.
6-1
7
DAMAGE MECHANISMS AND MODELS
Introduction
In general, high-energy piping service experience indicates that damage development and
cracking have been encountered at specific base metal locations and at weldments. Indeed,
several examples of catastrophic rupture have been recorded in which fracture has resulted in
widespread damage. Fortunately, the number of catastrophic failures is relatively small.
However, in many other cases, damage development has resulted in steam leaks, or significant
cracking has been found during plant inspections. In some situations, these problems have been
related to deficiencies during welding or manufacture. However, in the majority of cases,
damage developed as a result of long-term, in-service mechanisms.
The obvious goal for the electric generation industry as a whole is to predict and prevent failures
before they occur. The fundamental step in predicting a component’s effective lifespan and
preventing failures is to develop a comprehensive understanding of the potential damage
mechanisms affecting the component. With an estimate of current damage, rules for damage
accumulation, and failure criteria, the remaining life of a component can be assessed. However,
for both the dispositioning of defects and the assessment of damage accumulation, it is important
to identify the mechanism responsible for damage and, if possible, to determine the root cause of
the damage. A root cause analysis is significantly more than simply identifying the mechanism.
Root cause analysis should establish the reasons for the accelerated damage, so that appropriate
remedial action can be undertaken to minimize the risk of future problems.
Which damage mechanisms are active depends on the component, the local operating conditions,
and the materials and methods used in fabrication. Frequently, two or more damage mechanisms are
at work simultaneously on a component. Table 7-1 lists common damage mechanisms for various
components and locations.
7-1
Damage Mechanisms and Models
Table 7-1
Damage Mechanisms for Main Steam and Hot Reheat Piping
Component or Location Damage Mechanism

Precrack and Type IV creep
Creep cracking
Fatigue cracking
Combined creep-fatigue cracking
Seam welds
Corrosion-fatigue cracking
Corrosion pitting
Weld flaws (including heat treat)
Overheating
Creep swelling
Temper embrittlement
Thermal softening and sag
Spool pieces Oxide notching
Corrosion pitting
Overstress
Bowing
External creep cracking
External thermal fatigue cracking
Internal thermal fatigue cracking
Wye, tee, and valve bodies Combined creep-fatigue cracking
Corrosion pitting
Overheating
Creep cracking (internal or external)
Fatigue or thermal fatigue cracking
Combined creep-fatigue cracking
Girth welds
Corrosion pitting
Weld flaws (including heat treat)
Overheating
Overstress
Creep or creep cracking at saddle welds
Saddle welds
Thermal fatigue cracking of saddle welds
Overstress
Radiographic testing plug and Creep or creep cracking
thermowell welds; small bore Fatigue or thermal fatigue cracking, especially with bimetallic welds
pipe connections Overstress of branch pipe and welds
Creep cracking at borehole
Penetrations Thermal fatigue cracking at borehole
Thermal shock cracking at borehole
Creep cracking
Fatigue cracking
Overload
Supports
Thermal softening
Corrosion
Improper alignment, setting, or design
7-2
Because damage depends on factors specific to a generating unit (design, operating modes, water
chemistry, and fuel characteristics), each unit and its components must be treated individually to
obtain realistic life assessments. Determining the degree of damage to a component typically requires
the application of one or more inspection methods. Assessing the rate of damage accumulation
implies that the process of monitoring damage will be performed repeatedly or be ongoing.
Determining the degree of damage required to cause failure requires the use of one or more
analytical or experimental techniques. In some cases, it is advisable to adopt a conservative
approach. A component can be considered to have failed when it is more sensible economically to
repair or replace it rather than continuing to operate with a high risk of catastrophic failure.
Depending on the active damage mechanism, several techniques and software programs can be
used to predict the remaining life for a component. The lifetime of any high-energy piping
component is a complex function of factors such as operating conditions (stresses, temperatures,
and environment), geometry (piping layout, support placement, wall thickness), material, and
damage type. The uncertainties associated with life assessment such as actual material properties,
fabrication tolerances, and stress states make it extremely difficult to determine actual
component life, even with good analysis techniques. As a result, life assessment is often focused
on helping to set inspection intervals and is used as input to deciding whether to repair or replace
a component.
For those conditions in which crack initiation alone constitutes failure (or is a substantial portion
of the useful life of a component), conventional NDE methods and fracture mechanics analysis
are not helpful. This primarily occurs in very thin section components, in highly stressed
components, or in materials that have rapid crack growth rates or that are highly embrittled.
Techniques used for these conditions include calculations based on history, extrapolations of
failure statistics, strain measurements, accelerated mechanical testing, microstructural
evaluations, oxide scale growth, hardness measurements, and advanced NDE techniques.
In most instances of cracking in high-energy piping sections, the critical crack size at failure is
sufficiently large that NDE for crack sizing along with crack growth analysis for life assessment
is appropriate. This is then followed by periodic monitoring of the progression of damage and
benchmarking of analysis results against field observations. In these cases, cracks are tolerated,
crack initiation can occur early in the total life of the component (10%–20%), and retirement is
based on the economics of repeated repairs and the growth of a crack to critical size. In this case,
excessive concern with refining the damage rules is unwarranted. There are at least two
exceptions to the general observation, however. If a material has suffered severe embrittlement,
crack initiation approaches are important. A second exception is in Type IV cracking (creep
cracking), in which cracks that form along the fusion line of the weld–base metal interface are
hard to detect and can link up to grow rapidly.
7-3
A survey of U.S. repair technologies and practices for headers, high-temperature piping, and
turbine casings has been reported [7-1, 7-2]. The results for life assessment showed the
following:
• Over half of the utilities indicated that they used some form of in-house life assessment.
However, only two used computer software for life assessment.
• The level of damage (for example, creep cavitation, embrittlement, and so forth) at which a
component is considered nonrepairable varied considerably. Slightly more than 30% of the
utilities indicated that some minimum level of metallurgical damage was established.
However, 30% of utilities indicated that cost or economics often took priority over
metallurgical or technical considerations in their decision making.
• Factors included in repair or replace decisions included the following:
– Contract cost of repair versus cost of replacement
– Requirements for analysis and testing
– Estimated remaining life of component before and after repairs
– Trade-offs among cost, safety, risk, and availability
A few other general observations about life assessment are the following:
• The critical crack size to cause failure is not a constant in high-energy piping but will
decrease with service exposure as embrittlement occurs. The use of conventional NDE
techniques (see Section 10) is based on the premise that a detectable crack will form and
grow slowly enough to permit periodic inspection, repair, or retirement before a crack grows
to a critical size.
• The failure scenario must be understood. In thick-section components, cracks can grow by
creep or creep-fatigue at high temperature, but failure can occur by brittle fracture at low
temperatures during startup and shutdown sequences. Hydrostatic tests are often found to be
the limiting condition for fracture. Ductile tearing or plastic collapse at operating conditions
can also determine the limiting flaw size.
• Weld-related cracking in high-energy piping requires attention from a life assessment
viewpoint because the deterioration in susceptible locations often precedes deterioration in
the piping base material. Damage in welds can thus serve as an precursor index to damage
and remaining life in the base metal.
• The validity of any damage approach must be evaluated with reference to the material and
service conditions. As a result, tailored, case-specific approaches should be used rather than
relying on generalized laboratory results.
• A considerable amount of materials data has been accumulated from service-exposed
material. In the absence of component-specific data, the ex-service property databases are
very useful for life assessment.
7-4
The following subsections outline information about specific damage mechanisms that can affect
high-energy piping. Additional information regarding these topics and applicable assessment
methods can be found in the following EPRI reports [7-3–7-9]:
• Boiler Tube Failure Metallurgical Guide, Volumes 1–2 (TR-102433)
• Boiler Tube Failure: Theory and Practice, Volumes 1–3 (TR-105261)
• Condition Assessment Guidelines for Fossil Fuel Power Plant Components (GS-6724)
• Guidelines for Controlling Flow-Accelerated Corrosion in Fossil and Combined Cycle
Plants (1008082)
• Life Assessment of Boiler Pressure Parts, Volumes 1–5 (TR-103377)
• Metallurgical Guidebook for Fossil Plant Boilers (1004509)
• Remaining Life Assessment of Austenitic Stainless Steel Superheater and Reheater Tubing
(1004517)
Creep
Introduction
Creep is a time-dependent deformation and fracture of metal components that takes place at
elevated temperatures under the application of a load. Typical loading in a high-energy piping
system can include the weight of the pipe and the operating pressure stress. For common
engineering steels, creep becomes a significant concern only at temperatures exceeding
approximately half of the absolute melting point. For the stress levels encountered in most power
generating plants, creep is not a concern for low-alloy steels below approximately 700°F
(370°C), and for austenitic alloys below approximately 1000°F (538°C).
Curves that plot creep strain versus time have traditionally been described using three stages of
creep: primary, secondary, and tertiary (see Figure 7-1). Each stage can be characterized in terms
of creep rate (the change in strain with time). Primary creep is a period of relatively high but
decreasing creep rate during which the material’s creep resistance increases by work hardening;
the strain rate is continuously changing. No observable microstructural changes occur during the
primary period, and there is no mechanical degradation of the material. Secondary creep is a
period of essentially constant creep rate. Tertiary creep is a period of increasing creep rate; the
material fails at the end of this period.
7-5
Figure 7-1
Typical Creep Curve Showing the Three Steps of Creep (Curve A, Constant Load Test;
Curve B, Constant Stress Test)
Source: G. Dieter. Mechanical Metallurgy, Third Edition [7-10].
Creep failures occur as a result of crack initiation and propagation as the material loses strength
at operational temperatures. Increasing creep rate can result from microstructural aging or void
development or a combination of the two.
Microstructural aging effects in plain carbon and low-alloy steels can include precipitation and
growth of chromium and molybdenum carbides and pearlitic decomposition to spheroidized
carbides, which decreases the strength of the steel.
At high operating temperatures and under stresses, voids can be generated in areas of high
interfacial energy within the microstructure, including grain boundaries and precipitate–matrix
interfaces. Eventually, voids link up to form microcracks. Low-strain failures are due to the
coalescence of grain boundary microvoids into grain boundary cracks. Local fracture occurs
when the microcracks link to form macrocracks. For most thick-section components, even the
existence of a macrocrack does not necessarily constitute the end of useful life. A period of
stable crack growth usually occurs until a critical crack size is reached, which then leads to rapid
failure.
In general, welds and HAZs are considered to be undergoing creep cavitation and the base
material to be undergoing thermal softening. Low-alloy Cr-Mo steel base metals generally have
good creep rupture ductility with total uniaxial elongations greater than 10%. HAZs consist of
several metallographic regions, including a coarse-grained region, a grain-refined region, and an
intercritical region. The microstructural morphology and therefore the properties of each region
differ, but they are typically all inferior to the base metal properties. HAZs generally have poor
ductility with total uniaxial elongations less than 5%.
7-6
The following subsections describe the various stages of creep failure, including crack initiation
and crack growth, as well as current creep modeling efforts.
Crack Initiation
All engineering metals are essentially composed of many metallic crystals, which are three-
dimensional matrices of atoms following the repetitive order of the primary alloying element
(that is, iron for steels). When a stress is applied, the crystalline atomic matrix of any material
has the following three basic options to respond to the stress:
• The matrix can elastically deform. That is, the atoms in the matrix stretch to accommodate
the applied stress. This occurs at low values of applied stress.
• If the applied stress exceeds the ability of the atoms to stretch, then the crystal can plastically
deform (change shape) by moving atoms from one location to another.
• If the applied stress exceeds the ability of the atoms to stretch or to change the crystal shape,
the atoms can break their bonds, separate, and form two new surfaces. This is commonly
called cracking.
Which option the atoms of the metallic crystals follow depends on the inherent strength of the
alloy, the amount of stress applied, how quickly that stress is applied, and the operational
temperature.
Creep is time-dependent deformation that occurs at relatively constant stress levels but at
elevated temperatures. Increases in operational temperature produce several key microstructural
changes that decrease the strength of the alloy and its ability to resist applied stresses, including
the following:
• Metallic atom matrices become more energized, and it becomes easier for the atoms to move
and therefore easier for the crystal to change shape to accommodate the applied stress.
Therefore, the strength (which is the ability of the crystal to resist deformation) decreases as
the temperature increases.
• Many high-temperature alloys depend on precipitated particles for their strength. Precipitates
are second-phase particles (a separate atomic matrix) within the basic atomic matrix of the
crystal. They are formed when a sufficient number of alloying atoms of the nonprimary
element collect to form a new local matrix that differs from the overall crystal matrix. The
nonprimary alloying elements do not truly fit into the primary element atomic matrix. The
new matrix accommodates the size and electronic difference of the nonprimary alloying
elements.
Because diffusion of atoms is easier, it is easier for nonprimary alloying elements to collect
and precipitate second-phase particles at elevated temperatures. The particles grow as more
atoms collect at the particles’ interfaces. Small particles become larger particles by collecting
the atoms of other smaller particles—the larger particles get larger, and the smaller particles
dissolve. It is harder to move atoms through a “forest” of many small particles than it is to
7-7
move them through a lower number of large particles. (As an analogy, imagine how much
harder it is to walk through a dense forest of small-diameter trees versus walking through a
sparsely populated forest of large-diameter trees.) Therefore as the particles coarsen at
elevated temperatures, the metallic crystals lose strength.
• Many of the phase constituents that give steel higher strength—such as like pearlite, bainite,
or martensite—are metastable phases that will reorganize themselves into lower-strength
microstructural constituents if given a sufficient amount of time at a diffusion-activated
temperature.
These microstructural changes can lead to losses in high-temperature strength. As a tensile load
is applied to the weakened microstructure, voids can be created at phase interfaces (that is, grain
boundaries, second-phase particle boundaries, phase boundaries), which are areas with the lowest
cohesive forces. The number and size of the voids depend on the amount of load, the amount of
thermal energy, the number of void initiation sites, and the strength of the microstructural
interfaces. The formation of voids and the interlinking of these voids (microvoid coalescence) is
the fundamental crack initiation mechanism for creep degradation. Therefore, creep cracks form
where the microvoids initiate and coalesce.
Crack Growth
Cracks typically grow under tensile loading. When a large enough microcrack has been initiated
(no longer just a few coalesced voids), it acts as a sharp stress concentrator. The stress at the very
tip of the crack is amplified to levels significantly higher than the average applied stress (several
orders of magnitude higher), and therefore it generally takes less stress energy to extend a crack
than to plastically deform the material. Thus, when a crack is initiated, it tends to grow under
continued applied loading. The rate of crack growth depends on the level of loading and the
material’s inherent resistance to crack extension, which in turn depends on the material’s
microstructural morphology, and specifically can be related to the strength and fracture
toughness of the material. Because it can take time for a crack to propagate through the material,
the presence of a crack does not necessarily mean the end of useful component life.
Analytical Techniques
Creep Deformation—Life Models
Several mathematical models can be used to predict the operational creep life for a component
under specific operating conditions (time at temperature). The models vary in complexity. For a
variety of alloys, there is a simple relationship between minimum creep rate, ε, and time to
rupture, tr, termed the Monkman-Grant correlation, shown in Equation 7-1 [7-11].
log tr = m log ε Eq. 7-1
7-8
In Equation 7-1, m is a constant. For most materials, m has a value approaching unity, so that the
equation can be rewritten as shown in Equation 7-2.
ε tr = constant Eq. 7-2
Estimates of rupture life can be obtained with this equation for components removed from
service, given creep rate from dimensional measurements, or from short-term laboratory tests
(isostress tests), to give estimates of rupture life. Extrapolation to determine the probable time to
rupture at service temperatures is then typically performed. The most common accelerated test
for creep is the creep-to-failure test, in which engineering stress (load normalized by initial
specimen dimensions) is plotted against the logarithm of time to rupture, tr. The result is a series
of curves similar to the S-N curve for fatigue. For steady-state conditions, the stress rupture
curves provide reliable design lifetimes.
There are several alternative parametric extrapolations that allow short-term creep test results to
be extrapolated to long exposure times typical of power plant applications. These include the
LMP, the theta projection concept, and various others [7-12–7-14].
The LMP is the most commonly used, is easy to understand and use, and has been proven to be
at least as accurate as, if not more accurate than, any of the other parameters [7-12, 7-14]. The
LMP can be derived from the stress and temperature dependence of the creep rate or time to
rupture. The resulting equation relates stress, temperature, and time, as shown in Equation 7-3.
LMP = f (σ ) = T (log t r + C1 ) Eq. 7-3
Where:
T = temperature in absolute units
tr = time to rupture, at temperature (h)
C1 = a constant that ranges from 10 to 40 depending on the material; 20 is commonly
used for 1-1/4 Cr 1/2 Mo and 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo, and 30 is commonly used for P91.
The LMP can be used to estimate remaining life at a given service temperature and stress and to
set reinspection intervals. Figure 7-2 shows the curve relating stress to LMP. It is generated from
test data or from literature values. The service stress level (σ*) can be entered to read off the
service LMP. A knowledge of expected operating temperature can then be used to predict
remaining life.
7-9
Figure 7-2
Use of a Parametric Method (the Larson-Miller Parameter) to Estimate the Remaining Life
of Service-Damaged Material
Creep Crack Growth Models
The mathematical methods treat creep damage holistically and describe creep deformation before
crack initiation. There are also analogous methods to predict life based on creep crack growth
rates (propagation rates). Remaining life assessment of cracking (in the creep regime as well as
at lower temperatures) requires two relationships: 1) a means to relate the crack driving force to
nominal stress, crack size, geometry and material constants, and 2) a way to correlate the
calculated driving force to the resultant crack growth rate for the material of interest. A variety of
expressions have been developed to indicate the effects at a crack tip, including the stress
intensity factor, K, and the integral, J, for fatigue, along with three parameters which are been
successfully correlated to creep crack growth: C*, Ct, and C(t) [7-15–7-18].
C* is a path-independent energy rate line integral. It is analogous to the J integral from fracture
mechanics, except that the strain and strain-energy density are replaced by strain rate and strain-
energy-rate density, respectively. C* is defined as shown in Equation 7-4.
∂ui
C* = ∫ dy − Ti ds Eq. 7-4
Γ
∂x
Where:
Ti is the traction vector along the path, Γ.
ui is the deflection rate vector along the traction.
7-10
ds is a length element along the path.

W* is the strain rate density, which is defined as shown in Equation 7-5.
ε ij
W = ∫ σ ij dε ij
*
Eq. 7-5
0
Where:
σij = the stress tensor
εij = the strain tensor
C* addresses the steady-state (large-scale) creep crack growth regime under the special
conditions in which second-stage creep deformation is widespread in the body. C* can be related
to the crack tip stress and strain fields. Where elastic strains are dominant, the expressions reduce
to those for the stress distribution ahead of a crack tip as a function of the stress intensity. C* can
be directly measured in laboratory tests on cracked specimens in which the creep deflection is
measured. Also, C* can be estimated from J integral expressions and from estimates of the J
integral [7-14]. Therefore, C* can be calculated by finite-element methods and used as a
parameter to predict creep-crack growth.
Ct and C(t) are ways to extend the C* concept to small-scale creep conditions. For the more
general case in which significant creep strains occur only in the localized region near the crack
tip, at least in the beginning stages of crack growth, a parameter Ct has been proposed. In the
limit of widespread creep deformation, Ct = C*. The use of Ct has been shown to have some
advantages over the other two parameters. C* is not defined as path-independent in small-scale
and transition creep regions; therefore, its use is confined to extensive creep. C(t) is the near
crack tip value of C* and is therefore useful for small-scale and transition creep regions.
However, in these regimes, C(t) cannot be measured at the load point; it can only be calculated.
Ct can be used in all regimes, and can be both measured and calculated at the load point. It has
been shown that creep crack growth rate data for a wide range of conditions correlate with Ct.
These concepts have been confirmed by applying them to explain the observed creep lifetime of
cracked components, such as superheater outlet headers and high-temperature rotors, after they
have been removed from service. Figure 7-3 diagrams the typical fracture mechanics approach to
estimating life after creep cracks are detected.
7-11
Figure 7-3
Flowchart of the Time-Dependent Fracture Mechanics Analysis Approach to Determining
the Remaining Life in Creep and Creep-Fatigue Assessments
Damage Accumulation Rules
In field applications, creep damage is strongly influenced by local stresses and temperatures.
Because significant variation occur in these factors, there is significant variation in the rate at
which creep damage accumulates. For example, in some materials, changes as small as 10°F–
15°F (approximately 6°C–8°C) can double the creep rate of the material. Damage rules have
been developed to calculate the amount of life expended as a function of specific conditions. The
two most common rules sum time fractions or strain fractions. The Robinson life-fraction rule
sums time fractions as shown in Equation 7-6 [7-19]:
7-12
ti
D=∑ Eq. 7-6
t ri
Where:
ti is the time spent under condition i.
tri is the time to rupture under condition i.
Strains are summed in the strain-fraction rule as shown in Equation 7-7 [7-20]:
εi
D=∑ Eq. 7-7
ε ri
Where:
εi= the strain accumulated under condition i
εri= the strain to rupture under condition i
The Robinson life-fraction rule is analogous to the Palmgren-Miner rule in fatigue analysis. As
with fatigue, the Robinson rule assumes that each fractional expenditure of life is independent of
all others. It is frequently called, incorrectly, a linear damage rule; there is no requirement for
linearity, only for uniqueness of damage to life-fraction [7-21]. The original formulation was for
temperature changes only. Damage induced by variable temperature but constant stress is
uniquely related to life-fraction. Temperature changes do not result in sequence effects, and
therefore life expenditures in each segment of time at temperature are simply additive. In
contrast, problems developed with Robinson’s rule when it was applied assuming that stress
changes were uniquely related to life-fraction; they are not [7-21]. Robinson’s rule has been
successfully applied to analyzing power plant components.
There has been a considerable amount of evaluation of the accuracy of the life-fraction rules
[7-22–7-24]. Some current views toward using these damage rules are the following:
• Linear damage summation rules have been found to be just as accurate and useful as any
other rule in the specific context that they are used [7-25].
• Life-fraction rules have been shown to be generally valid for temperature changes and not for
stress changes [7-24].
• Cumulative life-fraction at failure has been shown to be greater than, equal to, or less than
unity, depending on the nature of the prior degradation, the ductility of the material, and the
order in which stress changes and temperature changes are imposed [7-24]. For example,
Figures 7-4 and 7-5 show the correspondence between the actual life and remaining life-
fraction for a ferritic 1/2 Cr 1/2 Mo 1/4 V pipe steel (MG) and a bainitic, low ductility cast
version (FW) based on the life-fraction rule (LFR). Results show that for ductile materials,
cumulative life-fraction is >1 and for brittle material life-fraction is <1.
7-13
Figure 7-4 shows a comparison between life estimates based on the LFR and the observed life in
postexposure accelerated tests [7-22]. The LFR tends to underestimate the remaining life of
ductile materials and overestimate the life of brittle materials.
Figure 7-4
Comparison Between Life Estimates Based on the Life-Fraction Rule and the Observed
Life in Postexposure Accelerated Tests
Source: R. Viswanathan and S. M. Gehl, Effect of Aging on the Creep Rupture Behavior of
Steels. First International Conference on Microstructures and Mechanical Properties of Aging
Materials [7-22].
A modified basis for the life-fraction rule to allow for the effects of ductility is shown in
Figure 7-5 [7-22]. The figure shows the remaining life-fraction from postexposure accelerated
tests versus the expended life under service conditions for three heats of low-alloy steel. The
theoretical (linear) curve will be conservative for ductile materials and nonconservative for
brittle materials. Revised curves to compensate for this effect are also shown in the figure.
7-14
Figure 7-5
Remaining Life-Fraction from Postexposure Accelerated Tests Versus Expended Life
Under Service Conditions
Source: R. Viswanathan and S. M. Gehl, Effect of Aging on the Creep Rupture Behavior of
Steels. First International Conference on Microstructures and Mechanical Properties of Aging
Materials [7-22].
Commercially Available Modeling Packages
Several commercially available modeling packages can model creep damage and predict
remaining life using algorithms based on the concepts in this section. Section 8 describes several
of the models.
Example
This section presents images of creep to illustrate failure appearance and to highlight some of the
concepts described in the preceding subsections. The example presented is a creep failure that
occurred in a 3000 MW unit in a section of high-energy piping under 2400 psig (16.5 MPa) and
operating at a temperature of 1000°F (538°C) that had operated for approximately 90,000 hours.
The crack resulted in a steam leak near a boiler stop valve.
7-15
The failure occurred in a girth weld close to a boiler stop valve and only feet from a broken
hanger (see Figure 7-6). The pipe was specified as 1-1/4 Cr 1/2 Mo; the relevant weld was
fabricated between the cast valve body and a forged tee.
Figure 7-6
Schematic Drawing Illustrating the Location and Extent of Cracking
Cracking developed at the edge of the HAZ adjacent to the parent metal on the casting side as
shown in the macrograph (right image) of Figure 7-7; this was a case of Type IV cracking. The
cracks appear to have initiated subsurface and crack initiation seems to be associated with
extensive creep cavitation as shown in the micrograph (left image) of Figure 7-7. In the
macroscopic image of Figure 7-7, note that cracking occurred on only one side of the weld, there
was no damage on the forging side.
7-16
Figure 7-7
Micrographic (Left) and Macrographic (Right) Images of the Creep Crack
Several features that are classically associated with creep crack initiation and growth are
illustrated in the images of Figure 7-7, making it a particularly good example. The features
include the following:
• The operational temperature was in the creep regime, and the component was under both
high pressure stresses and unexpected loading because of the broken hanger. It takes a
combination of stress and temperature over an extended period to initiate and propagate
creep cracks.
• Damage occurred in a specific region of the weldment, specifically at the edge of the HAZ in
the intercritical region. Creep cavitation is very sensitive to microstructural constituency, and
creep cracks tend to stay in a specific morphological region. Cracking did not occur in the
other intercritical region on the righthand side of the macro, where a similar but different
microstructure would be expected.
• The crack originated subsurface and not at specific stress concentrators as would be expected
with a fatigue crack.
• The crack has an intergranular appearance to its propagation and does not seem to be stress
dominated. Creep voids tend to nucleate at grain boundaries; therefore, creep cracks, which
propagate by void coalescence, tend to follow intragranular paths.
• The micrograph clearly shows many crack and void nucleation locations on several different
planes away from the main crack. This is typically seen in creep deformation, but it is not
seen in fatigue in which crack propagation is stress dominated and a single crack tends to
grow in transgranular paths.
7-17
Fatigue
Introduction
Fatigue is damage accumulation caused by cyclic or fluctuating stresses that typically lie below the
yield stress of the material and generally manifest as the initiation and stable propagation of a
crack. Final failure in a component subjected to fatigue occurs in one of two ways: either 1) a
critical crack size is reached and unstable rapid crack propagation leads to a through-component
fracture or 2) losses in cross-sectional area as a result of crack propagation lead to stress overload. In
cases of rapid crack growth, failure can be defined by the initiation of a crack. In many cases,
however, cracks grow for many stress cycles and the initiation of a crack does not necessarily mean
the end of useful life for the component.
Fatigue crack propagation depends on the frequency and magnitude of applied stress cycles and is
generally independent of stress duration (at high temperatures in which creep-fatigue becomes the
dominant mechanism, there is a dependence on stress duration). Stress cycling can be induced
mechanically or thermally. Figure 7-8 shows experimental results of fatigue testing for several
commonly used engineering materials, in which a cyclical stress (alternating tensile stress, in this
case) is applied to a component until it fails. In Figure 7-8, the ordinate variable (Y axis) is the
applied cyclical strain and the abscissa variable (X axis) is the number of applied cycles.
Although cyclic stress range is typically plotted on the ordinate axis, stress and strain are
interchangeable because fatigue testing is normally performed in the elastic region of the stress-
strain curve. At a high strain range (stress level), fatigue failure can occur in less than 100 cycles.
As the strain (stress) is lowered, the number of cycles to fracture increases dramatically and
asymptotically. Ultimately, there is a strain range (stress range) below which the component can
be cycled indefinitely without failure. This level is commonly called the endurance limit of the
material.
Fatigue damage is commonly grouped into two categories—low-cycle fatigue and high-cycle
fatigue. It is the magnitude of applied stress that dictates the number of cycles to failure (see
Figure 7-8). High-cycle fatigue is usually thought to occur in 106 or more cycles, and low cycle
fatigue usually occurs in 10,000 or fewer cycles of applied stress. Whether a fatigue fracture is of
a high-cycle or low-cycle nature is important in analyzing the failure and providing information
to the designer to correct the problem.
7-18
Figure 7-8
Compilation of Fatigue S-N Data for Common Engineering Materials
Source: S. S. Manson. Thermal Stress and Low Cycle Fatigue [7-26].
Pure fatigue damage creates thin cracks that follow a path determined by the direction and
location of applied stress, the location of stress concentrators, and the weaknesses in weld metal
or base metal. On a microscale, cracking tends to be transgranular and relatively straight. Cracks
are often oxide-filled and sometimes widened at the mouth. Corrosion lobes along the sides of
the crack develop after cracking exposes the metal to environmental effects, rather than being a
part of the fatigue process. Visual examination of high-cycle fatigue fracture surfaces usually reveal
a relatively smooth, flat surface with beach marks (also known as progression marks or clam shell
marks). With an appearance similar to the marks that waves make in the sand on a beach, beach
marks, which are classically indicative of fatigue fracture, are optically visible semispherical lines that
mark the progression of the crack and tend to increase in length as the distance from the crack
initiation location increases. Beach marks denote large changes in stress cycle intensity or frequency,
and are therefore more prevalent on fracture surfaces that take longer to develop and on softer
materials. In contrast, for low-cycle fatigue failures, in which rapid failure is common and failures
occur after fewer than 10,000 stress cycles of higher amplitude, the fracture surface is somewhat
rougher. Beach marks can also be evident in low-cycle fatigue depending on the range of stress intensity
at the crack tip.
The detection of fatigue damage after a crack has initiated is well established by a number of
methods, including liquid penetrant, magnetic particle, eddy current, ultrasonic testing, and
radiography. The analysis of fatigue behavior is also well established and sufficient materials data
exist for all common construction materials to allow complete analyses of the expected life of
components subject to fatigue.
7-19
Crack Initiation
Fatigue cracks typically initiate on surfaces exposed to tensile stresses at some form of surface
irregularity or defect and then propagate into the material. The science of fracture mechanics
tells us that the stress near the tip of a notch or other defect is amplified to levels many orders of
magnitude higher than the average applied stress on the component. Therefore, the effective
stress range (or stress intensity range) can lie above the endurance limit in the vicinity of a stress
concentrator, even if the average stress levels are well below the endurance limit. When a crack
is initiated, the crack acts as a very sharp notch; therefore, it has a tendency to propagate under
lower applied stresses than those required to initiate the crack in the first place. Because fatigue
cracks initiate at surface irregularities or defects, the initial surface finish and environmental
degradation of surfaces play integral roles in crack initiation.
Depending on the amplitude of alternating applied stress, initiating a fatigue crack can consume
up to 90% of the total cycles imposed on a component. This fatigue damage before initiation is
difficult to detect, even with the most sophisticated techniques. Thus, a component might be
examined after 10 years of service, appear to be satisfactory, and fail by high-cycle fatigue
within months after it is placed back in service. Fortunately, this scenario is usually true only for
highly cycled components. For low-cycle fatigue, which is the more common failure mechanism
for high-energy piping, initiation can consume less than half of the total stress cycles, and growth
of cracks found on inspection can be reasonably estimated.
Crack Growth
Figure 7-9 shows a plot of typical crack growth per cycle (da/dN) data for A533 steel. The
abscissa is in units of stress intensity range (ΔK), which combines stress range, crack size, and
geometric parameters, and which reflects the amplified effective stress experienced at a notch or
crack tip. Several typical fatigue crack propagation features are demonstrated in Figure 7-9,
• There is a threshold stress intensity below which cracks do not initiate.
• There are typically three regimes of crack growth rate that describe fatigue crack
propagation. After initiation, there is typically a period of fast crack growth when surface
stress effects cause rapid crack propagation. Following that is a period of stable crack growth
that typically follows some form of power law functionality. Classically, Paris’ Law is used
to describe stable crack propagation following the mathematical form shown in Equation 7-8.
da
= C (ΔK ) n Eq. 7-8
dN
• The final stage is rapid, unstable crack propagation to failure after a sufficient amount of
cross-sectional area has been lost that the part overloads.
7-20
The type of data illustrated in Figure 7-9 are used to project growth of cracks into the future,
based on stress ranges and number of applied cycles. The use of this fracture mechanics
approach for nuclear power plants has been documented in the ASME Boiler and Pressure
Vessel Code, Section XI, Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components,
and the approach is gaining acceptance in the fossil power industry as a basis for making run,
repair, or replace decisions [7-27]. Cracks can be left in a component for a limited amount of
additional duty if they are subjected to a fracture mechanics analysis and meet acceptance
requirements, which vary from component to component.
Figure 7-9
Fatigue Crack Growth Data for Type A533 Steel
7-21
Introduction
Nearly all the methods described in this section are part of a Level III assessment (see Section 8).
That is, they are analytical methods that will typically involve the following:
• Detailed NDE results
• Accurate estimates or measurement of materials properties
• Detailed stress analysis, typically using finite element methods, field measurements, or both
• Choice among sophisticated damage algorithms
Pure fatigue analyses are often of limited use in high-energy piping sections because fatigue
damage is often complicated by high-temperature creep, corrosion enhancement, or both.
Nonetheless, the tools of fatigue analysis are powerful and can offer the analyst considerable
insight about the accumulation of damage.
Typically, fatigue analysis begins by thoroughly reviewing the transient operational controls and
limits of the unit or making measurements of displacements, strains, and temperatures during all
transients. This information is then input to global and local finite element models. After the local
strain range is established for various anticipated strain reversals, this information can then be used
with a rainflow algorithm or other appropriate cycle-counting algorithms in combination with a
fatigue life-fraction rule, such as Miner’s rule, to estimate the fraction of fatigue life consumed for
each transient. Figure 7-10 shows a generic flowchart of the steps that are typically conducted as
part of a fatigue analysis using methods that calculate both fatigue initiation and propagation.
Figure 7-10
Typical Steps to Calculate Total Fatigue Life (Initiation and Propagation) in a Fatigue Analysis
7-22
A corresponding flowchart that examines the steps for propagation only (given an existing flaw
found by inspection or a flaw of assumed size) is shown in Figure 7-11.
Figure 7-11
Typical Steps to Calculate Fatigue Life in Propagation by Fracture Mechanics Analyses
Given an Existing or Assumed Flaw
Nominal Stress Approaches—Goodman Diagram and Modified Goodman Diagram
The basic method for presenting fatigue life information is the S-N curve, which is a plot of the
number of cycles, N, to failure against the stress range. N is usually the number of cycles to
complete specimen fracture and the S-N curve does not distinguish between crack initiation and
crack propagation. The number of cycles to failure at a given stress level is termed the fatigue
life for that stress. S-N curves are constructed using fully reversed loading on smooth fatigue
specimens. A number of variables—including mean stress, temperature, environment, specimen
size, specimen surface condition, and stress concentrations—can impact the measurement of
fatigue life. A safety factor is typically applied to the S-N curve in design of components, partly
to account for the effects of these variables.
7-23
The Goodman diagram, proposed by J. Goodman of London in 1899, is used to represent the
effects of mean and cyclic stress levels. The stress condition for a given situation is plotted on a
graph; the magnitude of the mean stress is plotted on the abscissa and the alternating stress level
is plotted on the ordinate. Figure 7-12 illustrates that fatigue life predictions can be made by
plotting locations of mean stress (σM) and alternating stress (σA) and comparing failure lines. The
Goodman and Soderberg lines are shown, along with a failure parabola by Gerber. Plotted points
of σM and σA that fall above and to the right of the appropriate line indicate conditions that will
lead to failure by fatigue.
Figure 7-12
Plotting Locations of Mean (σM) and Alternating Stress (σA) and Comparing Failure Lines
Three points are known. If the load is static (that is σa = 0) a mean stress equal to yield, Sy, will
initiate yielding and a mean stress equal to the ultimate strength of the material, Su, will cause
failure (fracture). On the ordinate, if the mean stress is zero, failure occurs at the endurance limit,
Se, which is found from laboratory testing. The Goodman diagram is a straight line connecting Su
and Se. Failure in fatigue will occur whenever the combination of mean and alternating stresses
calculated for a particular condition is above the Goodman line. Stress amplitudes for notched
members are estimated from those for unnotched members by invoking a fatigue strength
reduction factor, kf. Likewise a stress concentration factor for the mean stress, kfm, is also
estimated.
As indicated in Figure 7-12, a number of nonlinear theories attempt to overcome the

conservatism in the linear Goodman theory. The most widely used is probably the Gerber
parabolic relation, proposed by W. Gerber of Germany in 1874. The Goodman diagram can, in
principle, be used to evaluate the combined effects of steady and dynamic stress. However, given
the complexity of load variations typical of high-energy piping components, an analysis of cyclic
stress-strain and a damage summation method are more widely used for fatigue analysis.
7-24
The Local Strain Approach to Fatigue
Traditionally, total fatigue life of a notched member is separated into a crack initiation life,
which is spent developing small cracks, and a crack propagation life, which is spent growing
cracks to failure. During the initiation stage, the damage process is controlled by the cyclic
plastic strain at the notch root. The local strain approach analyzes plasticity and mean stress
effects in a rational and fairly rigorous manner, thereby avoiding most of the empiricism of the
nominal stress methods (such as with the use of the Goodman diagram). The details of life
prediction by the local stress-strain and damage-counting approach can be found in Fatigue
Under Complex Loading: Analyses and Experiments, in Fatigue and Microstructure, and in
“Behavior of Materials Under Conditions of Thermal Stress” [7-28–7-30]. These successful
methods combine cyclic stress-strain response, strain-based material properties, the local strain
approach to account for geometric notches, and a damage-counting algorithm based on closed
hysteresis loops to provide cumulative fatigue damage analyses.
Strain-life relations were shown by Coffin and Manson to be the sum of the elastic and plastic
strain resistance as shown in Equation 7-9 [7-31–7-33]:
σf
εt = (2 N )
f
b
+ ε f (2 N f )
c
Eq. 7-9
E
Where:
εt is the total strain.
σf is the fatigue strength coefficient.
E is Young’s modulus.
2Nf is the number of complete strain reversals to failure.
b is the fatigue strength exponent.
εf is the fatigue ductility coefficient.
c is the fatigue ductility exponent.
The parameters, σf, E, b, εf, and c are material properties that can be obtained from handbooks of
such properties. This leaves the total strain and corresponding number of cycles (strain reversals)
as unknowns. Given a strain, such as from the result of a finite element analysis or from a failure
analysis, the number of cycles to failure can be calculated. Conversely, in a design situation,
limitations on the allowable total strain can be placed on a design for a desired lifetime (number
of cycles). This damage rule has been named the Coffin-Manson relationship. The strain-
amplitude versus cyclic life relationship is illustrated in Figure 7-13.
7-25
Figure 7-13
Schematic Representation of the Strain-Amplitude versus Cyclic Life Relationship
The fractional damage under varying strain range conditions are estimated using standard εt (total
strain range) versus Nf (cycles to failure) curves and are summed up using the Miner rule (see the
next subsection) to determine the total life-fraction consumed. In the absence of εt versus Nf
curves, the method of universal slopes proposed by Manson can be used to estimate fatigue
curves based on a knowledge of the tensile strength and ductility of the material [7-34]. The
equation is shown in Equation 7-10.
⎛ 3.5σ u ⎞ −0.12
Δε t = ⎜ ⎟N f + D N f
0.6 − 0.6
Eq. 7-10
⎝ E ⎠
Where:
σu is the ultimate tensile strength (ksi).
E is Young’s modulus (ksi).
D is ductility, defined as D = ln [100/(100-RA)]
where RA is the reduction of area in (%).
The implication of this equation is that in the elastic region, fatigue strength is governed by
tensile strength, and at large cyclic strains, it is governed by ductility. The knowledge of cyclic
strains can be either measured or calculated by finite element methods. If the temperature-
dependent strength modulus and ductility are used, the universal slope equations can be used to
estimate fatigue life at any desired service temperature.
7-26
Miner’s Rule for Calculation of Fatigue Life-Fraction
Actual service spectra almost always show an irregular variation with time. Realistic life
predictions must account for irregular load histories in fatigue or irregular stress histories from
other degradations. Traditionally, the method of analyzing nonconstant fatigue loading is a life-
fraction rule (termed Miner’s rule or Palmgren-Miner rule), which states that life is exhausted
when the sum of life-fractions in each load or stress regime reaches unity [7-35]. See
Equation 7-11.
m nf
D=∑ Eq. 7-11
i =1 Ni
Where:
D is the fatigue damage fraction.
Ni is the number of cycles to failure for cycle i.
ni is the number of applied stress-strain loops of this amplitude.
m is the number of stress-strain loops of various amplitudes within the load block.
To calculate the time to failure for a spectrum of loads, it is necessary to add the incremental
damage per cycle.
Figure 7-14 shows a simple example of how the rule is applied [7-36]. Here the assumed strain-
time history consists of three strain cycles of strain range Δε1, two cycles of strain range Δε2, and
four cycles of strain range Δε3. The increment of fatigue damage attributable to cycling at any
one of the strain ranges is defined as the number of applied cycles, n, of that strain range divided
by the allowable number of cycles, N, at that strain range. The allowable number of cycles is
determined from a fatigue curve of log strain range versus log cycles to failure.
7-27
Figure 7-14
An Example of the Application of Miner’s Rule
Source: EPRI Report 103377. Life Assessment of Boiler Pressure Parts, Volume 3: Heavy
Section Crack Initiation and Propagation [7-36].
It is a common misconception that the Palmgren-Miner rule implies a linearity of some damage
parameter with imposed cycles. Damage, by whatever measure, can accumulate nonlinearly;
however, the damage must be uniquely related to life-fraction [7-29].
A considerable amount of evaluation of the accuracy of the life-fraction rules has been done
[7-30, 7-31]. This is because of Miner’s rule for fatigue as well as the analogous Robinson’s rule
for creep damage and the combined rule for creep-fatigue. Linear damage summation rules have
been found to be just as accurate and useful as any other rule in the specific context that they are
used [7-33]. Systematic laboratory evaluations of life-fraction rules for welds are not currently
available.
7-28
Fracture Mechanics Approaches to Crack Growth by Fatigue
Fracture mechanics analyses can be invoked in situations where a crack is known to exist or is
assumed to exist (sized just below the detection limits of an NDE technique, for example).
Fracture mechanics assumes that there is no initiation; that is, the analysis begins with the
assumption of a sharp crack in the part and determines the time for that crack to grow to a critical
size. However, in damage-tolerant design, assumed initial flaw sizes can be unduly conservative,
in part because no credit is taken for the crack initiation life of the component. The optimal
approach is to consider both crack initiation and crack growth in design or life prediction.
Initiation lives from strain life curves to a specific crack size can be combined with crack growth
lives that start at the crack size at which initiation ended. One difficulty in combining initiation
and propagation is how to choose the crack size that can be considered the end of the initiation
phase.
In linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM) analyses, the component is assumed to behave as a
perfectly elastic material. A stress intensity is calculated that specifies the stress state at the tip of
a crack. In general, the stress intensity is a function of the applied and residual stress fields, the
existing crack size, and a factor that accounts for crack and specimen geometry, as shown in
Equation 7-12.
K = A1σ a Eq. 7-12
Where:
K is the stress intensity.
A1 is a crack and specimen geometry factor.
σ is applied stress.
a is crack size.
For cyclic stresses, the same equation is applicable and provides the cyclic stress intensity factor
(stress intensity range), ΔK = Kmax - Kmin. The incremental crack growth can be expressed as a
function of applied stress intensity range, as shown in Equation 7-13, where C and n are
empirical constants derived from laboratory test data.
da
= C ( ΔK )
n
Eq. 7-13
dN
The coefficient C depends on the temperature, the mean stress or strain, the material, the
configuration of the design or weld detail, the thickness of the member subjected to cyclic
loading, the surface roughness, and the weld quality. The exponent n is typically in the range
from 2.0 to 5.0. For a wide range of weld configurations and weld materials, the exponent has
been found to be approximately 3 [7-37].
7-29
The rate at which the crack will grow is directly proportional to the applied stress and to the
square root of the crack size. For the analysis of damage accumulation by fatigue, cracks are
assumed to begin to grow when the stress intensity reaches a threshold value, ΔKTH; below this
threshold, crack growth is not observed. Crack growth rates are typically determined in
laboratory tests and then used to predict service performance for various geometries. Failure by
rapid fracture is taken to occur at a critical stress intensity value, the fracture toughness, KIC.
Using fracture mechanics analyses, combinations of total stress state and flaw size that lead to
failure can be calculated.
LEFM analysis is valid only for those situations in which the strain field at the crack tip is
predominantly elastic; that is, the plastic zone is small (brittle materials). In most circumstances
when analyzing high-temperature piping degradation, this condition is not valid, and the use of
elastic-plastic fracture mechanics (EPFM), which accounts for plastic deformation of the
material near the crack tip, is appropriate. Figure 7-15 illustrates the development of an elastic,
small plastic, and large plastic field caused by a growing crack [7-38, 7-39]. LEFM can be
correctly applied to images (a) and (b) in Figure 7-15, and EPFM is properly applied to
conditions matching those illustrated in image (c).
Figure 7-15
Schematic of Stress Fields in Cracked Bodies
Sources: EPRI Report NP-701-SR, EPRI Ductile Fracture Research Document and
J. T. A. Roberts, Structural Materials for Nuclear Power Systems [7-38, 7-39]
The J-integral concept and the crack-opening-displacement technique have been developed as
part of the EPFM methodology. The J-integral concept is relevant because of its extension to
creep conditions through the C* and Ct parameters. The J-integral is an energy criterion that
characterizes the plastic strain (stress) field at a crack tip. The J-integral is a line integral defined
as shown in Equation 7-14.
⎛ ∂u ⎞
J = ∫ ⎜Wdy − T ds ⎟ Eq. 7-14
Γ ⎝ ∂x ⎠
7-30
Where:
Γ is the counterclockwise contour around a crack tip.
T is the traction vector defined according to the outward normal n along Γ (that is,
Ti = σijnj).
u is the displacement vector acting along the integration path.
ds is an increment of length along the integration path.
ε
W = ∫ σ ij ε ij , where σij and εij are the components of stress and strain.
0
The J-integral can be used as a fracture criterion. There is a value of J, termed JIC, that is the
critical value for the onset of fast crack propagation and is analogous to KIC for the linear elastic
case. Test methods are available for the measurement of JIC [7-40]. The J-integral is applied in
two different ways [7-7]. First, J expressions can be directly applied where they have been
developed for the particular component geometry. Secondly, the equivalence of J and K has been
established (see Equations 7-15 and 7-16), and this equivalence can be invoked to allow the use
of more common K solutions.
(1 − υ 2 ) for plane strain conditions

2
K IC
J IC = Eq. 7-15
E
K C2
JC = for plane stress conditions Eq. 7-16
E
Several commercially available fracture mechanics programs an be used to evaluate the

accumulation of damage by the crack-like mechanisms—fatigue, stress corrosion cracking, and
corrosion fatigue. International standards such as the R6 procedure developed by the former
Central Electricity Generating Board provide methods to analyze structures containing flaws
[7-41, 7-42].
Example
This section presents images of fatigue to illustrate failure appearance and to highlight some of
the concepts described in the preceding subsections. The example presented is a catastrophic
fatigue failure that occurred in a section of cold reheat piping. During the explosive failure event,
sections of collapsed metal piping were projected out of the plant’s building and into an
employee parking lot. The left image in Figure 7-16 shows the extent of damage caused by the
ultimate failure. The right image shows piping debris that was flung into the employee parking
lot by the explosion associated with the catastrophic failure.
7-31
Figure 7-16
Damage Caused by Fatigue Failure in a Section of Cold Reheat Piping
The crack initiated on the ID surface of the pipe at the toe of a seam weld. The pipe was
specified as 30-in. (76-cm) diameter by 0.636 in. (1.62 cm) minimum wall thickness to be
constructed of Class 1, 70 ksi (482.3 MPa) carbon steel; however, the pipe wall was actually
0.75 in. (1.9 cm) thick (thicker than specified). The seam weld was oriented at approximately the
2 o’clock position in a horizontal run of pipe. The section of pipe in which the crack initiated
was located between a hanger and a girth weld, approximately 18 in. (46 cm) from the hanger
and approximately 9 in. (23 cm from the girth weld. The crack initiated approximately 41 ft
(12.5 m) downstream of the attemperator. The crack had propagated approximately 92% through
the pipe wall from the ID to the OD at the time of failure; a brief leak before break period
occurred. Analysis of the scale present on the fracture surface indicated that the crack probably
initiated early in life.
The left image in Figure 7-17 is a macroscopic etch of the seam weld, indicating the crack origin
at the toe of the weld on the ID of the pipe. The right image in Figure 7-17 is a micrograph of the
fracture surface, showing significant oxide build-up, which indicates that the crack initiated early
in the operational life. Figure 7-18 provides a close-up stereoscopic view of the fracture surface.
7-32
Figure 7-17
Macroscopic Etch of the Seam Weld and Micrograph of the Fracture Surface
Figure 7-18
Stereographic Image of the Fracture Surface
7-33
Several features that are classically associated with fatigue crack initiation and growth are
illustrated in Figures 7-17 and 7-18, making this a particularly good example. These features
include the following:
• The fatigue crack initiated at the toe of the weld, where a notch was formed and a high stress
intensity, K, would be expected.
• The crack propagation path was stress dominated and not driven by microstructural
morphology. Specifically, the crack propagated across areas of both base metal and weld
metal in a transgranular straight line.
• The fracture surface is relatively smooth, and crack arrest locations (beach marks) are visible.
• More than 90% of the fracture occurred by fatigue cracking before the ultimate overload
event that generated the shear lip (see the top of Figure 7-18).
Creep-Fatigue
Introduction
During elevated-temperature operation, components can be subjected to both creep and cyclic
loading. The resultant damage is termed creep-fatigue and the effects can be interactive or
synergistic, or both. That is, creep-fatigue can cause component damage to accumulate
significantly faster than would be expected by considering each mechanism separately (see
Figure 7-19), or the effect can be simply additive. Creep-fatigue is assumed to be active when the
rate of fatigue damage is influenced by the rate of loading (strain rate) and hold times, and at the
same time, the exposed component is heated to temperatures within its creep regime—that is,
temperatures above 800°F (427°C) for Cr-Mo materials. As with simple fatigue, only inelastic
strains are damaging in creep-fatigue [7-21]. That is, if elevated temperatures influence the
characteristics of damage or the rate of fatigue damage, the damage mechanism is referred to as
creep-fatigue. Pressure stresses alone are typically insufficient to cause creep-fatigue.
Figure 7-19 shows the effect of prior creep damage (0.2 and 0.6 creep life-fractions) and tensile
hold time on the fatigue life of 1 Cr 1/2 Mo steel base metal and HAZs tested at 995°F (535°C)
[7-14]. For a strain range of 0.5%, the introduction of a 16-hour elevated temperature hold period
reduced the fatigue life from more than 10,000 cycles to approximately 100 cycles to failure by
the introduction of a 16-hour elevated temperature hold period.
7-34
Figure 7-19
Effect of Prior Creep Damage and Tensile Hold Time on the Fatigue Life of 1 Cr 1/2 Mo
Steel Base Metal and Heat-Affected Zones
Source: R. Viswanathan. Damage Mechanisms and Life Assessment of High-Temperature
Components [7-14].
Creep-fatigue is complicated, and it is far from understood. The complexities include the
following:
• The rate of damage accumulation depends on the waveform and frequency of cycling.
• The mechanisms by which creep and fatigue interact usually occur during different periods in
the thermal cycle.
• Different materials have different levels of susceptibility. Figure 7-20 shows that the
interaction between creep and fatigue is more severe for 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo than for other
common power plant steels.
• The role of damage can be influenced by subtle microstructural changes such as creep void
formation, diffusion of elements such as carbon, spheroidization, formation of ductility
reducing phases (for example, sigma phase formation in austenitic stainless steel) and strain-
or temperature-influenced precipitation or growth.
• The effect of prior creep damage on subsequent fatigue damage has been found to be either
beneficial or detrimental, depending on the nature of the prior creep damage [7-43]. If the
prior damage consists of softening, subsequent fatigue life can be increased. In the case of
prior creep cavitation, subsequent fatigue life is decreased [7-44].
7-35
Figure 7-20
Schematic of Creep-Fatigue Curves (Design) For Some High-Temperature Alloys
The problem of material degradation under the combination of cyclic loading and high
temperatures is currently under intensive study in many laboratories. Increasing numbers of
components must operate in this condition to achieve faster response times for starts and stops,
because of load changes, or because operating practices such as soot blowing introduce thermal
cycles. Traditionally, the potential for creep-fatigue interaction was assessed only for plants that
accumulated large numbers of starts and stops. It is increasingly being appreciated that realistic
recording of all cycles is necessary to properly account for fatigue behavior. Meaningful
calculations thus depend on accurate knowledge of local conditions, particularly temperatures and
how those temperatures change with time. Assessments based on average conditions do not
provide proper evaluation of damage levels.
Crack Initiation
Unlike pure fatigue cracks, which tend to initiate at surface defects, creep-fatigue cracks can
initiate subsurface at creep voids or coalesced voids. In addition, the cracks can initiate at the
surface, similar to a typical pure fatigue crack, and then creep-fatigue synergism leads to more
rapid propagation as a result of an easier crack path (associated with high-temperature
embrittlement phenomena or microstructural damage) or reduced crack resistance (which can be
the result of creep voids created throughout the cross section). High-temperature microstructural
changes can lead to rapid crack initiation or crack extension, or they can act to hinder crack
initiation or crack extension. Depending on the exposure range, steels can gain plasticity when
exposed to high-temperature service; increased plasticity makes crack propagation more
difficult. Conversely, high-temperature service can also lead to the precipitation of embrittling
7-36
phases, which reduce plasticity and increase the likelihood of crack initiation or easy crack
extension. The steel’s initial chemistry and microstructural morphology are critical variables that
determine a component’s resistance to creep-fatigue crack initiation or crack extension. During
failure analysis, creep-fatigue cracks are differentiated from pure creep and pure fatigue cracks
because morphological characteristics of both phenomena are observed.
As with most high-energy piping defects, the most susceptible, and therefore probable, locations
for cracking are weldments because of their microstructural inhomogeneity.
Crack Growth
Like both pure fatigue cracks and creep cracks, creep-fatigue cracks typically experience a
period of stable crack growth. Crack extension rates depend on the temperature of service, the
amplitude and period of the applied stress range, the mean stress level, the rate of strain
application, and the complex interactions of microstructural changes at high temperatures. Both
high-cycle fatigue behavior and low-cycle fatigue behavior can be experienced. Because
microstructural embrittlement caused by high-temperature exposure is a time-dependent
phenomenon, crack initiation and rapid fatigue crack propagation (classically associated with
low-cycle fatigue) are possible after years of operation. In this case, crack initiation can be
defined as component failure. The more common scenario is stable creep-fatigue crack
propagation at definable and measurable rates, which can be used to predict useful component
life.
Several methods exist to enable the use of crack measurements made with NDE to predict
remaining component life. Even if cracks are not detected, calculational methods can be used to
ensure safe operation until the next inspection cycle. A fracture mechanics approach can be used
in which the maximum crack size that cannot be detected is postulated, and calculations are
performed to predict when the postulated crack will reach a size that will induce rupture or
failure. This type of approach can be used to justify continued operation and determine
appropriate reinspection intervals to ensure safe operation. The next subsection describes several
calculation techniques in more detail.
Life Prediction Techniques
There are numerous rules and methods for estimating creep-fatigue damage, including the
following:
• A linear summation of Miner’s and Robinson’s rule
• Frequency-modified Coffin-Manson relationship [7-45]
• Strain range partitioning method [7-46]
• Ostergren damage function [7-47]
7-37
• Ductility exhaustion method [7-48]

• Bicego’s energy criterion [7-49]
• Ductility normalized inelastic strain range [7-50]
• Damage rate method [7-51]
• General damage function [7-52]
The various damage rules for creep-fatigue have been compared by many investigators, and there
is a wide divergence of opinion about which rule provides the most accurate life prediction
[7-14, 7-53]. One consistent finding is that even the most accurate rule is useful only to within a
factor of 2 or 3 on remaining life prediction. It has been suggested that further tuning of the
damage rules themselves, which represent only the first step in the life assessment process, is not
expected to be fruitful [7-54].
The most common approach to life estimation based on creep-fatigue damage, particularly in the
United States, is the linear superposition of fatigue and creep damage (see Equation 7-17).
N t
D=∑ +∑ Eq. 7-17
Nf tr
Where:
D is cumulative life.
N/Nf is the cyclic portion of the life-fraction.
N is the number of cycles at a given strain range.
Nf is the pure fatigue life at that strain range.
t/tr is the time-dependent creep fraction.
t is the time at a given stress.
tr is the time to rupture at that stress.
The stress relaxation period is divided into time blocks during which an average constant stress
occurs, and then t/tr is computed and summed for each time block. Creep damage occurring under
constant stress after stress relaxation is also included in the creep fraction. This approach is the
basis of the inelastic route described by Viswanathan in “Life Prediction of Turbine Generator
Rotors” [7-25]. An alternative approach, the elastic route, incorporates the stress relaxation
damage into the fatigue term by using fatigue curves that incorporate the effect of long hold
times.
The solid line in Figure 7-21 shows the safe design limit as a fraction of creep life and fatigue
life for 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo steel. The figure indicates the relative reductions in life for various levels
of two-shift operation relative to the original, primarily base load operation. This methodology is
highly conservative [7-55].
7-38
Figure 7-21
Interaction and Consequences of Creep and Fatigue (Based on ASME N47) for a Typical
Power Plant Steel (2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo)
Source: EPRI Report 1001507. Damage to Power Plants Due to Cycling [7-55].
As for other mechanisms, the life-fraction rule for creep-fatigue is purely phenomenological; it
has no mechanistic basis [7-54]. Its applicability depends on the development of empirical
constants that are material-dependent. The life-fraction rule also assumes that tensile and
compressive hold periods are equally damaging, which is not consistent with experience [7-54].
Other problems are that neither strain softening nor the effect of prior plasticity is incorporated.
The damage summation method, however, remains popular because of the ease of use and the
requirement for only standard S-N curves and stress-rupture curves [7-54]. Systematic laboratory
evaluations of life-fraction rules for welds are not available.
Stress relaxation properties are important for determining the damage occurring during creep-
fatigue; they are a fundamental part of the R5 methodology developed in the United Kingdom.
The various approaches used to describe stress relaxation behavior are the Feltham equation, the
Davis equation, and the relation due to Conway, et al. [7-56–7-58]. Figure 7-22 shows stress
relaxation curves for 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo at 1005°F (540°C) from an initial stress of 30.1 ksi
(207.86 MPa) and the fits of three alternative stress relaxation equations.
7-39
Figure 7-22
Stress Relaxation Curves For 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo Steel
Source: D. Charman and A. Croker, “Monitoring of Boiler Life During Cycling Operation” in EPRI
Report 1004655, Cyclic Operation of Power Plant: Technical, Operational and Cost Issues—An
International Seminar: Proceedings: "Two Shifting" Seminar [7-59].
There is still extensive debate regarding the accuracy, usefulness, and conservatism of the
existing creep-fatigue models. Regardless of these debates, it is clear that, in certain situations,
there can be a strong synergistic effect of hold times at elevated temperatures on the fatigue
response of high-temperature components including high-energy piping. Recognition of this
leads to corrective actions that can, in some cases, be different for creep-fatigue versus thermal
mechanical fatigue only.
Crack Growth Under Creep-Fatigue Loading
The previous subsection described rules for predicting the initiation of creep-fatigue cracks.
Methods for predicting creep-fatigue crack growth are somewhat analogous to methods
described for fatigue.
Saxena, Williams, and Shih described a method for creep crack growth that was the sum of three
terms, as shown in Equation 7-18 [7-60].
⎟ + C2 (K ) (t h ) + C3 (C ) (t h )
da ⎛ da ⎞ 2m 1− m * m
Δa = =⎜ Eq. 7-18
dN ⎝ dN ⎠ 0
Where:
(da/dN)o is the amount of crack growth due solely to fatigue.
C2, C3, m are experimentally derived constants.
7-40
K is the elastic stress intensity.

th is the hold time.
C* is the crack tip driving force in creep.
The first term is the pure fatigue contribution with no effect of hold time; it corresponds to crack
growth behavior at short hold times and high frequencies. The second term is the creep-fatigue
interaction term. It has a nonlinear dependence of crack growth rate on hold time and pertains to
intermediate hold times and frequencies in which the creep-fatigue interaction is present. The
third term is for pure creep occurring during long hold times and low frequencies. A plot of
da/dN versus t shows three regimes of crack growth rates that correspond to the terms in the
equation. The crack growth rate is a continuous function of frequency, even though the
mechanism varies from transgranular fatigue at one end of the spectrum to intergranular creep at
the other end of the spectrum [7-61].
A more recent model has been proposed, combining the second and third terms into a single
term, as shown in Equations 7-19 through 7-21 [7-62].
⎛ da ⎞
Δa = ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ = CΔK n + bCtm(ave )t h Eq. 7-19
⎝ dN Total ⎠
Ct(ave) is expressed by Equation 7-20.
t
1 h
t h ∫0
Ct (ave ) = Ct dt Eq. 7-20
Ct(ave) was observed to correlate well with average crack growth rate during the hold time,
expressed as shown in Equation 7-21.
⎛ da ⎞ 1 ⎛ da ⎞ 1 ⎡⎛ da ⎞ ⎛ da ⎞ ⎤
⎜ ⎟ = ⎜ ⎟ = ⎢⎜ ⎟ −⎜ ⎟ ⎥ Eq. 7-21
⎝ dt ⎠ ave t h ⎝ dN ⎠ hold t h ⎣⎝ dN ⎠ Total ⎝ dN ⎠ 0 ⎦
Figure 7–23 shows creep-fatigue crack growth data for a 1-1/4 Cr 1/2 Mo steel at various hold
times from 10 seconds to 24 hours [7-61].
7-41
Figure 7-23
Comparison of Creep-Fatigue Crack Growth Rates With (a) Ct(ave), (b) ΔK
Source: R. Viswanathan and H. Bernstein, “Some Issues in Creep Fatigue” in EPRI Report
1004655, Cyclic Operation of Power Plant: Technical, Operational and Cost Issues—An
International Seminar: Proceedings: "Two Shifting" Seminar [7-61].
7-42
The top figure shows good correlation between average creep-fatigue crack growth rates and the
Ct(ave) parameter. The da/dt versus Ct data obtained from creep crack growth experiments are also
included on the figure for comparison. The result shows that creep-fatigue and creep crack
growth rates can be expressed as a single trend if (da/dt)ave is characterized in terms of Ct(ave) or
da/dt is characterized in terms of (Ct) [7-61]. This considerably simplifies life prediction
procedures because creep-fatigue and creep crack growth data can be used interchangeably for
life prediction [7-61]. This observation is material-specific and might not be the case for other
materials or conditions [7-61].
In contrast, the bottom figure shows considerable scatter for ΔK, indicating that it is not suitable
for characterizing creep-fatigue crack growth rates during the hold periods. The dotted line in the
figure is the cyclic-dependent crack growth rate.
Comparison of Analytical Techniques for Creep, Fatigue, and Creep-Fatigue
Table 7-2 is a summary comparison of the various analytical techniques used when conducting a
life assessment for components exposed to fatigue, creep, or creep-fatigue.
Table 7-2
Comparison of Assessment Methods for Fatigue, Creep, and Creep-Fatigue
Technique or Fatigue Creep Creep-Fatigue

Measure
Nominal stress Nominal stress Nominal fatigue approaches
approaches (such as approaches (such as (such as fatigue at very low
Goodman diagram and stress-rupture) frequencies or with hold
Predicting total stress-life relation) times)
life Creep rupture of small
Local stress-strain plus specimens plus parametric Strain-life with wave shapes
damage counting analysis of crack growth dictated by service
(damage counting) conditions
Total strain-life of small Creep rupture of small Local strain associated with
specimens specimens specific wave shapes, and
Predicting then damage counting by
Local strain analysis Short-term creep tests
initiation plus damage counting extrapolated interaction rule
parametrically to long
times
Linear-elastic or elastic- Time-dependent fracture Statistical (probabilistic)
Predicting
plastic fracture mechanics analysis based on Paris
propagation
mechanics equation
Life-fraction Miner, Palmgren-Miner Robinson rule Summation of Miner and
damage rule Robinson rules
Coffin-Manson Strain traction rule Frequency-modified Coffin-
relationship Various “mixed” rules Manson relationship
Other damage Rainflow counting incorporating t and strain Strain range partitioning
rules (closed hysteresis loops) proportions Ductility exhaustion method
Various other rules
7-43

Comparison of Assessment Methods for Fatigue, Creep, and Creep-Fatigue
Technique or Fatigue Creep Creep-Fatigue

Measure
Stress versus life in Strain versus time to None generally accepted
Generic plot number of cycles (S-N rupture (hr)
curve)
Uniaxial push-pull with Creep-rupture test None generally accepted
Basic accelerated
smooth or notched Stress-rupture test
text
specimens
Key variables in Strain Strain rate and Strain, strain rate, and
accelerated tests temperature temperature
Variables Cyclic frequency Temperature (preferred) No consensus
changed for Stress
accelerated life
testing
Stress-life curves LMP Damage counting from
Extrapolation of
Strain-life curves Various other rules hysteresis loops,
short-term results
extrapolation by interaction
to long term
rule
J-integral C* (steady-state, large- Probably J-integral,
Energy integral to scale creep crack growth) although no agreement
describe plastic (because of environmental
C1 (non-steady-state crack
damage at crack effects)
growth regime)
tip
J-integral
Advanced NDE method Advanced NDE methods Advanced NDE methods
such as acoustic
Assessing Strain (dimensional) Strain (dimensional)
emission, position measurements measurements
damage before annihilation, and
crack formation Barkhausen noise Rupture testing Rupture testing
analysis Microstructural evaluations Microstructural evaluations
Traditional NDE Traditional NDE methods Traditional NDE methods
Assessing
methods plus microstructural plus microstructural
damage after
evaluation for material evaluation for material
crack formation
condition assessment condition assessment
Between strengthening Between strain hardening Among cyclic strain
effect of strain or and diffusion-controlled hardening, recovery, and
Mechanistic
precipitation hardening recovery (internal stress environmental effects
“competition”
and cyclic strain relaxation)
softening
Example
This section presents images of creep-fatigue to illustrate failure appearance and to highlight
some of the concepts described in the preceding subsections. The example shows cracking that
occurred in a section of main steam piping in Britain; the cracking was ultimately attributed to
upshock and downshock. Upshock is caused by hot steam entering a cold thick-section
7-44
component, causing the inner part of the wall to warm faster than the outer. The instantaneous
result can be compressive yielding of the inside surface. The stress-temperature profile is
illustrated in Figure 7-24.
Figure 7-24
The Initial Stress-Temperature Distribution Generated by Upshock
When the through-wall temperature gradient has dissipated, a local tensile residual stress remains
at the pipe bore, which in turn acts as a stress riser. The residual stress creeps out during service,
but is regenerated at the next start-up. Resultant cracking occurs by intermittent creep at the
operating temperature. The reverse condition, downshock, is caused by rapid steam cooling on a
hot component, causing the inner part of the wall to cool faster than the outer. This gives rise to a
transient tensile stress at the bore. Resultant cracking occurs by fatigue at a temperature close to
the cooled steam temperature. In this specific main steam piping, the base metal was CrMoV
low-alloy steel, and the weld metal was 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo. British plants tend to operate at higher
temperatures than their U.S. counterparts; in this case, the main steam temperature was 1050°F
(565°C), which is well within the creep range.
Figure 7-25 illustrates several features that are classically associated with creep-fatigue crack
initiation and propagation, making this a good example. Both images in Figure 7-25 are
stereoscopic macrographs of creep-fatigue cracking that occurred in two different longitudinal
seam weldments in the same main steam piping. The left image shows creep-fatigue cracking
from upshock; the right image shows creep-fatigue cracking from downshock.
7-45
Figure 7-25
Stereoscopic Macrographs of Creep-Fatigue Cracking Resulting from (a) Upshock and (b)
Downshock
Creep-fatigue is differentiated from pure fatigue or pure creep because the cracking has features
of both damage mechanisms. The upshock cracking shown in the left image of Figure 7-25 was
initiated at the stress concentrators on either side of the weldments and was generated by
repeated thermal shock loading cycles; both of these characteristics are classically associated
with fatigue cracking. However, the crack is Type IV, it tends to follow the intercritical region of
the HAZ, and it does not follow the stress path or propagate transgranularly; these behaviors are
classically associated with creep cracking. Because these cracks demonstrate both fatigue and
creep behavior, they are classified as creep-fatigue cracks.
In a similar but different way, the crack shown in the image on the right side of Figure 7-25 is
also classified as creep-fatigue. In both images, the cracks occur in the creep regime, which is a
necessary condition for creep-fatigue. In the right-side image, the crack initiates at a stress
concentrator toward the center of the weldment, it propagates transgranularly, and the
propagation seems to be stress dominated—these are all classically associated with fatigue
cracking. Again, both creep and fatigue factors and behaviors are present; therefore, the crack is
classified as creep-fatigue.
Flow-Accelerated Corrosion
Introduction
The phenomenon of FAC is well understood. It is a process in which the normally protective
magnetite (Fe3O4) layer on carbon steel dissolves in a stream of flowing water (single phase) or
wet steam (two phase). Under normal conditions, the oxide growth and removal processes are
approximately equal. However, abnormal conditions can reduce or eliminate the protective oxide
7-46
layer and lead to a rapid removal of the base material. In the worst cases, metal loss continues
until the pipe or tube bursts. The rate of metal loss depends on a complex interplay of many
parameters including the following:
• The feedwater chemistry, including oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), oxygen and
reducing agents, and pH
• The material composition, in particular the levels of Cr, Cu, and Mo
• The other materials in the feedwater system
• The fluid hydrodynamics, such as velocity, geometry, steam quality, temperature, and mass
transfer
The FAC process can lead to rapid rates of metal loss; wall thinning rates as high as 0.120 in./yr
(3mm/yr) have occurred. Thus, it is important to implement effective FAC prevention programs.
See the EPRI report Guidelines for Controlling Flow-Accelerated Corrosion in Fossil and
Combined Cycle Plants (1008082) for details [7-6].
The feedwater system in fossil plants can consist of all-ferrous materials or a mixture of copper-
containing feedwater tubes and ferrous piping (known as a mixed metallurgical system). The
specific configuration has important ramifications on the choice of feedwater chemistry and
hence on FAC. The two possible all-ferrous systems are those containing carbon steel piping and
tubing, and those with stainless steel tubing and carbon steel piping.
Based on the seriousness of previously reported failures the most susceptible situation for FAC is
one in which all the feedwater heater tubing (both low-pressure and high-pressure tubing) is
stainless steel and the water chemistry is all-volatile treatment (AVT) reducing.
Mixed metallurgical systems can use only AVT-reducing chemistry because the reducing
environment is necessary to protect the copper-based tubing. Wall loss has been observed in
ferrous parts of these systems, but the rate of damage is not as severe. This apparent anomaly is
explained by the fact that the copper alloys and oxides act as a catalyst for the reaction between
the reducing agent (hydrazine) and dissolved oxygen in the feedwater. However, even with these
systems, it is still advisable to operate with a rigorous monitoring system.
High-energy piping can contain single-phase (water) fluid flow or two-phase (wet steam) fluid
flow, or both, depending on the temperature and pressure conditions. FAC mechanisms differ for
the two conditions; therefore, it is important to differentiate between the two and explore them
individually. The underlying mechanisms for single-phase flow are explored first.
Operational Conditions
The critical factors influencing FAC include the following:

• ORP
• Water pH
7-47
• Temperature
• Flow velocity
• Mass transfer
• Geometry
The following sections describe these factors.
Oxidation-Reduction Potential
ORP (or redox) is by far the most important factor for single-phase FAC. In fossil and heat
recovery steam generator (HRSG) plants, the ORP is usually reported as a voltage versus that of
an Ag/AgCl (sat. KCl) reference electrode. ORP reflects the balance between various conjugate
redox systems and must not be confused with the corrosion potential. However, it does provide a
useful indicator of the corrosivity of the flowing water. ORP is sensitive to the materials of
construction and to the temperature because of the effects of temperature on the redox reactions.
ORP also changes with pH, partial pressure of oxygen in the flowing water, mass transport
properties, and flow rates; therefore, ORP cannot be compared from unit to unit.
Not only does ORP control the surface oxide that forms in feedwater or evaporator water—AVT
reducing (AVT[R]) or AVT oxygenating (AVT[O]) or oxygenating treatment (OT)—but as the
ORP becomes more reducing, the possibility for FAC increases. Changing to AVT(O) by
eliminating the reducing agent or by adding oxygen (OT) essentially reduces the possibility of
dissolution into the flowing water to low values, even in areas where FAC was severe with
AVT(R).
Water pH
Water pH is the second most important factor because it affects the solubility of the surface
Fe3O4. Generally, a higher pH reduces the amount of corrosion and FAC. FAC is directly related
to the pH of the fluid in contact with the oxide surface at the hot operating temperature, not the
cold pH as measured in the feedwater or HRSG evaporator.
Temperature
Temperature is important because it influences several fluid properties: the pH of the water or
wet steam, the solubility of the oxide layer, the rates of the oxidation and reduction reactions,
and the variables related to mass transfer (Reynolds, Schmidt, and Sherwood numbers; fluid
density and viscosity; steam quality and void fraction). Laboratory data and field experience
indicate that FAC tends to peak at temperatures in the range of 300°F–350°F (150°C–180°C).
7-48
Flow Velocity
Flow velocity must be considered because there is a strong dependence of FAC on flow velocity.
This is not simply determined by the bulk fluid velocity but also by the factors that influence the
local velocity: surface geometry, flow path geometry, and turbulence.
Mass Transfer
Mass transfer is the process of transporting material (essentially magnetite) from the surface to
the bulk of the flowing water or water-steam flow. The local mass-transfer coefficient depends in
a complex manner on fluid velocity, flow geometry, pipe or tube surface roughness, steam
quality and void fraction (for two-phase flow), and temperature. Mass transfer is usually
described by the dimensionless parameters: Reynolds, Schmidt, and Sherwood numbers.
Geometry
Geometry is the factor that decides where FAC will occur. Certain geometries affect mass
transfer as a result of changes in local velocity and turbulence. FAC does not often occur in
straight pipes or tubes; it is more often encountered in points of hydrodynamic disturbance.
These include elbows, tight bends, reducer tees, locations downstream of flow control orifices
and valves, and even fabrication discontinuities. The geometric discontinuity of these features
generally increases turbulence.
Materials Influences
Alloy composition is important because even trace amounts of chromium (and copper and
molybdenum) can significantly reduce the solubility of magnetite, and thus of FAC. Secondary
alloying elements tend to collect at surfaces because of their misfit within the matrix crystal of
the primary alloying element. Therefore, even small additions that lead to small concentrations
within the bulk can lead to higher concentrations at free surfaces; therefore, alloying additions
can have significant impact on surface oxide composition and morphology.
An alloy with a nominal chromium (Cr) content of 1% will have low or negligible FAC, and
there is evidence that amounts of chromium as low as 0.1% will significantly reduce FAC. Often
organizations use 1.25% Cr alloys for replacement of FAC-damaged areas. These alloys are also
used in HRSG evaporator circuits susceptible to FAC; however, unless the feedwater and
evaporator chemistries are changed also, then FAC can continue to occur at other locations not
changed to 1.25% Cr or higher.
7-49
Analysis Techniques
A predictive methodology uses formulas or relationships to predict the rate of wall thinning in a
specific piping component type such as an elbow, tee, or straight run. The predictions must be
based on factors such as the component geometry, material, and flow conditions. An example of
a predictive methodology is the Chexal-Horowitz correlation incorporated in the
CHECWORKS™ and CHECUP™ programs [7-63]. An effective FAC predictive methodology
should incorporate the following attributes:
• Consider the geometry, operating time, temperature, velocity, water chemistry, and material
content of each component.
• Address the range of hydrodynamic conditions (that is, diameter, fitting geometry,
temperature, quality, and velocity) expected in a power plant. It is desirable to have the
ability to calculate the flow and thermodynamic conditions in lines where only the line
geometry and the end conditions are known.
• Consider the water treatments commonly used in power plants. The water chemistry
parameters that should be addressed are the pH range, the concentration of dissolved oxygen,
the reducing agent, and the ORP.
• Cover the range of material alloy compositions found in power plants.
• Use the hydrodynamic, water chemistry, and materials information to predict the FAC wall
loss rate accurately. The model should be validated by comparing its predictions with wall
loss measured in power plants.
• Provide the wall loss rates of components.
• Provide the capability to use measured wall loss data to improve the accuracy of the plant
predictions (if a full-featured analysis program such as the CHECWORKS program is used).
The developer of the predictive methodology should periodically review the accuracy of the
predictive correlations and refine it as necessary. EPRI’s CHECUP and CHECWORKS
programs are described in more detail in Section 8.
Examples
Figure 7-26 shows an FAC failure in an economizer inlet header tube [7-64]. All high-pressure
and low-pressure heater tubing in this unit was stainless steel; the feedwater was AVT(R). The
nipple weld is shown; the damage starts approximately 1–2 in. (2.5–5 cm) from the header bore.
This is obviously an extreme example of FAC. The typical orange-peel appearance of single-
phase FAC is clearly evident on the inside tube surface.
7-50
Figure 7-26
FAC Failure and Damage on an Economizer Inlet Header Tube
Source: EPRI Report TR-101611-R1. Flow-Accelerated Corrosion in Power Plants [7-64].
Figure 7-27 shows a close-up of the superficial appearance of FAC. The feedwater flow was
from top to bottom. Where the FAC is minor or just initiating (lower right of Figure 7-27) a
series of pit-like features are evident on the surface. In some cases, these have a chevron or
horseshoe appearance, with the tip pointing in the direction of flow. This chevron appearance is
the result of small turbulent effects near and on the surface oxide causing dissolution of the oxide
because of increased mass transfer. As FAC becomes more severe, these chevrons overlap until,
where the FAC is most severe, the surface takes on the continuous scalloped or orange-peel
appearance. This scalloped appearance usually occurs in areas in which significant wall loss has
occurred. If these areas are analyzed metallurgically, there will be very little oxide remaining on
the surface. Thus, when the area is first viewed, it often has the orange color of flash rust if it is
not protected from moisture during the shutdown process. When the oxide is very thin (less than
0.00004 in. (1 μm) the surface often has a metallic appearance because of the almost transparent
film of oxide (magnetite).
Figure 7-27
Typical Surface Appearance of FAC
7-51
Figure 7-28 shows a higher-magnification view of the surface of an active FAC site that shows
the microscopic scalloped appearance.
Figure 7-28
Typical Scalloped Appearance of Single-Phase Flow-Accelerated Corrosion as Viewed
with a Scanning Electron Microscope
Other Potential Damage Mechanisms
The most relevant forms (that is, those that have the highest rate of occurrence) of degradation in
high-energy piping are creep, fatigue, creep-fatigue, and FAC. There are, however, other
degradation mechanisms that either are partially responsible for overall material damage or occur
much less frequently than the four primary mechanisms. Several other potential degradation
mechanisms are briefly described below.
Microstructural Degradation and Embrittlement
Alloy composition, thermomechanical processing, and heat treatment determine what

microstructural components are present in a metal component. The microstructure determines the
mechanical properties. The thermodynamic stability of all microstructural components is
sensitive to operating temperature. At the higher operating temperatures of fossil plant high-
energy piping, many microstructural components change, sometimes detrimentally, and therefore
affect the mechanical properties of the component. Several degradation and embrittlement
phenomena relevant to high-temperature piping are described in the following subsections.
7-52
Spheroidization
As detailed in Section 3, pearlite is an equilibrium steel phase that forms when austenite is
cooled below its equilibrium thermodynamic stability; the transformation occurs in the
temperature range of approximately 1652°F–1341°F (900°C–727°C), depending on the carbon
content of the alloy. Pearlite is formed because the α-iron phase, which is the stable low-
temperature iron phase, has lower carbon solubility than γ-austenite. As α-iron crystals grow into
the austenite phase field, carbon is rejected. When the carbon concentration of the region
adjacent to the nucleating ferrite is high enough, cementite (also known as iron carbide, Fe3C) is
formed. Because the austenite-to-ferrite transformation and related carbon rejection occurs on a
planar front, the pearlite has a lamellar microstructure, which means that there are alternating
sheets of ferrite and iron-carbide. The plate-like structure of pearlite makes it a very strong phase
because it is difficult to move dislocations across the boundaries of the plates to change the shape
of the steel crystals.
All microstructures try to minimize their total energy. Although the lamellar pearlite structure is
formed to reduce the energy of the ferrite phase because of its limited carbon solubility, the
planar structure has a high amount of interfacial area and therefore a high surface energy. A
spherical structure has the lowest possible amount of surface. At temperatures above around
800°F (427°C), the lamellar shape of pearlite is unstable, and the iron-carbide constituent is
driven to change to a spherical shape. Changing its shape to a sphere minimizes the surface
energy of the carbide. The process that leads to the new shape is known as spheroidization. Iron-
carbide spheroidization is temperature sensitive because it requires diffusion of carbon atoms in
large quantities; diffusion processes are accelerated as temperature increases. Another factor in
addition to temperature that can promote spheroidization is high stress.
Because it is easier to move dislocations through a distribution of large spherical carbides than
through a lamellar pearlite structure, spheroidization decreases steel strength. The effect of
spheroidization on the rupture strength of a typical carbon-molybdenum steel containing
0.17% C and 0.42% Mo, at 900°F and 1000 °F (480°C and 540°C), is shown in Figure 7-29 for
several initial metallurgical structures (coarse-grained and normalized or annealed). In these
tests, the structure of the steel affected the rupture strength; for example, the stress for failure of
a spheroidized structure in a given time was sometimes only half that of a normalized structure.
At 900°F (480°C), a coarse-grain normalized structure was the strongest for both short-time and
long-time tests. The spheroidized structures were weaker than the normalized or annealed
structures for short-time tests at both 900°F and 1000 °F (480°C and 540°C). As the test time
increased, the rupture values for all the structures tended to approach a common value.
7-53
Figure 7-29
Effect of Spheroidization on the Rupture Strength of Carbon-Molybdenum Steel
(0.17 C 0.88 Mn 0.20 Si 0.42 Mo)
Source: EPRI Report 1004188. Cycle Chemistry Guidelines for Fossil Plants: Phosphate
Continuum and Caustic Treatment [7-65].
Although the spheroidized structure is weaker than the normalized pearlitic microstructure, a
greater life in cyclic fatigue loading has been observed (see Figure 7-30). This is because the
platelets of cementite in pearlite are relatively brittle; therefore, they offer planes of relatively
rapid fracture within the pearlitic microstructure.
7-54
Figure 7-30
Difference in the Fatigue Behavior for Carbon Steels with a Pearlitic or a Spheroidized
Microstructure
Source: EPRI Report 1004925. Cycle Chemistry Guidelines for Fossil Plants: Oxygenated
Treatment [7-66].
Graphitization
In most steels, iron carbide is not the final equilibrium stable phase; if given sufficient time at
temperature, it will transform to graphite and ferrite. Thus, a further step in microstructural
transformation is the formation of graphite particles within the steel, a process known as
graphitization. The formation of graphite particles or nodules, if dispersed throughout the metal,
is not considered a problem; however, if they form a continuous zone, the resulting embrittled
material can fail catastrophically by brittle fracture. Graphitization is a well-known phenomenon;
in fact, notes in Table PG23.1 of ASME Section I warn of the change in iron-carbide to graphite
for plain-carbon steels and carbon-1/2 Mo steels.
Both spheroidization and graphitization are mechanisms of pearlite decomposition. The changes
to the shape of iron-carbide (spheroidization) and its decomposition into graphite (graphitization)
are competing processes (see Figure 7-31). At temperatures above approximately 1000°F
(538°C), graphite appears after spheroidization. At temperatures below approximately 1000°F
(538°C), graphitization occurs before the steel is fully spheroidized. Of the two, graphitization is
less common, but because it results in embrittled material, it is more serious when it does occur.
Because of the difference in activation energies of the two processes, it has generally been
considered that graphitization is preferred at temperatures below approximately 1020°F (550°C).
However, it has recently been observed from field experience with degraded materials that the
graphitization-to-spheroidization temperature can differ somewhat from the accepted value, it
can depend on steel composition and microstructure, and it can occur in a manner that is not
completely predictable.
7-55
Figure 7-31
Variation of Microstructural Changes Due to Spheroidization and Graphitization with Time
at Elevated Temperature
Source: EPRI Report TR-110051. Interim Cycle Chemistry Guidelines for Combined Cycle
HRSGs [7-67].
Pearlite decomposition tends to become unstable when the steel has been heated briefly above
the A1 temperature, approximately 1340°F (725°C). This temperature regime typically occurs
during the welding process, which is why graphitization damage is mostly associated with the
HAZs of welds, usually at a characteristic distance from the weld. Recent field investigations
have identified graphitization that has occurred in base metal removed from the influence of
welds [7-68]. This phenomenon, referred to as non-weld-related graphitization, seems to be
associated with locations that have been subjected to large plastic deformations. A complete
explanation of this second type of graphitization is not yet in hand. Boiler tubes are among the
power plant components in which this recently recognized form of graphitization has led to
failure.
The propensity to graphitization damage has also been considered to depend on the steelmaking
practice used. Aluminum-killed steels, once in common usage, have been shown to be more
susceptible than those deoxidized with silicon or titanium, unless the aluminum content is
restricted to <0.025%.
Use of carbon-molybdenum steel has been largely discontinued for higher-temperature

applications because of problems associated with graphitization. Chromium-containing steels are
highly resistant to graphitization, and are therefore preferred for service above 850°F (455°C).
7-56
Temper Embrittlement
Originally called Krupp krankheit (Krupp steel sickness), temper embrittlement was first
experienced during the making of large cannons in Germany during the 1800s. Today, temper
embrittlement continues to be a major cause of degradation of toughness in ferritic steels.
Numerous components become candidates for retirement if they are severely embrittled because
under these conditions the critical crack size can become very small. The problem is encountered
after exposure to the temperature range 650°F–1000°F (345°C–540°C). Slow cooling following
tempering or post weld heat treatment, or service exposure in this temperature range, can lead to
embrittlement.
The problem has been identified in a wide range of alloys including low-alloy steels, higher-
strength alloy steels, and stainless steels, and it is traditionally of greater risk with components
manufactured using older technologies. This increased susceptibility is related to two factors: 1)
the higher normalizing temperatures traditionally used in steelmaking (because higher
temperatures result in larger grain sizes) and 2) traditional steelmaking practices lead to higher
levels of trace impurities, particularly the elements phosphorus (P), tin (Sn), antimony (Sb), and
arsenic (As). Relatively small amounts of these elements, on the order of 100 ppm (0.01 wt%) or
less have been shown to cause temper embrittlement [7-2]. In the temper embrittlement
temperature range, the diffusivity of these tramp elements is high enough that they tend to
diffuse to and accumulate at grain boundaries (also known as grain boundary segregation).
Segregation of these elements to grain boundaries leads to grain boundary decohesion and a loss
of impact resistance. Figure 7-32 demonstrates the loss of Charpy impact toughness associated
with temper embrittlement. When temper embrittlement manifests, intergranular fracture rather
than cleavage occurs in the brittle lower shelf region, and the brittle-to-ductile transition takes
place at a higher temperature—that is, there is an increase in the FATT that can, under extreme
situations, be as much as 572°F (300°C).
7-57
Figure 7-32
Shift in Impact Transition Curve to Higher Temperatures as a Result of Temper
Embrittlement Produced in SAE 3140 Steel by Isothermal Holding and Furnace Cooling
Through the Critical Range
Source: EPRI Report 1000457. Guidelines for Copper in Fossil Plants [7-69].
Plain carbon steels are not considered to be susceptible to temper embrittlement if the manganese
content is kept below 0.5%. Molybdenum, in amounts of 0.5% or less, reduces susceptibility
[7-70].
Carbide distribution and size also influence the fracture toughness of a material, in addition to
the known problem of temper embrittlement. The influence of carbides on the FATT of 2-1/4 Cr
1 Mo steel has been evaluated in a series of aging experiments using an alloy that was very low
in trace elements. Step-cool heat treatment typical of the type used to evaluate temper
embrittlement revealed that relatively low-temperature exposure did not change FATT. In
contrast, significant reductions in FATT were found after aging at 1022°F, 1112°F, and 1157°F
(550°C, 600°C, and 625°C). Figure 7-33 shows the complete transition curves both for the virgin
steel (that is, at implementation into service) and for samples that were heat treated under
laboratory conditions to increase the size of the carbides. Figure 7-33 also includes data from an
ex-service sample that had experienced 88,000 hours at 1004°F (540°C). The points representing
samples of steel aged at 1112°F (600°C) for 10,000 hours simulate the change in FATT
measured after prolonged service.
7-58
Figure 7-33
Charpy Impact Transition Curves for 2-1/4 Cr Mo Steel Before Service, After Laboratory
Aging, and After Prolonged Service at 1022°F (550°C)
Corrosion
Most commonly used metals form thermodynamically stable oxides, and therefore prefer to exist
as oxides, which are brittle and undesirable for structural applications. Metals are metastable and
are thermodynamically driven to oxidize. Corrosion is essentially the electrochemical oxidation
of metallic species to their natural state.
Figure 7-34 shows that—because corrosion involves the passage of electrons—for corrosion to
proceed, there must be a complete electrical circuit which includes the following [7-70]:
• An anode (where oxidation is taking place, metal is dissolving, and electrons are being
supplied)
• A cathode (where reduction is taking place and electrons are being consumed)
• Electrical contact between the anode and cathode
• A conductive electrolyte (aqueous solution) that completes the circuit
7-59
Figure 7-34
Basic Corrosion Cell
If any one of these components is not present, the circuit is not complete, and corrosion will not
occur. At higher temperatures, there are fewer impediments to oxidation reactions, and the
primary limiting factor is the availability of oxygen to form oxide; therefore, an even layer of
oxide is typically formed on the surface of metal exposed to oxidizing conditions, and low-
temperature aqueous corrosion is not a concern.
In a high-energy piping system, corrosive processes become a concern only during lay-ups and
maintenance activities where local pools of water can exist in places that catch water.
Specifically, the concern is localized corrosion. Localized corrosion involves stationary
electrodes; that is, one area of the metal surface becomes a fixed anode and another area
becomes a fixed cathode. Under these conditions, corrosion will continue unfettered at the
anodic site. There are many forms of localized corrosion, including crevice corrosion, pitting
corrosion, and under-deposit corrosion. The nature of localized corrosion tends to produce metal
loss at ever-increasing rates as the environment within the pit or electrochemical crevice is
isolated from the bulk environment, and the localized environment becomes acidified and
enriched in damaging ions such as chlorides and sulfates.
Pitting is the most common form of localized corrosion damage in high-energy piping. It is also
one of the most destructive and insidious forms of localized corrosion because it can cause
equipment failures as a result of perforation with essentially no weight loss of the component. It
is often difficult to detect pits because of their small size and because they are often covered by
corrosion product. Like crevice corrosion, pitting most often occurs in stagnant environments.
Pitting is typically characterized by an extended initiation period followed by an autocatalytic
(snowballing) propagation. The relative probability of identifying a pit of a given depth is a
function of the area—the larger the surface area, the deeper the pits. Therefore, laboratory tests
cannot be readily used to predict the pitting depths on an actual component. Extreme value
statistics can be used to make pitting prediction extrapolations.
7-60
Because of the thickness of high-energy piping, it is unlikely that pitting can lead to through-wall
perforation. However, depending on its aspect ratio, a pit can act as a very effective stress
concentrator and therefore become an initiation location for cracking (either fatigue, corrosion
fatigue, stress corrosion cracking, or creep-fatigue).
Stress Corrosion Cracking and Corrosion Fatigue
As with creep-fatigue, the imposition of cyclic stresses in a corrosive environment (aqueous,

steam, or air) can cause greater damage than the effect of either corrosion or fatigue
independently. Two types of environmentally assisted cracking are distinguished here, stress-
corrosion cracking and corrosion fatigue.
Stress corrosion cracking is the initiation and growth of cracks in a susceptible material by
simultaneous exposure to stress and an adverse chemical environment. Stress corrosion cracks can be
either intergranular or transgranular. The level of concentration of corrodents can be high in stress
corrosion cracks. These concentrations are caused by thermodynamic and mechanical factors that
combine to collect contaminants in steam or water into relatively small regions. As a result of these
concentration levels, stress corrosion cracking can take place at stress levels significantly below the
yield strength of the material. Cracks initiated by stress corrosion can subsequently grow by other
mechanisms or a combination of mechanisms.
Corrosion fatigue is the initiation and growth of a crack brought about by the combined action of
fluctuating stresses and a corrosive environment. It results in a shorter life than would be
characteristic of either the cyclic stresses (fatigue) or the corrosive environment alone. Typically,
in corrosion fatigue processes, the tip of the crack becomes an anodic region where metal
dissolution occurs and can accelerate either crack initiation rates, crack propagation rates, or both.
After cracks have initiated, corrosion fatigue is essentially indistinguishable from stress-corrosion
cracking if the maximum applied stress-intensity factor (Kmax) is greater than KISCC. KjSCC is the stress-
intensity factor below which stress-corrosion cracks do not propagate in static loading. The stress
intensity factor is a description of the stress field at the tip of a crack, which is usually much greater
than the stress applied to the overall component. Fatigue-crack propagation rates are increased by
corrosive environments both above and below KISCC; however, below K1SCC, there is a critical frequency
(for each material) at which crack growth rate is a maximum. Corrosion fatigue is sensitive to the
rate of cycling because most corrosion processes are dependent on both macroscopic diffusion of
aqueous ionic species and diffusion of chemical species within the metallic microstructure.
Because diffusion processes take time (diffusion rates depend on temperature), fast cycling loads
can propagate a crack by standard fatigue processes without allowing any form of anodic
dissolution at the crack tip.
Erosion
Erosion is the degradation of material resulting from severe fluid flow, impingement of steam or
fluid directly on a surface, or impingement of solid particles borne by fluid or gas flow.
7-61
Solid particle erosion is a common problem; for example, in turbine blading, erosion is caused by
impingement of steam-borne oxide particles on the blades. Various explanations for the
mechanism of damage through solid particle erosion have been proposed. Regimes of damage and
rate of attack have been found to be a function of a number of parameters, including angle of
impingement, particle size, shape, hardness, velocity, and the material properties of the target. In
blading, for example, one mechanism in effect is ductile shearing resulting from impingement of
particles at small angles to the surface.
Internal erosion is usually attributed to the removal of protective surface films on a metal.
Accelerated corrosion rates can occur as the protective film is removed. The combined process is
referred to as erosion-corrosion. Higher alloy steels, nickel-based alloys, and stainless steels are
generally considered resistant to erosion-corrosion. Another example of erosion is the degradation
of blade airfoil materials caused by water droplets carried by the steam in a turbine. Erosion damage can
predispose sites for damage from other mechanisms such as fatigue. More commonly, however,
erosion continues to remove material until there is no longer sufficient area for the component to
carry the steady load to which it is subjected, at which time failure occurs by an overload mechanism.
The next subsection describes the operational conditions and mechanisms that lead to erosion in
high-energy piping.
Cavitation
Cavitation occurs in two distinct forms in power plant equipment. Although the same word is
used to describe both phenomena, they are distinctively different. For clarity, they are defined in
the following paragraphs.
Creep cavitation is the formation of microscopic holes or voids in a structure subjected to high
temperatures and stresses; it is a volumetric phenomenon that affects steels operating above
700ºF (370ºC). The creep process is a slow, time-dependent mechanism that causes permanent
deformation of the component, the very early stages of which are characterized by the formation
of internal voids in the structure as a result of migration of atoms under stress. Grain boundaries
are the preferred sites for the formation of these cavities, and replication techniques are used to
determine their existence. Creep cavitation in itself is not harmful to the structure, but is a
precursor of more severe damage.
Cavitation or cavitation pitting occurs in components such as pumps and hydraulic turbines where
water is compressed and decompressed for transport purposes. As the absolute pressure of the
water changes with respect to the vapor pressure, bubbles can form and eventually collapse as the
pressure rises and falls. When the bubbles collapse, there is a localized water hammer-type
implosion, which can produce a high local stress on the surface of the component. The continuous
action of multiple implosions can cause the surface material to crack and eventually disintegrate
locally, resulting in the formation of minute pits. These pits can eventually grow by continued
cavitation or by other means, and can eventually weaken the structure to the point at which failure
occurs. In a high-energy piping system, cavitation or cavitation pitting is a concern only in the
immediate vicinity of pumps where bubbles can be created and entrained in the fluid flow.
7-62
Material Selection Considerations
The four primary damage mechanisms that are most likely to affect high-energy piping systems
are creep, fatigue, creep-fatigue, and FAC. In each case, proper steel selection can minimize the
probability of damage. Based on the relevant damage mechanism, Table 7-3 lists the type of steel
that is most susceptible to damage and the preferred selection to resist that type of damage.
Different steels have different levels of damage resistance, depending on the damage mechanism,
and the preferred steel for resistance to one form of damage can have higher susceptibility to
another form of damage. Therefore, optimal steel selection for a given application depends on a
thorough understanding of the potential application’s operating environment.
Table 7-3
Steel Selection Guide Based on Damage Mechanism Susceptibility
Damage Necessary Conditions for Most Susceptible Preferred Steel

Mechanism Damage Steel Selection
High-temperature exposure under Brittle low-alloy Higher temperature,

sufficient stress for an extended steels higher alloy content
Creep period of time steels and newly
developed ferritic steel
grades
Cyclical stress of sufficient Pearlitic and Higher alloy steels with

amplitude to lie above the material martensitic plain high tensile strengths
Fatigue
endurance limit; presence of stress carbon steels and ductility
risers
Combination of high-temperature 21/4 Cr 1 Mo and Higher alloy content

exposure under a cyclical stress of lower alloy content steels including
Creep-fatigue sufficient amplitude and duration to steels stainless steel and
lie above the endurance limit of the Incoloy (Ni-based
material alloys)
Exposure to turbulent water flow at Carbon and low- Stainless steels or

temperatures below 662°F alloy steels steels that contain
FAC
(350°C), a reducing water chromium additions
chemistry, and a pH <9
High-temperature exposure above Plain carbon or Highly alloyed steels

900°F (490°C) for extended low-alloy structural with stable carbide
timeframe; presence of carbon and steel strengthening
Spheroidization
or carbides in the microstructural
morphology; typically a method of
pearlitic decomposition
Occurs with extended exposure Typically Chromium-containing

(greater than 1000 hours) of experienced in only steels
Graphitization pearlitic steels to temperatures 1/2-molybdenum
between 800°F and 1020°F (425°C steels that were
and 550°C) aluminum killed
7-63

Steel Selection Guide Based on Damage Mechanism Susceptibility
Damage Necessary Conditions for Most Susceptible Preferred Steel

Mechanism Damage Steel Selection
Undesirable impurities present in Thicker section Steel produced using

sufficient quantity in the chemistry components “clean steel” practices,
of the steel; exposure to constructed of which reduce the
Temper temperatures between 650°F and older plain carbon presence of tramp
embrittlement 1000°F (345°C and 540°C) for a or low-alloy elements in the
sufficient time to allow impurity structural steels chemistry
diffusion and segregation to the
grain boundaries
Presence of a low-temperature, Plain carbon or 316 stainless steel with

Corrosion stagnant and oxygenated aqueous low-alloy structural 2%–3% molybdenum
(pitting) solution for an extended period of steel has excellent pitting
time resistance
Exposure to a high-velocity Plain carbon or Higher-strength steels

Erosion aqueous solution with hard low-alloy structural and stainless steels
insoluble particle entrainment steel
Extremely turbulent water flow in Carbon and low- Higher-strength steels

which air bubbles can be alloy steels and stainless steels
Cavitation generated; typically seen only
seen downstream of some form of
impeller, as in a pump
Higher-strength steels are being selected more frequently for power plant applications,
particularly in Europe. All things being equal, higher strength means that a thinner (and much
lighter) cross section can be used for piping that holds the same pressure. Thinner cross sections
lead to easier, faster, and significantly less expensive construction and repair. However, most of
the analytical techniques used to predict remaining life are predicated on stable crack growth. If a
crack is initiated, then component life is necessarily shorter for a thinner cross section than a
thicker one. Although newly developed steels with higher strength (and ductility) often exhibit
higher resistance to crack extension, the thinner cross section is a major factor in overall
component life after damage has initiated. Construction, repair, and replacement decisions
should be made keeping this in mind.
References
7-1. State-of-the-Art Weld Repair Technology for High Temperature and Pressure Parts,
Volumes 1–7. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 1996–1998. TR-103592.
7-2. R. Viswanathan, D. Gandy, and S. Findlan, “Weld Repair of 2-1/4Cr-1Mo Service-Aged
Header Welds,” Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol. 121, pp. 345–352
(November 1999).
7-3 Boiler Tube Failure Metallurgical Guide, Volumes 1–2. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2000,
1994. TR-102433.
7-64
7-4 Boiler Tube Failure: Theory and Practice, Volumes 1–3. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 1996.
TR-105261.
7-5 Condition Assessment Guidelines for Fossil Fuel Power Plant Components. EPRI, Palo
Alto, CA: 1990. GS-6724.
7-6 Guidelines for Controlling Flow-Accelerated Corrosion in Fossil and Combined Cycle
Plants. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2005. 1008082.
7-7 Life Assessment of Boiler Pressure Parts, Volumes 1–5. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 1990.
TR-103377.
7-8 Metallurgical Guidebook for Fossil Plant Boilers. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2005. 1004509.
7-9 Remaining Life Assessment of Austenitic Stainless Steel Superheater and Reheater
Tubing. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2002. 1004517.
7-10. G. Dieter, Mechanical Metallurgy, Third Edition, McGraw-Hill, 1986.
7-11. F. C. Monkman and N. J. Grant, “An Empirical Relationship Between Rupture Life and
Minimum Creep Rate in Creep Rupture Tests,” Proceedings of the ASTM, Vol. 56, p. 593
(1956).
7-12. F. R. Larson and J. Miller, “A Time-Temperature Relationship for Rupture and Creep
Stresses,” Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 34, pp. 765–771 (1952).
7-13. R. W. Evans, J. D. Parker, and B. Wilshire, “An Extrapolation Procedure for Long-Term
Creep Strain and Creep Life Prediction,” in B. Wilshire and D. R. J. Owen (eds.), Recent
Advances in Creep and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures, Pineridge
Press, Swansea, 1982, pp. 135–184.
7-14. R. Viswanathan, Damage Mechanisms and Life Assessment of High-Temperature
Components, ASM International, Metals Park, OH, 1989.
7-15. J. D. Landes and J. A. Begley, in Mechanics of Crack Growth, ASTM STP 590,
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 1976, pp. 128–148.
7-16. A. Saxena, in Fracture Mechanics: Twelfth Conference, ASTM STP 700, American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadephia, PA, 1980, pp. 131–135.
7-17. A. Saxena, in Fracture Mechanics: Seventeenth Volume, ASTM STP 905, American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 1986, pp. 185–201.
7-18. H. Riedel, Fracture at High Temperatures, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987.
7-19. E. L. Robinson, “Effect of Temperature Variation on the Creep Strength of Steels,”
Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 60, pp. 253–259 (1938).
7-20. Y. Lieberman, “Relaxation, Tensile Strength, and Failure of E1 512 and Kh1 F-L Steels,”
Metalloved. Term. Obrabotka Metal, Vol. 4, pp. 6–13 (1962).
7-21. R. H. Richman and W. P. McNaughton, An Analysis of Accelerated Life Testing, Final
Report, Research Project 2812-4, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: May 1988. Unpublished.
7-65
7-22. R. Viswanathan and S. M. Gehl, “Effect of Aging on the Creep Rupture Behavior of
Steels,” in P. K. Liaw, et al (eds.), First International Conference on Microstructures and
Mechanical Properties of Aging Materials, TMS, Warrendale, PA, 1992, pp. 35–41.
7-23. Accelerated Stress Rupture Testing Guidelines for Remaining Creep Life Prediction.
EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 1997. TR-106171.
7-24. R. Viswanathan and J. Foulds, “Accelerated Stress Rupture Testing for Creep Life
Prediction—Its Value and Limitations,” Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology,
Vol. 120, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, pp. 105–115 (1998).
7-25. R. Viswanathan and C. H. Wells, “Life Prediction of Turbine Generator Rotors,”
Technology for the Nineties, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York,
1993.
7-26. S. S. Manson, Thermal Stress and Low Cycle Fatigue, McGraw-Hill, 1966.
7-27 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, Rules for Inservice Inspection of
Nuclear Power Plant Components. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New
York, 2004.
7-28. N. E. Dowling, W. R. Brose, and W. K. Wilson, “Notched Member Fatigue Life
Predictions by the Local Strain Approach,” in Fatigue Under Complex Loading: Analyses
and Experiments, Vol. AE-6, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, pp. 55–
84 (1977).
7-29. R. W. Landgraf, R. D. Richards, and N. R. LaPointe, “Fatigue Life Predictions for a
Notched Member Under Complex Load Histories,” in Fatigue Under Complex Loading:
Analyses and Experiments, Vol. AE-6, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale,
PA, pp. 95–106 (1977).
7-30. M. R. Mitchell, “Fundamentals of Modern Fatigue Analysis for Design,” in M. Meshii
(ed.), Fatigue and Microstructure, American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH, 1979,
pp. 385–437.
7-31. S. S. Manson, “Behavior of Materials Under Conditions of Thermal Stress,”
NACA-TN-2933, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, 1953.
7-32. S. S. Manson, and M. H. Hirschberg, “Fatigue Behavior in Strain Cycling in the Low-
and Intermediate-Cycle Range,” in J. J. Burke and V. Weiss (eds.) Fatigue—An
Interdisciplinary Approach, Proceedings of the 10th Sagamore Army Research
Conference, Syracuse University Press, Syracuse, NY, 1964, pp. 138–178.
7-33. L. F. Coffin Jr., “A Study of the Effects of Cyclic Thermal Stresses on a Ductile
Material,” Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 76, p. 923 (1954).
7-34. S. S. Manson, “Fatigue: A Complex Subject—Some Simple Approximations,”
Experimental Mechanics, Vol. 5, No. 7, pp. 193–226 (1965).
7-35. M. A. Miner, “Cumulative Damage in Fatigue,” Trans. ASME Journal of Applied
Mechanics, Series E, Vol. 67, pp. A159–164 (1945).
7-66
7-36. Life Assessment of Boiler Pressure Parts, Volume 3: Heavy Section Crack Initiation and
Propagation, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 1993. TR-103377-V3.
7-37. T. R. Gurney and S. J. Maddox, “A Re-Analysis of Fatigue Data for Welded Joints in
Steel,” Welding Research International, Vol. 3, No. 4 (1973).
7-38. EPRI Ductile Fracture Research Review Document. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:1978.
NP-701-SR. (Out of print and unavailable.)
7-39. J. T. A. Roberts, Structural Materials for Nuclear Power Systems, Plenum Press, New
York, 1981.
7-40. ASTM Standard E813-85, Standard Test Method for JIC, A Measure of Fracture
Toughness, 1985 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, American Society for Testing and
Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 1985.
7-41. I. Milne, R. A. Ainsworth, A. R. Dowling, and A. T. Stewart, “Assessment of the
Integrity of Structures Containing Defects,” Report R/H/R6-Rev. 3, CEGB, London,
1986. Also, International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, Vol. 32, p. 196 (1988).
7-42. G. G. Chell, Application of the CEGB Failure Assessment Procedure, R6, to Surface
Flaws, ASTM STP 1074-1990, American Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, PA, 1990.
7-43. R. Viswanathan, “Life Management of High-Temperature Piping and Tubing in Fossil
Power Plants,” Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol. 122, pp. 305–316 (August
2000).
7-44. R. Viswanathan and H. Bernstein, “Some Issues in Creep-Fatigue Life Prediction in
Fossil Power Plants,” in W. Barnford (ed.), Service Experience and Design in Pressure
Vessels and Piping, PVP-Vol. 335, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, pp. 99–
109 (1996).
7-45. L. F. Coffin, “Prediction Parameters and Their Application to High Temperature Low
Cycle Fatigue,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Fracture,
Brighton, London, Chapman-Hall, 1969, pp. 643–654.
7-46. S. S. Manson, in Fatigue at Elevated Temperatures, ASTM STP 520, American Society
for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 1973, pp. 744–782.
7-47. W. J. Ostergren, “A Damage Function and Associated Failure Equations for Predicting
Hold Time and Frequency Effects in Elevated Temperature Low Cycle Fatigue,” Journal
of Testing and Evauation, Vol. 4, No. 5, American Society for Testing and Materials,
pp 327–339 (1976).
7-48. R. H. Priest, D. J. Beauchamp, and E. G. Ellison, “Damage During Creep-Fatigue,” in
Advances in Life Prediction Models, ASME Conference, Albany, NY, 1983, pp. 115–
122.
7-49. V. Bicego, C. Fossati, and S. Rafazzoni, “An Energy Based Criterion for Low Cycle
Fatigue Damage Evaluations,” in Y. Yamada, R. L. Roche, and F. L. Cho (eds.), Material
7-67
Behavior At Elevated Temperatures and Component Analysis, Book No. H00217

PVP Vol. 60, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, NY, 1982.
7-50. K. Yamaguchi, S. Nishijima, and K. Kanazawa, “Prediction and Evaluation of Long
Term Creep Life, in International Conference on Creep, Tokyo, April 1986, pp. 47–52.
7-51. S. Majumdar and P. S. Maiya, “A Damage Equation for Creep-Fatigue Interactions” in
ASME-MPC Symposium on Creep-Fatigue Interaction, MPC-3, Metal Properties
Council, 1976, p. 323.
7-52. G. A. Cincotta, et al., Gas Turbine Life Management System, General Electric Company,
EPRI Project RP-2421-2, February 1988.
7-53. D. A. Miller, R. H. Priest, E. G. Ellison, “Review of Material Response and Life
Prediction Techniques Under Fatigue-Creep Loading Conditions,” High Temperature
Material Processes., Vol. 6, No. 3 and 4, pp. 115–194 (1984).
7-54. R. Viswanathan, “Creep-Fatigue Life Prediction of Fossil Plant Components,” in
Y. S. Garud (ed.), Creep, Fatigue, Flaw Evaluation and Leak-Before-Break Assessment,
PVP Vol. 266, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, pp. 33–50 (1993).
7-55. Damage to Power Plants Due to Cycling, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2001. 1001507.
7-56. P. Feltham, “Stress Relaxation in Copper & Alpha-Brasses at Low Temperatures,”
Journal of the Institute of Metals, Vol.89, pp. 210–214.
7-57. E. A. Davis, “Creep and Relaxation of Oxygen-Free Copper,” Journal of Applied
Mechanics, Vol. 65, p. A-101.
7-58. J. B. Conway, R. H. Stentz, and J. T. Berling, “Fatigue, Tensile and Relaxation Behavior
of Stainless Steels,” USAEC, TID-26135, pp. 228–262.
7-59. D. Charman and A. Croker, “Monitoring of Boiler Life During Cycling Operation,” in
I. A. Shibli, F. Starr, R. Viswanathan, and D. Gray (eds.), International Seminar on
Cyclic Operation of Power Plant—Technical, Operational and Cost Issues, pp. 4–3-1
through 4–3-11. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2001. 1004655.
7-60. A. Saxena, R. S. Williams, and T. T. Shih, “A Model for Representing and Predicting the
Influence of Hold Times on Fatigue Crack Growth Behavior at Elevated Temperatures,”
in Fracture Mechanics: Thirteenth Conference, ASTM STP 743, American Society for
Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 1981, pp. 86–99.
7-61. R. Viswanathan and H. Bernstein, “Some Issues in Creep-Fatigue,” in I. A. Shibli,
F. Starr, R. Viswanathan, and D. Gray (eds.), An International Seminar on Cyclic
Operation of Power Plant—Technical, Operational and Cost Issues. pp. S2–1-1
through S2–1-23. EPRI, Palo Alto: CA, 2001. 1004655.
7-62. K. B. Yoon, A. Saxena, and P. K. Liaw, “Characterization of Creep-Fatigue Crack
Growth Behavior under Trapezoidal Waveshape Using Ct Parameter,” International
Journal of Fracture, Vol. 59, pp. 95–102 (1993).
7-68
TR-103198-P5R1.
7-64. Flow-Accelerated Corrosion in Power Plants. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 1998.
TR-106611-R1.
7-65. Cycle Chemistry Guidelines for Fossil Plants: Phosphate Continuum and Caustic
Treatment. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2004. 1004188.
7-66. Cycle Chemistry Guidelines for Fossil Plants: Oxygenated Treatment. EPRI, Palo Alto,
CA: 2005. 1004925.
7-67. Interim Cycle Chemistry Guidelines for Combined Cycle HRSGs. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:
1998. TR-110051.
7-68. G. Krauss, Steels: Heat Treatment and Processing Principles, 4th Printing, ASM
International, 1995.
7-69. Guidelines for Copper in Fossil Plants, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2000. 1000457.
7-70. J. J. Moore, Chemical Metallurgy, Second Edition, Butterworths, 1990, p. 333.
7-69
8
PROGRAMMATIC APPROACHES TO LIFE
MANAGEMENT OF PIPING SYSTEMS
Introduction
Condition assessment of critical components is essential to ensure safe and reliable operation of
fossil-fueled power plants. In the most extreme case, accurate condition assessment would
necessitate inspection of all the components in a system. However, in view of the large number of
components in a commercial generating plant, it is not practical or even possible to perform
inspection at all possible degradation locations. Such a task would be completely impractical
because of the excessive costs and time that would be involved.
Traditionally, therefore, inspections have been performed in stages with a full system evaluation
requiring years to complete, or assessments have been carried out on a “random” sample of
locations. However, both of these approaches have serious drawbacks. Although the systematic,
staged inspection eventually covers the whole system, the locations at greatest risk are not
necessarily inspected first. Furthermore, because the information regarding condition is obtained in
increments, judgment about the most appropriate maintenance action cannot consider an overall
evaluation. In the worst-case scenario, costly repairs are carried out on different sections of the
piping system during each maintenance period. Even when all the repairs are complete, the system
is not new because the integrity of repair welds is a significant variable, yet the total cost of the
multiple repair programs is usually far greater than the cost of complete replacement. Conversely, the
approach based on selective examination is usually not completely random because criteria such as
ease of access are frequently taken into account when selecting inspection locations. Unfortunately,
locations that are readily accessible are not always those of highest risk of failure.
The most effective approach is therefore to adopt a methodology that permits a relatively simple
yet conservative assessment of the plant as a whole. This should allow a realistic knowledge of all
major sections of a facility. Initially, therefore, the general condition of all aspects should be
established so that maintenance work can be focused in plant areas most in need, without
compromising safety.
Moreover, in a balanced approach, the level of analysis performed will vary for different plant
components and the selection of specific methods should be based on the consequences of local
component failure. Thus, recent methodologies for maintenance planning have advocated that
components are identified as either critical or influence. A critical component is defined as one in
8-1
Programmatic Approaches to Life Management of Piping Systems
which failure would have significant safety or financial consequences. Typically, such
components are high-energy pressure vessels and piping or turbine generator rotors. In these cases,
initial failure would be life threatening, the cost of replacement components is high, and the long
lead times for replacement would, in many situations, result in high costs for the associated
losses in output.
Conversely, an influence component is defined as one in which failure would not normally be life
threatening and a single failure does not have a major impact on cost. An example of an influence
component would be tubing in a boiler or heat exchanger. Here, it is unlikely that a single failure
would lead to personal injury or major repair costs. However, if failures occur over a period of time
with an increasing rate, eventually the rate of failure will be unacceptably high and remedial action
must be taken. In general, the level of failures considered unacceptable depend on the economics of
a particular plant. Thus, for a particularly high efficiency unit, more than one or two failures per
year can be considered excessive, whereas for a low merit plant, when there is sufficient spare
capacity, relatively high rates of failure can be tolerated.
In general, this approach provides for specific actions based on the risk of failure, where risk can be
defined as the product of failure probability, P(F), and failure severity, S, as shown in Equation 8-1.
Risk = P(F) x S Eq. 8-1
The simplest approach to assess risk is to extrapolate from an experience base. This approach is
frequently adopted for tubing failures because there is usually a statistically significant sample
size available and the risk of underestimating performance and having one or two failures is
usually not catastrophic. However, this approach cannot usually be adopted for critical
components. First, there are much lower populations for analysis; and second, without
understanding the details of the relevant damage processes, failure can occur without warning.
Thus, assessment programs for critical components must be capable of answering key questions
such as the following:
• Where to look
• What to look for
• Which techniques to use
• At what frequency to carry out evaluations
If these questions can be answered, a realistic condition assessment program will be achieved.
Furthermore, if the costs of specific technical programs can be balanced with the costs of
replacement and the costs of failure, then run, repair, or replacement decisions will be optimized
from both economic and technical standpoints.
8-2
Three-Level, Phased Approach to Assessment
A logical method of condition assessment therefore uses a phased approach, and a three-level,
phased approach to life assessment is commonly followed worldwide. Level I generally involves
calculations based on operating history and mainly screens components for the possibility of
degradation. Level II involves NDE, the results of which can be funneled back into Level I
calculations to provide more accurate assessments of remaining life. Level III typically involves
destructive testing (sample testing) and detailed analysis, often with complex finite element
modeling.
At each level, the estimated remaining life is compared to the desired remaining life. If the
estimated life is too short, the next phase of the procedure is conducted, performing progressively
more rigorous evaluation procedures only if the desired remaining life is not shown from the
lower level. As the assessment level increases, more accurate data are required and a more
accurate estimate of remaining life can be calculated. However, the more rigorous the
assessment, the greater the cost and time required. Using a phased approach means that inspection
resources are targeted so that the right form of inspection is carried out at high-risk locations at
the correct time. This scheme, developed originally for high-temperature header life assessments,
is based on practice from the former CEGB and derivatives of that practice [8-1, 8-2]. Figure 8-1
sketches out the progressively more intense assessment approaches [8-3].
Figure 8-1
Data Requirements in Assessment Stages for the Three-Level Approach
Source: EPRI Report CS-4778. Generic Guidelines for the Life Extension of Fossil Fuel Power
Plants [8-3].
8-3
The application of the phased approach provides those responsible for plant maintenance with a
logical progression to decision making. With this approach, assessments are based on established
engineering guidelines, with appropriate actions specified at each stage. Thus, the final decision
must be either to continue operation for a given time under specified operating conditions or to
repair or replace the component. Moreover, this methodology is amenable to the application of
computer codes. Successful systems are already available that perform the following:
• Store all relevant information regarding the plant in a logical manner
• Allow sorting and retrieval of data so that required analyses can be performed accurately and
efficiently
• Ensure that procedures are such that documentation, analyses, and inspections are fully
verified by appropriate quality assurance procedures
• Provide consistency and continuity for all activities undertaken
In this way, the multiplicity of potential maintenance decisions facing a plant operator can be
reduced with information supplied rapidly in an appropriate format. The following subsections
detail the three levels of phased approach.
Level I
The initial, or Level I, evaluation examines design or overall service parameters to ascertain whether,
on the basis of the most conservative considerations, the component has a remanent life greater than the
anticipated service life. It is possible to carry out this assessment without reference to plant-
specific measurements provided that operating parameters do not exceed design. However, it is normal
even at this stage to consider the results of component-specific instrumentation. Care must be
exercised with this approach because instrumentation, which monitors average conditions, might
not identify regions where extremes are present. Nevertheless, by considering relevant industry
experience, it is usually possible to ensure that the data used are conservative. When
implementing the methodology, if doubt exists regarding the conservatism of the data available,
the more complex evaluations of Level II should be implemented.
Each level of analysis can be conducted considering a specific degradation mechanism. Figure
8-2 shows the generic steps in a Level I assessment for creep damage [8-4]. The Level I analysis
is a preliminary or screening assessment of component condition based on maintenance history,
relevant experience, a piping survey, and a preliminary life-fraction. The information gathered in
Level I will be required for more detailed analyses of later levels; therefore, investigators should
start with Level I, even if damage has been found in the component. However, in that case, it will
almost always be necessary to determine the extent of damage, which is a Level II activity, and
to determine its significance, which in many cases will invoke at least some analytical techniques
that are part of Level III.
8-4
Figure 8-2
Generic Steps in a Level 1 Assessment for Creep
Adapted from EPRI Report GS-6724. Condition Assessment Guidelines for Fossil Fuel Power
Plant Components [8-4].
The information to be reviewed during a Level I assessment includes the following:

• Applicable drawings as well as fabrication and material specifications
• Support details for pipes
• Operating hours and cycles
• Unit trips and excursions
• Maintenance history
• Inspection history
8-5
• History of failures, details of failure analyses performed, maintenance actions taken

• Design parameters, including temperatures and pressures
• Steam temperature records
For specific damage mechanisms, there will be an emphasis on different data. For example,
creep evaluation will involve design pressure, design temperature, and operating hours. Creep-
fatigue of attachment welds will also include an analysis of unit cycling and survey of header
attachments and supports. A hot walkdown survey for attachments to, and in the vicinity of, the
subject pipe should be conducted to assess the magnitude of system loads that would influence
the accumulation of damage at the attachment welds. The purpose is to benchmark the piping
systems and attachments in the hot conditions so that the systems can be checked from hot to
cold to determine actual deflections. These deflections can then be checked against those
predicted by stress analysis.
Supports and attachments should be reviewed for the following:

• Compatibility between analyzed (design) and as-built (present) configurations
• Unacceptable vibrations
• Interference problems
• Signs of physical damage
• Operability of drains
Supports should be surveyed for the following:

• Operation within the travel range
• Actual and design support location consistency
• Proper installation and sizing of supports according to the design
• Support movements in agreement with design and analysis displacement
• Signs of transient and impact loads on pins and other devices
• Operability of any special supports, guides, or restraints
• Proper clearances and gaps
The survey is combined with a review of the piping stress analysis, if available, to determine
whether the attachment welds are high stress areas. In the absence of a piping analysis, hanger
and pipe support information will qualitatively indicate whether the attachment junctions are
potentially subject to significant damage from system loads.
8-6
For high-temperature components, a preliminary life-fraction analysis should be performed. It

will typically use minimum materials properties, design stresses, design or actual service
temperatures, and a life-fraction rule. Typical analyses might include the following:
• Piping. Creep rupture analysis using operating pressure, temperature, and minimum base
metal properties.
• Longitudinal seam welds. Creep rupture analysis. Properties to be used are a fraction of
those for the base metal. The appropriate values to be used can be obtained from the
methodology outlined in the EPRI report Guidelines for the Evaluation of Seam-Welded High
Energy Piping (TR-104631) [8-5].
• Attachment welds (base and weld metal). Creep and fatigue analysis. See EPRI report TR-
104631 for the value of material properties to use for considering the weld and HAZ [8-5].
• Other welds. Creep rupture evaluation can be performed. Stress analysis will generally be
required. However, a preliminary creep rupture evaluation can be performed using code
allowable stresses and operating temperature with properties as defined in EPRI report TR-
104631 [8-5].
Historically, Level 1 analysis provided only gross estimates of damage as a result of inaccuracies
in the assumed history of stresses and temperatures, material properties, and the life-fraction rule.
As a result, such calculations have been most useful for determining key locations to be
evaluated more rigorously, for scheduling maintenance outages, and screening for when
inspections for damage should occur.
The complexity and variability of damage precludes a definitive quantitative guideline for
triggering a Level II assessment from Level I results. Some Level II triggers are the following:
• The life-fraction consumed, as calculated by the analyses described above, exceeds 50%.
• The visual inspection performed during the hot walkdown indicates piping or piping support
damaged.
• There is other evidence of known damage to the piping.
• There have been repairs (except the most trivial) to the piping, seam welds, girth welds, or
attachment welds in the past (other than during initial installation).
Level II
The basic steps in a generic Level II assessment are shown in Figure 8-3 [8-4]. Level II
assessments require that specific plant examinations be performed. It is the role of the initial
evaluation to screen and identify the components that are at highest risk of failure and to select
specific locations to be examined. The particular methods involved in these examinations will
depend on the component and the type of operation. In general, the inspections should provide
information regarding condition through NDE. Level II can also involve the use of
thermocouples to refine operating temperature estimates, although some care in this regard is
required when extrapolating the current temperature backward over significant periods of
8-7
operation. Component-specific details, together with more refined estimates of operating stress and
temperature, are used to give a more precise estimate of performance than was obtained in the
Level I assessment. If the period of predicted remanent life is below that desired, or specific
indications of component damage are identified, then more detailed evaluations are required.
Figure 8-3
Generic Steps in a Level II Assessment
Understanding the potential NDE evaluation techniques is critical to a Level II analysis.

Section 9 provides detailed information about various NDE techniques. A brief summary of their
application during a Level II analysis is provided here.
A visual inspection is primarily aimed at identifying regions showing gross dimensional

distortion (for example, swelling) from design conditions as well as macroscopically visible
cracking. It is also conducted to obtain estimates of the condition and functional capability of
supports and other sources of potential extra stress. The visual examination can provide an
8-8
indication of high-temperature locations for more detailed inspection (or sampling as a part of a
Level III assessment). Locating the longitudinal seam welds, if any, should also be part of the
visual inspection.
All major welds should be inspected by magnetic particle testing (MT) and dye penetrant testing
(PT). If flaws or cracks can be present at locations away from the accessible surface, then angel
beam UT or another volumetric method should be applied. Macrocracking associated with the
inspected welds will thus be identified. All indications should be mapped and sized, if possible.
Specialized techniques such as time-of-flight diffraction or linear phased array UT might be
required.
High-priority locations for further inspection will be identified by the results of the Level I
assessment and the Level II visual, MT, PT, and UT examinations. Further inspection will
include replication, chemical analysis, and hardness measurements. Replication of weldments
can provide an indication of the severity of creep cavitation damage in the weld metal and HAZs.
Nominal compositions of piping base metal and surface weld beads can be verified with an alloy
analyzer in situ, or alternatively, material can be removed using a clean tungsten carbide burr or
other means. These samples can then be analyzed using relevant laboratory test methods.
In general, a preliminary qualitative estimate of remaining life of the weldments can be made
from the results of the replication, based on the appearance of the creep cavities. (See Section 10
for more information.) For the base metal at stress concentrations, simple estimates of remaining
life based on the level of damage observed are more difficult.
Level III
Figure 8-5 lists the generic steps in a Level III assessment [8-4]. This level is triggered by the
need to ascertain remaining life more precisely on the basis of Level II results. The Level III
assessment should be based on detailed knowledge of operating conditions and specific materials
properties. Thus, sophisticated instrumentation and analysis procedures are required to document
local operating conditions. The effort at this level is relatively involved and is aimed at
determining actual material properties and loads, along with more detailed analytical techniques
for a more precise life assessment. However, experience suggests that even with precise
knowledge of stress and temperature parameters, the scatter in standard material properties will
introduce unacceptable uncertainties in life estimates. Probabilistic analysis methods have been
introduced to reduce the overall conservatism of performance assessment based on lower bound
properties. However, these methods are still limited because many of the steels used in steam
plants are susceptible to changes in material properties with time. Thus, even if distributions of
materials data are available for relevant alloys before service, changes in properties as a result of
operation can be established only by postexposure testing.
The type of testing required for a Level III assessment will vary with component type and
degradation susceptibility. Thus, for example, if the component is at risk of creep failure, tests are
performed to evaluate creep strength and ductility. Conversely, defect assessments are usually based
on material toughness so that testing must establish fracture toughness. In general, condition
8-9
assessments will frequently be limited by the ability to characterize accurately the nature and
extent of defects present and the uncertainty regarding component properties. These limitations
will be significantly reduced if techniques can be applied to remove material samples for
laboratory testing.
A Level III assessment will typically consist of the following elements:

• More detailed NDE to fully characterize defect dimensions.
• More detailed microstructural evaluation by more careful examination of the results of
replication.
• A refined analysis of all loads and stress analysis by finite element or other methods to
identify and quantify the highly stressed regions.
• A refined analysis of creep, creep-fatigue, fatigue, or corrosion-fatigue (depending on the
situation) expected life.
• Sampling of piping and weld material for testing to establish the actual properties of the
material. This is particularly applicable to creep rupture or creep-fatigue properties in high-
temperature components. See Section 10 for more information on accelerated testing and the
use of miniature specimens.
• More detailed or specific on-line monitoring for specific variables of interest. It can also
require more complete acquisition of information to characterize the extent of damage,
depending on what was conducted during Level II. For example, if an inspection of the main
steam seam welds indicated some significant damage, an extension of the inspection to
nearby regions might be indicated.
8-10
Figure 8-4
Generic Steps in a Level III Assessment
8-11
The detailed Level III assessment can be quite expensive and might require cost justification, for
example, when the alternative is replacement or significant repair. In most cases, if significant
damage is found and repair or replacement is not chosen, a Level III assessment will be required
to ensure that the component can be operated in a safe manner, even for a short period of time.
Advantages and Disadvantages of the Phased Approach to Assessment

Several key points can summarize the role of component condition assessment in continued plant
operations [8-4].
• In general, a multilevel approach offers a logical and resource-effective way to evaluate most
components. If thorough documentation of historical practice and current operations is in
hand, some components and damage types can be evaluated with only a Level I assessment.
• Component assessment is normally described in terms of multiple levels of evaluation. Clearly
some types of components and damage are more amenable to the general methodology than
others. Modification of the methods to suit the demands of or resources available to a
particular utility application might be required.
• The multilevel approach can be modified when common sense dictates that some activities that are
generally applied later in the sequence should be moved to earlier roles. Certain critical
components are more likely to demand such foresight for reasons of safety, time constraints,
access, cost constraints, or overall impact on scheduling. For example, it is often expeditious to
perform analyses to identify critical flaw sizes or locations (such analysis methods are generally
considered a Level III activity) before embarking on certain inspection programs. This might
be necessary when the expected time to evaluate any indications is expected to take longer than is
allowed by the constraints of the outage. Hence, knowledge of what level of damage will necessitate
a replace or repair option might be necessary for cost effectiveness, even before the inspection
outage is started.
• Phased levels of assessment interface with ongoing plant operation. Planned maintenance
outages can be aligned with required inspection and sampling projects for detailed component
assessment.
• At each level of analysis, the calculated remaining life is compared to the desired component
life. The choice of an acceptable remaining life (or alternatively a safety factor on the
calculation) will depend on a number of factors specific to each utility. These can typically include
the unit plan, ease of repair or replacement in case of failure, lead time on component
procurement, and safety implications of component failure.
• The final event in the assessment sequence is the decision about whether to run the
component as is, to refurbish by repair or upgrade, or to replace. After that decision is made,
it is appropriate to attach a reevaluation period to the result. For any of the options, a periodic
inspection and reevaluation will be appropriate.
8-12
• Before replacing a damaged component, it is crucial to determine the cause of the damage
and to estimate the probable damage accumulation rate. Damage found in a component after
20 years should not simply be assumed to have developed over the entire service life. This
could lead to a replacement of like with like and the assumption that it should provide a
further 20 years of service. However, close examination of the damage and unit history can
indicate that in fact damage has developed in the recent past and a policy of straightforward
replacement offers significantly less service. (This is a typical problem with change of service
from base load to cycling.). Damage can be found to have been caused by operating practice that
has not been properly controlled. If the root cause is identified, often operation can be modified
to improve service performance without major cost or inconvenience.
• The completion of assessment of a particular component is also an excellent time to
determine the nature of inspection, monitoring, and future record keeping that would make
the reevaluation easier the next time. It might also be a time to examine operating procedures
and routine aspects of maintenance to fine-tune them for longer life as well as for increased
performance.
Application of the progressive damage assessment scheme described depends on the ability to assess
the degree of damage in the component, the rate of accumulation of additional damage, and the
degree of damage necessary to cause failure. Most of the required methods and techniques to make
these determinations are well established; however, some continue to see improvements with time,
as evidenced by the large and growing literature of life assessment techniques.
In addition, each method (and Level) has inherent problems. For example, accurate knowledge of
local component stress values is often complex. For Level I, the use of design stresses can in
certain cases allow a realistic bounding analysis to be performed. More often, for all but the
simplest cases, complications such as residual stresses, system loads, geometric discontinuities,
and so on, will mandate more detailed methods typical of Level III analysis. Even in Level III,
uncertainties will be present in the methods used.
The same observation pertains to other aspects of the assessment methods. First, the amount of
damage (or size of flaw depending on the type of damage) can be hard to measure. More often,
issues such as whether the worst damage was detected, where to look, and what was overlooked
are inherent in trying to answer the question about the amount of damage in the component.
Second, the actual material properties can be difficult to evaluate, particularly without destroying
the components. As with inspection, the issue of identifying locally inferior material and the
choices of sampling schemes make the application of the assessment methods more difficult.
Finally, in some cases there is insufficient historical information, so that any form of Level I
methods is immediately rejected.
These drawbacks are, for the most part, inherent in any method of condition assessment; they are
not specific to a multilevel approach. Further, they do not detract from the efficacy of the process
for components that are appropriate. The point is made to emphasize the requirement for good
judgment along with an understanding of the advantages and drawbacks of the various
assessment methods.
8-13
Currently Available Prediction Tools
Introduction
A number of currently available software packages can be used to perform the different level
analyses for high-energy piping life assessments. This subsection introduces both the available
American programs and those used in Europe, evaluates their effectiveness, and describes some
operational details.
BLESS (Boiler Life Evaluation and Simulation System)
When analyzing for creep and creep-fatigue, developing a complete analytical technique from
first principles and applying it to the field situation can be an extremely daunting task. This
subsection describes BLESS, an analytical tool that has been developed to incorporate the key
aspects of high-temperature damage analysis. BLESS is available to utilities from EPRI. The
description of its capabilities also highlights some of the key considerations for those who build
their own analytical tools.
The primary focus of the EPRI BLESS code is an estimation of the initiation and propagation of
ligament cracking in high-temperature headers [8-6–8-8]. But a secondary (and relevant)
application is the initiation and propagation of girth and longitudinal seam weld cracking in
headers and straight runs of steam piping. The primary use for the BLESS code is to establish
component inspection schedules.
The code facilitates analysis of high-temperature component life by eliminating the requirement
for finite element stress analysis and thermal analysis. The BLESS code can be used to make
either deterministic or probabilistic estimates of remaining life. BLESS can also be used to
evaluate alternative, new high-temperature component designs. The program calculates the time
to initiation and time to failure for a specific design.
For component seam welds, the one-dimensional model is adequate without empirical
modifications. For component girth welds, although stresses from attached components and
support loads are important, they are not calculated. The restraint of thermal expansion stresses
by piping systems dominates the stress state at girth welds; these are not included in BLESS
calculations [8-9]. Restraint of thermal expansion stresses as well as deadweight stresses and
bending moments must be calculated outside of the BLESS code and then used to define
equivalent load-controlled membrane stress inputs to BLESS.
Inputs
Operating conditions and header geometry are input to the program.
8-14
Material Properties
All material properties required for analysis are contained in the program. BLESS uses nonlinear
creep-fatigue crack growth rates. Material properties are best-estimate values, and therefore
produce a best estimate for lifetime. Materials included in the code include P11, P22, and P91. The
constitutive relationships consider primary and secondary creep and use functional forms provided
by Riedel in Fracture at High Temperatures, which are briefly described in “BLESS: Boiler Life
Evaluation and Simulation System, A Computer Code for Reliability Analysis of Headers and
Piping” [8-10, 8-8]). Additional information can be found in the following documents:
• Properties for P11 are reviewed in “BLESS: Boiler Life Evaluation and Simulation System,
A Computer Code for Reliability Analysis of Headers and Piping” [8-8].
• Properties for P22 are summarized in the EPRI report Life Assessment of Boiler Pressure
Parts, Volume 4: BLESS Code User’s Manual and Life Assessment Guidelines (TR-103377-
V4) [8-7].
• The creep rupture properties are based on the ASTM compilation, “Supplemental Report on
the Elevated-Temperature Properties of Chromium-Molybdenum Steels (An Evaluation of 2-
1/4 Cr 1 Mo Steel)” [8-11].
• The creep and fatigue crack growth properties are described in Chapter 5, “Probabilistic
Fracture Mechanics,” of the Probabilistic Structural Mechanics Handbook [8-12].
The BLESS program incorporates the effect of aging on material properties. For components
already in service, the program permits adjusting the key inputs—including current crack sizes,
material ultimate tensile strength and hardness, and oxide crack depth—to perform a sensitivity
analysis of assumptions and to attempt to match the estimated flaw size or growth with what has
been actually observed.
Calculational Methods
The program performs both thermal and pressure stress analysis of a high-temperature
component. The BLESS code allows for life assessment of components without the use of finite
element thermal and stress analysis. The simplification is made possible by using a one-
dimensional model (through-wall variation only) based on a simple thick-walled cylinder model
to calculate transient temperatures and stresses. The simplified model provides reasonable values
for stress distributions in areas removed from geometric discontinuities, such as boreholes. The
model is modified to account for specific geometries with closed-form empirical equations based
on detailed three-dimensional linear finite element analyses. Details about how this was done can
be found in the EPRI report Life Assessment of Boiler Pressure Parts, Volume 1: Executive
Summary (TR-103377-V1) [8-13].
The BLESS code can be used either probabilistically or deterministically. The probabilistic
functions of the code use a Monte Carlo simulation consisting of repetitive deterministic lifetime
calculations [8-13]. The repetitive calculations use varying input values randomly sampled from
their distribution. The results of the simulations are combined into a histogram of results that is
the probability of failure as a function of time.
8-15
BLESS incorporates two alternative approaches for predicting crack initiation [8-4]. The first
involves inelastic linear damage summation. It includes a damage fraction rule that consists of
two parts—a rate-dependent creep portion based on Robinson’s rule and a rate-independent
fatigue part based on Miner’s rule. The second approach involves repeated cracking of oxide
scale and oxide notching. After a crack is initiated, growth from creep and fatigue is calculated
using nonlinear fracture mechanics using the Ct(ave) parameter. Elastic deformation with primary
creep and secondary creep are considered. The creep-fatigue interaction uses Robinson’s rule for
creep and Miner’s rule for fatigue.
After a crack has initiated, growth can occur by fatigue, by creep, or by continued oxide
notching. BLESS allows for calculation of propagation by all of these mechanisms. When both
fatigue and creep occur together, the resulting creep-fatigue is covered by BLESS. If either of the
two constituent modes is not present, the value calculated for the contribution from that
mechanism is negligible. The crack driving force for fatigue is considered to be the cyclic stress
intensity factor (ΔK) and for creep, the Ct parameter. These are evaluated from the analogous
fully plastic J-integral solution. After (ΔK) and Ct(ave) are calculated, crack growth can be
calculated from Equations 8-2 and 8-3, where nfat, Cl, and q are constants determined from curve
fit data.
da ⎛ da ⎞ ⎛ da ⎞
=⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ Eq. 8-2
dN ⎝ dN ⎠ cycle ⎝ dN ⎠ time
= C fat (ΔK ) fat + Cl (Ct (ave ) ) th

da n q
Eq. 8-3
dN
Cracks can grow in an axial or circumferential direction, and from surface penetration to surface
penetration, or from component ID to OD.
OmegaPipe Software
Overview
All of the information in this subsection was extracted and modified from the following two
documents:
• T. L. Anderson, OmegaPipe Version 2.6 User’s Manual, The Materials Properties Council,
Inc., 2002 [8-14].
• T. L. Anderson, Life Assessment of Long Seam Piping, as Implemented in the OmegaPipe
Software, Structural Reliability Technology, 2001 [8-15].
8-16
The OmegaPipe software was developed by Dr. Ted L. Anderson of Structural Reliability
Technology, Inc., for the High-Energy Piping Project of the Materials Properties Council. (The
Materials Properties Council is a nonprofit corporation founded in 1966 by the American Society
of Mechanical Engineers, ASM International, ASTM, and the Engineering Foundation. It is
supported by industry, technical organizations, codes and standards developers, and government
agencies.)
The software package performs stress analysis, life assessment, and remaining life predictions
for seam-welded steam piping systems that operate at elevated temperatures (high-energy
piping). Using a template provided in the software, the user creates a piping model that
corresponds to the system of interest, and then OmegaPipe performs a global stress analysis. The
user can then select a portion of the piping system (for example, elbow, sweep, or run) for which
the software can probabilistically estimate the remaining life for that specific piping detail.
The OmegaPipe software includes the following four main modules:

• A Windows-based physical modeling editor, which allows users to create a
three-dimensional, geometrically correct, graphical piping system model that incorporates
dimensional, material, and support data. The modeling editor displays an isometric view of
the piping system on screen.
• A finite element analysis module, which performs a global stress analysis of the piping
system models.
• A library of parametric equations, which relate stresses in the pipe wall (obtained from the
global stress analysis) to local stresses at the fusion boundary of a seam weld or girth weld.
Unlike most piping stress analysis programs, OmegaPipe software also models creep
relaxation in the system.
• A life assessment module for long seam welds and girth welds, which uses the local stresses
computed in the other modules to predict remaining life in specific sections of pipe. The life
prediction module combines a void growth failure model with the Omega creep crack growth
equations. Two versions of a cavity growth model are incorporated into the software; one
model is used for life assessment of normalized weld metal, and the other pertains to Type IV
cracking in the HAZ.
The flowchart in Figure 8-1 illustrates the various modules and file types used in the OmegaPipe
software [8-14]. More detail is provided below on several special features of OmegaPipe
software that add to its utility in high-energy piping analysis.
8-17
Figure 8-5
Flowchart of the OmegaPipe Software
Source: T. L. Anderson. OmegaPipe Version 2.6 User’s Manual [8-14].
Piping Stress Analysis
The OmegaPipe software package was specifically tailored for stress analysis of high-
temperature piping. Calculations of the remaining life of a component operating in the creep
range are highly sensitive to the level of applied stress. Errors in calculated stress levels can
result in significant errors in life estimates, and therefore, accurate stress analysis is essential.
Typically, commercial programs for piping flexibility analysis perform an approximate stress
analysis that represents piping components with straight and curved beam finite elements; high-
temperature ovalization effects in elbows are modeled with empirical flexibility factors and
stress intensification factors. In addition, most modeling programs are limited to linear elastic
material behavior.
OmegaPipe software uses special piping finite elements, based on the work of Yan, et al, in “An
Enhanced Pipe Elbow Element: Application in Plastic Limit Analysis of Pipe Structures,” that
account for ovalization and warping in elbows and sweeps [8-16]. These elements use
axisymmetric shell theory with nonaxisymmetric boundary conditions, which are applied
8-18
through harmonic analysis. During stress analysis, these elements can account for the relaxation
and redistribution of stresses that occurs during creep. During analysis, the Material Properties
Counsel’s Omega material model is used to characterize creep behavior at elevated temperatures.
Local Weld Stresses
The complex piping finite elements that OmegaPipe software uses do not account for the
presence of seam or girth welds, and therefore the stresses computed pertain only to seamless
piping. Although the presence of seam welds does not have a significant effect on the global
stiffness or relaxation of the piping system, the stress distribution in a piping system’s weldments
is very important because welds are the locations of highest susceptibility to damage. The weld
metal in a normalized weld creeps faster than the base metal. In this case, the physical constraint
of the base metal creates a triaxial stress state in the weld metal, which increases the probability
of cracking. Moreover, the weld cusp in a double-V joint creates a local stress concentration,
which also increases the probability of cracking. In the alternative case of a weld that is not
normalized, the HAZ is softer than the surrounding base metal and weld metal, and therefore
local deformation and triaxiality make the HAZ susceptible to Type IV cracking.
OmegaPipe software is designed to account for the effects of welds on actual stress distributions.
A series of parametric equations, which were developed through complex finite element analysis
and curve fitting, are used to relate stresses obtained from the seamless piping stress analysis to
the local stress state at the weld fusion lines [8-15, 8-17]. At a given location around the
circumference in a straight pipe or bend, OmegaPipe software’s stress analysis module reports
five stress values (calculated through the thickness), which are averaged to give equivalent
membrane hoop and axial stresses at the location of interest.
Life Assessment
OmegaPipe software includes subroutines that predict the remaining life in welded components
exposed to high temperatures based on the analyses performed. The local stresses, which were
calculated at weld fusion lines, are used to estimate prior damage and predict the remaining life
at the location of interest. Upon completion of the piping stress analysis, the program conducts
a deterministic life assessment on each element in the model at the seam weld location. If the
seam weld location was not identified for a given element, the life assessment is performed at the
12 o’clock position around the piping circumference.
OmegaPipe software reports its individual component life estimates with a relative life ranking
system, from the shortest predicted lifespan to the longest. Within the ranking methodology, the
location at which the shortest life is computed is assigned an index of 10, and all other locations
are scaled relative to that location. For example, a life index of 1.0 would be expected to have a
life 10 times greater than that of the worst location. As noted in the OmegaPipe literature, the
relative life ranking should be used with caution because this ranking does not account for
possible random and unpredictable metallurgical variations throughout the piping system, nor
does it account for local variations in geometry, such as pipe peaking or out-of-roundness [8-15].
8-19
The life assessment model considers the combined effect of creep and cavity growth. The same
model is used for both normalized welds and Type IV cracking in nonnormalized HAZs. The
OmegaPipe software treats the difference between the two failure mechanisms with variations in
local stress state and material properties (for example, relative creep rates and initial cavity size
and spacing).
The OmegaPipe software can also perform a Monte Carlo probabilistic life assessment for
specific locations, which creates a plot of probability of failure versus remaining life.
CHECWORKS™ and CHECUP™ Programs
Using the Chexal-Horowitz correlation incorporated in the CHECWORKS™ and CHECUP™

programs, EPRI’s CHECUP technology was developed specifically for fossil, co-generation, and
industrial steam plants to rank the amount of wall loss that might have occurred at various piping
locations due to FAC [8-18]. It can also be used for the feedwater piping of HRSG units, but not
for economizer or evaporator tubing. CHECWORKS increases the confidence of plant owners
and operators that the most damaged components will be identified, inspected, and repaired or
replaced long before a rupture might occur. For the large number of piping runs and components
that are potentially susceptible to FAC damage, CHECUP provides a technical basis for selecting
higher FAC risk locations for inspection from among the many possibilities. This provides a cost
benefit in reducing the number of inspections required to characterize the level of FAC damage
for a specific unit. Material and chemistry conditions drive the FAC mechanism with the
hydrodynamics setting the rate of damage; CHECUP provides an analysis basis for the
hydrodynamic factors.
CHECUP predicts the wall loss of single-phase piping segments and components since plant
startup. A piping segment is a portion of a line that has the same size, material, and operating
conditions. Input data for a segment include the material, pipe size, operating temperature, flow
rate, system identification, dissolved oxygen, water treatment, condensate cold pH, and number
of operating hours since plant startup. Provision is made for selecting component types from a
library of previously analyzed geometries. A typical input screen for CHECUP is shown in
Figure 8-5. Output data include the predicted wear of common types of piping components with
some parametric variations of uncertainties. as shown in Figure 8-6.
8-20
Figure 8-6
Sample Input Screen for CHECUPTM Software FAC Analysis
Figure 8-7
Sample Output Report from CHECUPTM Software FAC Analysis
8-21
Key features of the CHECUP software include the following:

• All data input for a segment on one screen.
• Ability to quickly evaluate operation at reduced or cycling unit loads.
• Built-in properties of standard pipe sizes and common piping materials.
• Built-in correlations of cold pH and water treatment (ammonia, several amines) with hot pH
(hot pH impacts the rate of FAC).
• Sensitivity of results to plant variables—material alloy content (AC), temperature, oxygen
content, and cold pH is also shown.
• Results can be easily evaluated to aid in the selection of inspection locations.
The FAC prediction results from the CHECUP software are intended primarily for prioritizing
inspection efforts; they are not intended to provide accurate prediction of FAC damage. Actual
inspection results are to be used to trend FAC damage and estimate remaining service life.
European Programs
This section will be included in a future update.
References
8-1. Central Electricity Generating Board, Procedure for Boiler Header Creep Life
Assessment, Generation Operation Memorandum 101, Issue 2, 1982.
8-2. R. W. Coade and S. D. Mann, Creep Life Assessment Procedures and a Computer-Based
Life Assessment Program, State Electricity Commission of Victoria, Report No.
SO/85/92, May 1985.
8-3. Generic Guidelines for the Life Extension of Fossil Fuel Power Plants. EPRI, Palo Alto,
CA: 1986. CS-4778.
8-4. Condition Assessment Guidelines for Fossil Fuel Power Plant Components. EPRI, Palo
Alto, CA: 1990. GS-6724.
8-5. Guidelines for the Evaluation of Seam-Welded High-Energy Piping. EPRI, Palo Alto,
CA: 1995. TR-104631.
8-6. D. O. Harris, R. Viswanathan, and D. Dedhia, “The Effect of Operational, Material and
Geometric Variables on the Creep/Fatigue Life of Headers in Fossil Power Service,”
Fitness for Adverse Environments in Petroleum and Power Equipment, PVP Vol. 359,
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (1997).
8-7. Life Assessment of Boiler Pressure Parts—Volume 4: BLESS Code User’s Manual and
Life Assessment Guidelines. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 1992. TR-103377-V4.
8-22
8-8. D. O. Harris, C. H. Wells, J. M. Bloom, C. C. Schultz, H. J. Grunloh, R. H. Ryder, and

R. Viswanathan, “BLESS: Boiler Life Evaluation and Simulation System: A Computer
Code for Reliability Analysis of Headers and Piping,” Reliability and Risk in Pressure
Vessels and Piping, PVP Vol. 251, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New
York, pp. 17–26 (1993).
8-9. Inherently Reliable Boiler Component Design: Interim Report. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:
2002. 1003990.
8-10. H. Riedel, Fracture at High Temperatures, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987.
8-11. G. V. Smith, “Supplemental Report on the Elevated-Temperature Properties of
Chromium-Molybdenum Steels (An Evaluation of 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo Steel),” ASTM Data
Series DS6S2, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadephia, PA, 1971.
8-12. D. O. Harris, “Probabilistic Fracture Mechanics,” in C. Sundararajan (ed.), Probabilistic
Structural Mechanics Handbook, Chapman & Hall, New York, , 1995, pp. 106–145.
8-13. Life Assessment of Boiler Pressure Parts—Volume 1: Executive Summary. EPRI, Palo
Alto, CA: 1993. TR-103377-V1.
8-14. T. L. Anderson, OmegaPipe® Version 2.6 User’s Manual, The Materials Properties
Council, Inc., 2002.
8-15. T. L. Anderson, Life Assessment of Long Seam Piping, as Implemented in the OmegaPipe
Software, Structural Reliability Technology, Boulder, CO, 2001.
8-16. A. M. Yan, R. J. Jospin, and D. H. Nguyen, “An Enhanced Pipe Elbow Element:
Application in Plastic Limit Analysis of Pipe Structures.” International Journal for
Numerical Methods in Engineering, Vol. 46, pp. 409–431 (1999).
8-17. G. V. Thorwald and T. L. Anderson, Finite Element Case Study of Local Stress Effects in
Long Seam Welded Pipe. Structural Reliability Technology, Boulder, CO, 2001.
TR-103198-P5R1.
8-23
9
PIPING SYSTEM SURVEYS
Introduction and Background
Pipe support systems are a critical component of properly operating high-energy piping systems.
Their primary function is to maintain the system stresses while the unit is in the on-line (hot) and
off-line (cold) positions. Hanger support systems are designed to accomplish the following:
• Support the dead weight of the piping, the insulation, the contained fluid, and the weight of
other attached components.
• Allow for thermal expansion of the piping and still provide weight support, while minimizing
the load transfer at the terminal points (the boiler header and turbine connection).
• Provide support and displacement control for wind and seismic loads.
• Provide support for other dynamic load situations such as vibration and water or steam
hammer.
Considerable stresses can be created in the piping and in the terminal point connections (boiler
header and turbine) if the support system is not designed properly to accommodate thermal
expansion differences or if the hanger supports malfunction. These elevated stresses can
eventually lead to distortion of the steam piping or premature failure of the girth, seam, or other
attachment welds.
This section provides a brief background of the various types of high-energy piping hanger
supports and how they operate. It includes guidelines on evaluating the hanger and support
performance and describes problems that can arise from hanger malfunctions. It also describes
how to conduct a thorough hot and cold walkdown of a system. Finally, it provides system
survey checklists that can assist in the hanger system evaluation.
Support System Design
The method of determining hanger support locations that will allow the pipe to meet the code
stress requirements is primarily based on the pipe’s diameter, the overall configuration of the line
(including the span of the horizontal and vertical pipe runs), the location of heavy valves and
fittings, and the structures available for support. Because the location of the supports is different
for each piping system, several considerations can help to create a successful hanger support
system. For areas with valves, wyes, or other exceptionally heavy loads within the piping run,
the hangers should be located as close as possible to the load to minimize bending stresses. If the
9-1
Piping System Surveys
piping changes direction, hangers should be positioned adjacent to the locations of direction
change. If a change in direction occurs between supports, the pipe span length should be less
than 75% of the comparable straight run length.
For vertical piping sections, hangers should be positioned so that the elevation of support is
above the midpoint of the length of pipe supported. This will eliminate the tendency for the
piping to rotate about the support. In addition, using multiple hanger supports on the vertical pipe
runs provides additional horizontal stability and distributes the piping load over the building
structure.
After the load is known, the amount of pipe displacement determines the type of hanger that
should be used. Displacements larger than 1 in. (2.54 cm) typically require a constant-load
hanger to prevent a load transfer back to the pipe or other adjacent hangers. For pipe
displacements 1 in. (2.54 cm) or smaller, variable-load hangers can be used.
Understanding the thermal expansion of the line is critical for determining the type of support
needed on the piping. Thermal expansion is independent of pipe size or wall thickness and is
entirely dependent on the temperature and material type. Thermal displacement always describes
the pipe movement as it travels from the cold to the hot condition, and the direction of thermal
expansion has nothing to do with the direction of fluid flow in the pipe. To determine the thermal
movements and high stress locations of a piping system, a complex finite element analysis is
required. However, the thermal movements of a piping system’s vertical span from a single
reference point can be approximated using the thermal expansion calculation shown in
Equation 9-1.
Δthermal expansion = α l ΔT Eq. 9-1
Where:
ΔT = the change in the system’s operating temperature from cold to hot.
α = the coefficient of expansion of the piping material
l = the vertical spacing
The following examples describe the use of Equation 9-1 (see Figure 9-1):
• For a rigid support at H-4, the movement at point D would be
7.2E-6 in./in.-F x (55 ft x 12 in./ft) x (1050 - 70) = 4.67 in. up
or 4.0E-6 mm/mm-C x 16.8 m x 1000 mm/m x (565.5 - 21.1) = 119 mm up
• To determine the movement at an intermediate point (for example, H-2), interpolate using the
displacements at the end points. For this example, calculate the proportion (in this case,
11/20) of the difference in displacement at the end points (D and K) and add it to the
common displacement. If point D moved 4.67 in. (119 mm) up and point K moved 2 in.
(50.8 mm) up, point H-2 moved 3.89 in. (98.8 mm) up, as shown by the following:
(4.67 - 2) x 11/20 + 2 = 3.89 in. up

or (119 - 50.8) x 3.35/6.60 + 50.8 = 98.8 mm up
9-2
Figure 9-1
Portion of Typical High-Energy Piping Isometric Drawing
Types of Hanger Supports
Four general categories of hanger supports are used in power plant design. Each hanger type and
style is used for a specific function and type of location based on the flexibility, size, and length
of a piping run.
The hanger categories include the following:

• Flexible supports
• Rigid supports
• Snubbers and sway braces
• Dampers and other horizontal restraints
9-3
Flexible Supports
Pipe systems move as a result of thermal expansion when the unit goes from the off-line (cold) to
the on-line (hot) condition. Flexible supports use helical coiled springs and a bell crank lever arm
to provide a continuous supporting force throughout the expansion and contraction cycle.
Flexible supports are of the following two types:
• Constant-load hangers are the most frequently used support in high-energy piping systems.
They are used to prevent the transfer of the pipe load to any connected equipment or adjacent
supports. When constant supports are used, the supporting force is the same in both the cold
and hot positions. Each support has a travel scale and indicator that shows the position of the
bell lever within the prescribed travel range. A locking device is available on the hanger for
use during initial construction and maintenance periods. The locking device should never be
in use during plant operation. Each support has a nameplate that provides the pertinent design
and sizing information. Figure 9-2 shows a constant-load support hanger.
Figure 9-2
Cross Section of a Constant-Load Support Hanger
• Variable-load hangers are used predominantly in noncritical piping systems, or in critical

piping systems where the vertical movement is very small (1 in. [2.54 cm] or less). When
used in critical piping systems, they are typically used adjacent to the piping’s terminal
points in order to limit applied bending loads in the hot position. The variable load hanger
provides a level of support (typically vertical) that changes as displacement of the attached
piping occurs. Variable support loads are typically set to apply the required support load in
the hot condition, transferring the load when the system returns to the cold position where the
material’s allowable stresses are much higher. The spring rate of a variable support hanger
cannot be adjusted; however, the load being carried is controlled though the length of the
attachment rod (which in turn, changes the expansion and contraction of the spring or
springs). Each support has a nameplate that provides the pertinent design and sizing
information. Figure 9-3 shows a variable-load hanger.
9-4
Figure 9-3
Cross Section of a Variable-Load Support Hanger
Rigid Supports
Rigid supports are used in locations where the pipe movement needs to be limited or must be
completely prevented. They are typically restraints, guides, anchors, or limit stops. Most main
steam and HRH systems have one vertical rigid support located along the major vertical run. A
system is termed a floater if no rigid supports are present. Many systems use piping guides and
limit stops to direct piping deformation to designed expansion loops and to guard against severe
distortion. A limit stop allows the pipe to have unrestricted movement for a preset distance
before being restrained. Limit stops are frequently used near safety valves to counteract the
thrust loads of the valves lifting. Figure 9-4 shows a rigid support.
9-5
Figure 9-4
An Example of a Rigid Support
Snubbers and Sway Braces
Snubbers and sway braces restrict the horizontal movement of the pipe through the use of rigid
rods. Either one or two rods can be used, depending on whether the desire is to restrict the
motion of the pipe to the axis of the brace or the axis of the pipe, respectively. Figure 9-5 shows
the two arrangements of sway braces, a single-rod and a double-rod arrangement.
Figure 9-5
Sway Brace Arrangements
9-6
Dampers
Two commonly used dampers are vibration dampers and shock suppressors. Vibration dampers
are installed so that no vibration load is applied to the pipe in the hot condition. They are
essentially sway braces with double-acting springs. They have some adjustability after
installation. Shock suppressors are designed to mitigate seismic events. They are not designed to
support the weight of the pipe. They are required in nuclear piping systems, but in fossil plants
they are often used on piping where there can be large dynamic loads. They are not effective
against high-frequency, low-amplitude movements, and they require higher maintenance than
vibration dampers do.
Support Attachments (Pipe Side)
The most favorable way to attach the hangers to the pipe is through the use of bolted clamps.
This avoids adding welds to the high-energy piping and therefore minimizes the number of stress
concentrators and future potential cracking areas. The clamps are held in place with either a two-
bolt or a three-bolt design. They must be fabricated from alloy steel suitable for high-temperature
service when on the main steam or HRH lines.
On vertical piping runs, the clamps support the pipe through the use of lugs welded to the line.
The lugs frequently experience cracking, although they are not typically not detrimental to the
line, and they should be periodically examined. Figure 9-6 shows an example of this
configuration.
Figure 9-6
Configuration of Welded Attachment Lugs on Piping
Hanger plates welded to the elbow extrados are often used to attach a hanger where the pipe
changes direction from a horizontal to a vertical run. Figure 9-7 shows an example of this
arrangement. Again, these attachments are prone to cracking and should periodically be
examined.
9-7
Figure 9-7
A Typical Hanger Plate Attachment Configuration
Evaluation of Hanger and Support Performance
A good hanger inspection program is essential to maintain properly operating hangers and to
reduce high-energy piping problems. Hanger failures result in increased load on the piping,
which can result in deformation of the line, premature creep failures, and fatigue damage, all of
which dramatically reduce the piping life. Frequent monitoring of the support system’s condition
can identify broken or bottomed out hangers and make trending of the hanger readings possible
so that potential problems with the critical piping can be identified before becoming significant
issues. It is important to monitor the hangers in both the hot and cold conditions to ensure that
they are operating properly and have not become locked into one position.
What to Look for in a Hanger Support Evaluation
The initial line inspection should determine whether the correct hangers are in place and whether
they are located on the line as specified on the design drawings. The clearances between the
support components, piping, and nearby plant structures and equipment should be checked to
ensure that there will be no interferences when the pipe moves from the cold to the hot position.
The hangers should be verified as having the correct size and being the correct type for the load
they are supporting. The load is determined based on the actual pipe diameter and wall thickness,
the type and thickness of the insulation, and the fluid capacity of the pipe. The total weight of the
piping, insulation, valves, and so forth should be equal to the load carried by the hangers plus the
load supported by the terminal points.
9-8
ASME B31.1 recommends that the hangers be periodically examined to look for changes both in
the piping and in the hangers [9-1]. Hangers can become inoperable as a result of creep
deformation of the piping, a dynamic event in the line such as a water or steam hammer, or
deterioration of the spring and other components. For constant-support and variable-load
hangers, the code recommends that hanger readings be obtained both in the fully hot position and
when the unit is off-line in the cold position. The hanger readings should be recorded and
permanently stored. The temperature of the pipe at the time of observations should also be noted.
Hanger load and travel adjustments might be necessary over the life of a critical piping system.
As a result of relaxation in the material, the piping rarely returns to its exact original position
after operating in the hot condition. Also, as high-energy piping ages, creep deformation results
in permanent shifting throughout the system. Careful monitoring of the hanger loads will result
in a better-balanced system and less permanent deformation.
When a Hanger Support Problem Has Been Identified
For the majority of hanger problems that are identified, an immediate shutdown of the plant for
repairs is not necessary; however, a timely response is important. Engineering must assess the
effect of the hanger failure on the unit’s continued operation. In addition, they must determine
the cause of the hanger failure. Typically, a flexible support hanger failure is the result of the
support exceeding its limit. The damage imposed on the piping as a result of the malfunctioning
hanger is cumulative. High stresses can lead to either premature creep failure or fatigue cracks.
Without a stress analysis, it is difficult to determine where damage will occur in the piping; it is
not always in the proximity of the failed hanger.
If the flexible support’s limits have been exceeded, adjustments should be made with the system
on-line in the hot condition. This will ensure that the necessary loads are supported when the unit
is most susceptible to creep degradation. (The allowable stress is much higher, and therefore the
piping is more tolerant to high stresses, in the cold condition.) To ensure that the proper
adjustments and maintenance have been performed on the hanger, the support’s readings in both
the hot and cold positions should be taken over the next few months of operation.
Replacing a Hanger Support
If the hanger support is not repairable, then the entire hanger or the affected parts must be
replaced. Hanger replacements typically occur with the unit off-line. Before removing the
hanger, at least one support upstream and downstream of the affected support should be pinned,
and the piping at the hanger should be supported. Lateral support might also be required. If a
detached support (as in the case of a broken hanger rod) is being reconnected, the piping run
must be brought back to the appropriate elevation and slope before attaching and setting the
support.
9-9
Addressing Chronic Hanger Support Problems
If a system has a history of constant hanger support problems, several things must be considered
to remedy the situation. On supports that are frequently adjusted, verify that they are sized
correctly. Performing closed-form calculations or a more sophisticated stress analysis can help
check the hanger needs (for improved design). In addition to verifying the correct hanger size,
verify the accuracy of the specified load carried by each hanger support (as indicated on the
hanger nameplate). Several different methods can be used to determine whether the hanger is
accurately carrying the correct load, including the following:
• The support can be removed from the line and tested in a test stand.
• In situ hanger testing can be performed.
• Dynamometers can be installed in the support rods.
• A shear pin load cell can be used on the hanger.
In addition to hanger support issues, unit operations should be reviewed to determine whether
system transients are contributing to the hanger problems. Repeated dynamic events such as
water or steam hammer and thermal transients can cause significant hanger problems and
degradation of high-energy piping.
In Situ Hanger Testing
In situ hanger testing was developed to determine whether the system’s hangers are supporting
the correct loads while they are still in place on the pipe. The apparatus works by circumventing
the rigid section of the hanger support and allowing the load to be directed into hydraulic rams.
The load is then determined based on the knowledge of the ram pressure and area. Care must be
taken not to lift the pipe during the testing process. If the pipe is lifted during testing, the results
will be invalidated. Load results can then be compared to the hanger design loads or used in a
stress analysis for the line [9-2].
Sagging and Skews in Critical Piping
A common problem in older critical piping systems is sagging of the pipe between the supports.
Sagging is typically found at the bottom of a vertical riser or in long horizontal sections; it is a
result of improperly spaced hanger supports or prolonged operation of the piping at or above the
design temperature. Drains or taps should be added to the sagging piping to prevent any water
that has accumulated in the pipe’s low points from being sent though the turbine during startup.
It would also be prudent to add additional hangers to reduce the horizontal pipe spans.
Unlike sagging, which is a common problem in older systems, skewing is a sign of a significant
problem that requires immediate attention. It is indicative of a locked flexible support or snubber
and can result in significant deformation in the pipe at bends and vertical sections. If left
unattended, hanger problems can result in rapid accumulation of damage.
9-10
Hot and Cold Hanger Walkdown Inspections

Preparation
To perform a thorough walkdown inspection, adequate preparation should be made. Before

performing a walkdown inspection, become familiar with the piping system and hanger supports
in use. This can be accomplished by the following:
• Review the piping system drawings (such as the line isometrics) to understand the overall
piping layout and the location of the hanger supports.
• Prepare isometric sketches of the piping system (see Figure 9-8) to assist in support
identification, and develop hanger travel sketches or data sheets to use for documentation of
as-found conditions.
Figure 9-8
A Simple Isometric Sketch of Piping System Showing Relative Locations of Supports with
ID Names and the Type of Support Hanger
9-11
• Review the hanger detail drawings such as those shown in Figures 9-9 and 9-10, if available,
to determine the design hot and cold support load, the travel scale positions, the predicted
magnitude and direction of thermal expansion, and other relevant design data.
• Review any prior walkdown inspection data, if available, to be aware of significant
conditions that were observed in previous inspections.
Figure 9-9
Detailed Design Drawings for a Typical Constant-Support Hanger Showing the Pertinent
Load and Travel Information
9-12
Figure 9-10
Detailed Design Drawings for a Typical Variable-Load Support Hanger Showing the
Pertinent Load and Travel Information
Inspection Equipment and Documentation Aids
Access to perform close inspection of the majority of hangers can be difficult unless scaffolding
is erected; therefore, many inspections must be performed remotely. Several items that will
facilitate remote hanger inspection include the following:
• Binoculars or other high-magnification sighting tools to assist with inspection of remote
hangers and hanger travel scales
• A high-intensity light source
• A tape measure or scale
• A camera for documentation of as-found conditions
• A paint stick or other marking tool to mark ID names on supports if they are not already
present
• A clipboard, paper, and pens
• Shop towels and solvent to clean hanger nameplates or travel scales
• Piping system drawings or isometric sketches showing supports and ID names
• Data sheets or sketches for recording hanger data
9-13
Documentation of the Hanger Walkdown
Document all conditions that are specifically examined, not just the questionable or detrimental
as-found conditions. This documentation will provide true baseline data should future problems
with the pipe hangers occur. Begin the hanger inspection at one end of the piping and work
toward the opposite end, referring to the line sketch and verifying the information. A consistent
reference system should be established for the identification of the hangers and the
documentation of the as-found condition. That system can include a standard north-south or east-
west direction and a relationship to the front or rear and left or right of the boiler. It is critical
that the operating condition of the unit be noted at the time of the walkdown. If the unit is on-
line, the megawatt load and the steam outlet temperature at the time of testing should be
recorded.
Measurement of gaps or clearances at limit-stops, at penetrations through wall or floor openings,

and at other locations can confirm whether or not piping is expanding from cold to hot as
desired. These measurements are important should a stress analysis of the piping system be
necessary to investigate problem areas or to predict pipe remaining life. Figure 9-11 shows a
support hanger running through the floor grating. Measuring the clearance helps to determine
whether there is sufficient room for expansion and contraction.
Figure 9-11
A Support Hanger Running Through the Floor Grating
9-14
Summary of Hanger Walkdown Documentation Requirements
The documentation requirements for a hanger walkdown include the following:

• Date and unit status (off-line or on-line, unit load or nominal steam outlet temperature) at the
time of the inspection
• Hanger nameplate design information (hanger manufacturer, hanger size or figure number,
design cold and hot load, design travel and direction, total available travel)
• Hanger travel or load scale configuration (such as 10 travel scale divisions with 0 at the top
of the travel scale and 10 at the bottom)
• Hanger design cold and hot travel scale positions as indicated by stamps, if present, on the
travel scale (typically H and C stamps or red and white markers)
• Current hanger travel scale position, including a note for any hangers that are topped or
bottomed out
• Details of any other observed detrimental conditions (such as loose support rods, corroded or
impacted spring hanger assemblies, or deformed structural steel members)
System Survey Checklist
The following list can be used as a checklist for observations that should be made during a
hanger support evaluation.
General Hanger Observations

• Check whether the supports are located where they are supposed to be according to the
design drawings.
• Check whether the supports are the right size and type for the load they are carrying.
• Check whether the supports are free to move with the pipe.
• Check for any structural restrictions.
• Check for damaged insulation adjacent to the hanger area.
Constant Load Support Observations

• Look for loose, bent or broken support rods.
• Examine the springs, pivots, and cases for broken parts.
• Look for signs of corrosion on the springs.
• Check for foreign matter such as fly ash or other debris in the springs that could restrict its
movement.
9-15
• Document the hanger travel scale position (if the hanger scale position is not legible, then
estimate the position from 0 at the bottom or lowermost scale position and 10 at the top or
uppermost travel position.
• Note any hanger that is topped or bottomed out.
• Ensure that the locking devices are not engaged.
• Note the hanger design information from the hanger nameplate.
Variable Load Support Observations

• Look for loose, bent, or broken support rods.
• Examine the springs, pivots, and cases for broken parts.
• Look for signs of corrosion on the springs.
• Check for foreign matter such as fly ash or other debris in the springs that could restrict its
movement.
• Document the hanger load scale position.
• Note any hanger that is topped or bottomed out.
• Ensure that the locking devices are not engaged.
• On vertical piping runs, examine the pipe-side hanger attachment lugs for cracking.
• Note the hanger design information from the hanger nameplate.
Rigid Support Observations

• Check pipe-side lugs for deformation.
• Look for signs of lateral interference with the surrounding structure.
Sway Brace Support Observations

• Examine the pivot to ensure it is in proper working order
Snubber and Shock Suppressors Support Observations

• Stroke snubbers and shock suppressors to verify that they are not locked up and acting as
rigid supports.
• Ensure that the hanger is not bearing the pipe’s weight.
• Check that the fluid reservoirs are filled to the manufacturer’s recommended level.
9-16
General Piping Observations

• Examine horizontal and vertical piping runs for sags, skews, or other anomalies.
• Examine the insulation on the piping for interference or tight clearances between the piping
and any adjacent piping, surrounding structures, other equipment, floor gratings, and so on.
• Check for missing, loose, or damaged pipe insulation or lagging.
• Look for damage or deformation of the structural steel at or near the pipe support attachment
points.
• Measure and document the pipe location at position indicators, limit stops supports, or other
locations where the pipe location can be measured relative to a fixed, permanent reference.
References
9.2 G. May, “The Need for in situ Pipe Support Testing,” Proceedings of ASME Power 2004,
POWER2004-52031. March 2004, Baltimore, MD.
9-17
10
NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING
Introduction
The status of fossil power plant condition assessment has changed dramatically over the past
several decades. Previously, the problem was a lack of inspection and life assessment tools; now,
the problem centers on the vast array of options available to the planner. The list of components
recommended for inspection has grown dramatically, as have the available NDE approaches for
component inspection. Even within the limitations of a single component, the planner often finds
an extensive range of available inspection technologies, each having its own inherent
capabilities, reliabilities, and level of maturity.
The problem that the planner must currently address has evolved to the selection of appropriate
inspection technologies and inspection scope to meet specific conditions and objectives in the
most economic way. Reinspection interval extension is one way of reducing maintenance costs
that is currently receiving significant attention. Although this approach is perfectly valid, it
places additional emphasis on selection of appropriate NDE and life assessment technologies to
ensure that the component will operate through a longer cycle with acceptable risk.
Power utility NDE planners or purchasers must often make decisions based on limited
information and without sufficient time and support to perform a comprehensive cost-benefit
analysis. All too often, decisions are made purely on the basis of inspection cost without due
consideration of the true cost, which should include the impact of decisions on potential repairs
or replacements, reinspection intervals, possible forced outages, and other indirect expenses
associated with the inspection capabilities.
At the other end of the spectrum, decisions are also based on the best available technology for
the application. Depending on the particular circumstances, less exhaustive (and therefore
generally less expensive) options can be more than adequate and therefore appropriate.
This situation has increased the need for a single document that presents NDE information in a
concise format. The fossil power utility planner can then access and retrieve comprehensive
information quickly and use the information in developing a condition assessment strategy.
10-1
Nondestructive Testing
Assessment Objective (Macro/Micro)
The procurement objective is to enable informed NDE decisions to be made, even by personnel
who are not experts in NDE, without being overwhelmed by the technicalities of the NDE
technique.
High-energy piping systems are typically inspected every scheduled outage to ensure that the
hanger support system is functioning properly. This might entail only a walkdown of the system.
In other instances, a full inspection of the system can be scheduled to examine the system more
comprehensively for damage such as weld cracking, loss of wall, and so on.
The inspection or reinspection decision is based on the following parameters:

• Fabrication history
• Operating history
• Identification of the specific damage mechanisms that apply to a given component
• Risk-benefit assessment for optimizing resource management budgets
Table 10-1 lists common NDE methods, their applications, their advantages, and their
limitations.
Table 10-1
NDE Methods Cross-Reference
Method Applications Advantages Limitations Comments
Surface Inexpensive, fast, Surface only; variable Should always

discontinuities— simple, real time, can and poor resolution; eye be the first
Visual cracks, porosity, slag, eliminate the need for fatigue; distractions; method applied
misalignment, other methods. requires good
warpage, leaks illumination
Surface Inexpensive, rapid, Surface only; not useful Messy;

discontinuities— portable, easy to on hot, dirty, painted, or requires good
Liquid cracks, porosity, apply, more sensitive rough surfaces ventilation
Penetrant seams, laps, leaks than visual alone,
applicable to most
materials
Surface and near- Low cost, fast, Material must be Wet

surface portable, more ferromagnetic; surface fluorescent
discontinuities— sensitive to tight must be clean; part might technique very
Magnetic cracks, voids, cracks than liquid require demagnetization; sensitive to
Particle porosity, inclusions, penetrant, can do alignment of field is small surface
seams, laps near-subsurface, will important. flaws
work on some coated
materials
10-2

NDE Methods Cross-Reference
Method Applications Advantages Limitations Comments
Surface and deep Portable, can give Couplant required; Requires the
subsurface location and size of thin complex shapes use of
discontinuities— discontinuity, good are difficult; meaningful
cracks, laminations, sensitivity, inspect orientation of reference
porosity, lack of from one side discontinuity standards;
Ultrasonic fusion, inclusions, important; operator- automated
thickness dependent digital
ultrasonic
systems are
highly
developed
Subsurface Provides permanent Not sensitive to Can be useful

discontinuities— record, can be misaligned planar, method to
cracks, voids, portable, applicable to crack-like flaws; assist with
inclusions, thickness wide range of radiation hazards; disposition of
Radiography variation, lack of materials relatively expensive; ultrasonic
fusion, incomplete poor resolution on indications
penetration, corrosion, thick, double-wall
missing components, exposures for large
composition diameter piping
Surface and Remote and Contact with Current practice

subsurface continuous system; might is to confirm
discontinuities—crack surveillance, location, require many indications by
initiation and growth, severity; permanent contact points; other methods;
leaks, boiling and record; tests an entire complex use is growing
Acoustic
cavitation, phase vessel or system; interpretation; rapidly
Emission
changes costs 50–90% less system must be
than direct costs for stressed; some
ultrasonic examination; systems are too
piping need not be complex
taken out of service.
Surface Damage assessment Evaluates surface Can reveal

microstructural and determination of condition only extent of creep-
condition microstructure and related damage
Replication heat treatment only at the
verification without tested surface
sectioning the
component.
10-3
Access and Required Surface Preparation
Preparation of various power plant component surfaces for inspection is governed by many
variables, including the following:
• NDE techniques to be used
• Type of NDE procedures to be applied
• Sequence of NDE techniques to be used
• Materials involved
• Component size and portability
• Costs of various surface preparation techniques
• Time required, including scaffolding, access, and so forth
• Interference with other projects in the plant
Planning of the overall outage and inspections and coordination between the NDE personnel and
contractors are critical to minimizing the cost and time involved in surface preparation, as well as
the impact on other parallel plant projects being performed during the outage.
No Surface Preparation
It is often recommended that a walkdown of the equipment be conducted with no surface

preparation of the components because signs of unusual operation of the unit can often provide
valuable evidence of the abnormal condition and aid in subsequent inspections and overall
condition assessment. Signs of steam or water leakage, aggressive air penetration, or local
overheating can be detected quickly and visually by experienced personnel during the walkdown,
before any cleaning is conducted. Deposits in the turbine stages can provide critical evidence of
past exposure to contaminants for future use, and samples should be collected before being
contaminated with cleaning media. Heat patterns in generator rotors or stators can be indicative
of insulation breakdown. Similarly, dusting or greasing of insulation components can provide
valuable information relative to looseness between mating parts, rubs, vibration, and so on.
Patterns of coal ash deposition in superheater, reheater, or economizer sections can provide
critical information regarding flow balance across the boiler. Damage to insulation and sagging
can indicate hanger or support problems in piping systems. One of the first questions to be asked
after the unit is scheduled to be brought down is, “What information might I lose by cleaning
component surfaces?”
Most inspection techniques require that a clean surface be obtained for inspection. However, this
is not always the case. Some exceptions can include electromagnetic acoustic transducer or
focused beam UT of boiler tubes (particularly in gas-fired units) and internal inspection of heat
exchanger tubing by eddy current testing (ET), which can be performed with no surface
preparation unless deposits and debris accumulation are excessive. Magnetic flux leakage
inspections and even some general UT techniques can be performed with no surface preparation,
10-4
depending on the as-found component surface condition, the criticality of the inspection, and
other factors. Infrared thermography and radiographic test (RT) inspections can often be done
with no surface preparation. The need to perform any cleaning operations should be verified with
the appropriate NDE personnel before proceeding with any cleaning operation.
Surface Debris and Scale Removal
One of the most popular surface preparation techniques is grit or sand blasting. Large areas can
be cleaned quickly and, with proper air pressure and media density, little damage is done to the
surface. For smaller areas requiring inspection, local wire brushing, needle gunning, or light
grinding might be preferred because of their portability. There is a possibility that some small,
shallow cracks will be peened over with these latter techniques. Particular care is recommended
for thin or soft materials to ensure that small cracks do not go undetected. The use of such
surface preparation methods can lead to severe inspection limitations when certain surface
inspections are to be conducted, particularly for PT and to a lesser degree MT and ET. The
materials involved should also be considered when considering appropriate cleaning methods.
Some material, for example, cannot be exposed to chemicals and must be cleaned using purely
mechanical means. Other components must be cleaned using chemicals because of surface finish
requirements or dimensional tolerances that cannot be disturbed. Consequently, it is important to
coordinate the type of surface preparation to be performed with the appropriate NDE personnel
and materials specialists to make certain that the selected cleaning means is compatible with the
NDE methods and techniques to be applied and with the materials involved.
Local, state, or federal regulations might dictate that cleaning techniques that cause potential
airborne contamination in confined spaces (grit blasting of boiler tubes is a good example)
require monitoring during and after the cleaning cycle. In these cases, the NDE personnel might
be required to wear protective breathing apparatus, which can slow down the inspection cycle.
This can be a particular problem when cleaning surfaces from which asbestos insulation has just
been removed.
For parts or components that can be moved, cleaning is often accomplished in a confined area,
such as an erected tent. This limits the export of cleaning media or the import of airborne
contaminants into the cleaning environment, which can be important for cleaning parts with tight
fit-ups and clearances that must be disassembled for inspection. In addition, the use of cleaning
and inspection enclosures can often be required as a means of controlling ambient light, for
example for the performance of fluorescent MT or PT inspections. For some components, such
as certain generator retaining rings, temperature and humidity control is very important. Often
the same enclosures used for cleaning provide suitable environmental protection for the
inspection and for storage of the components until ready for return to service.
10-5
Access Limitations
Internal inspections of boiler components, water and steam lines, assembled turbine and
generators, heat exchangers, and so on can require considerable modifications to gain access. If
the component is to be inspected frequently, consideration should be given to designing and
implementing a convenient means of access that can be reused, thus eliminating cutting and
rewelding at each outage. Modifications to provide access should include consideration for both
personnel and equipment and can involve larger access doors on boilers, new or larger manways
in turbine casings, heat exchangers, and so on. When modifications are required to perform
certain inspections, permanent modification can pay for themselves many times over because
improved access usually results in more timely maintenance, inspection, and repair cycles during
future outages.
Visual Testing
Overview
Quality visual testing (VT) is one of the least appreciated and possibly the most demanding NDE
activity currently used in power plant inspection. Whereas VT once consisted of looking over a
component, by current standards VT typically involves a great deal of training and practical
experience before one is qualified for this inspection method. Qualified VT inspectors must have
a good working knowledge of a vast array of plant components, metallurgy, potential flaw types
for various components, failure mechanisms, and so forth. They must be able to recognize the
presence of different damage forms and classify the damage in terms of severity and implications
relative to ongoing operation of the component, based solely on what normally is very limited
visual evidence. The American Society for Nondestructive Testing (ASNT) currently recognizes
VT as a specific inspection discipline, and the requirements for acquiring certification are
extremely demanding.
Although it is not an NDE technique in itself, debris removal is often a substantial part of a
visual inspector’s job. It is common for items such as screwdrivers, grippers, welding rods, or
nuts and bolts to drop into a component during maintenance operations. If not removed, they
could cause considerable damage when the plant is brought back to power. Various devices and
attachments have been developed to facilitate this task.
Application in Piping Systems
VT can be applied to any component in which the damage manifests itself at accessible surfaces
to a degree that permits detection by visual means. Considerable ingenuity can often be exercised
to produce a viewing and transport system for most plant components. VT should always be the
first method applied.
10-6
Advantages and Disadvantages
Advantages
The advantages of VT include the following:

• Inexpensive (excluding video borescope techniques)
• Fast and simple
• Real-time examination
• A permanent record can be produced when using video-based systems
• Can eliminate the need for other methods
Disadvantages
The disadvantages of VT include the following:

• Limited to accessible surfaces
• Variable quality; dependent on human factors (for example, eye fatigue and distractions)
• Typically poor resolution
• Requires good illumination
• Does not lend itself to automation
Magnetic Particle Testing
Overview
MT is a fairly simple inspection method that is useful for the detection of surface-connected and
near-surface discontinuities in ferromagnetic material. The method is applicable to a variety of
components, including raw materials as well as finished components.
When a ferromagnetic material test piece is magnetized by bringing the poles of a magnet (either
permanent or electromagnet) into contact or into close proximity, the magnetic flux lines that
flow from one pole of the magnet to the other will now travel within a surface layer of the test
piece. The presence of a discontinuity that intercepts the magnetic flux lines will result in flux
leakage, which, in turn, will attract small magnetic or ferromagnetic particles that will indicate
the location of such discontinuity. Tight discontinuities, such as cracks, will be best detected
when oriented in a perpendicular position to the flux lines; tight cracks that are parallel to the
flux are poorly detected or not detected at all.
10-7
In practice, the magnetic particles (commonly fine iron filings) are applied as a powder (or liquid
suspension of a powder); these are either colored to contrast with the test surface under visible
light or coated with a fluorescent material that glows under ultraviolet (UV) light. Fluorescent
particles are used for increased visibility and better sensitivity of detection. The test piece is
magnetized by the use of permanent magnets or an electromagnet yoke or by wrapping a length
of electrical cable around the test section to form a coil that is then energized with a power
supply that results in the magnetization of the wrapped zone. With the exception of the
permanent magnet, a yoke or a coil can be energized either with ac or dc in order to obtain the
needed mix of sensitivity and penetration.
MT is one of the most frequently used of the NDE methods applied in power stations for routine
inspection. MT can be applied essentially to any exposed surface of any ferromagnetic material.
Surface preparation is not as demanding as for dye penetrant inspection, and reasonable
sensitivity can be achieved, particularly with the wet fluorescent method. MT can even be
applied over thin surface coatings such as paint, although surface finish can affect both mobility
and retention of the particles.
A special type of magnetic particle inspection that is useful for inspection of tight spaces that
otherwise cannot be inspected with this method involves the use of rubber compounds for the
suspension medium. The process, called rubber-mag, is one in which particles are mixed into a
rubber compound that is in a liquid state. Magnetization is accomplished by the most appropriate
technique to produce directional magnetization for optimum detection of the prevalent flaw
orientation, and the magnetic particles are applied through the rubber suspension. The rubber
compound used must have very specific properties to maintain particle mobility while in the
liquid state and to provide a contrasting background to the particles. When set, the molded
rubber is removed and viewed for indications of the surface.
Advantages
The advantages of MT are the following:

• Relatively inexpensive
• Fast and simple
• Requires only minimal surface preparation
• Better surface preparation and the use of liquid fluorescent particles improves sensitivity
• A permanent record can be produced by photography
10-8
Disadvantages
The disadvantages of MT are the following:

• Variable quality; dependent on human factors (for example, eye fatigue or distractions)
• Requires good illumination for visible particles, or a darkened location for fluorescent
Dye Penetrant Testing
Overview
PT is a nondestructive method for finding discontinuities that are open to the surface. Indications
open to the inspection surface can generally be found regardless of the flaw size (above the
detection threshold), configuration, or orientation. As a result of capillary action, penetrant
materials are drawn into various types of surface imperfections, making the method well suited
for detecting most imperfections in both ferrous and nonferrous metals, provided the flaws are
open to the inspection surface. PT can be applied to a variety of components including raw
materials as well as finished components. The inspection of complex geometries is possible if the
surfaces are accessible and the surface geometry complexity does not preclude complete removal
of excess penetrant.
The theoretical basis of penetrant inspection is relatively simple. A liquid penetrant containing a
visible liquid (also called color-contrast) or fluorescent compound is applied to the inspection
surface. The penetrant is allowed to remain on the inspection surface for sufficient time to be
drawn into the openings of the surface discontinuity by capillary action. Excess penetrant
material is then removed, and a developer is applied to the test surface (applied as a thin layer of
white powder by a quick-drying propellant or suspension). The developer absorbs the residual
penetrant material held in the surface discontinuities and draws the penetrant to the exposed
surface, providing both an indication of the presence of a surface discontinuity and a contrasting
background which makes the indication more apparent under visual observation of the surface.
Fluorescent dyes require the use of UV light and a darkened location for viewing.
Penetrant inspection can be broadly classified by the following types of penetrants:

• Water-washable penetrant, which contains an emulsifier and therefore can be directly
removed using water as the cleaning agent
• Post-emulsifiable penetrant, which requires application of an emulsifier (liquid that combines
with the penetrant to make it water-washable) before water cleaning
• Solvent-removable penetrant, which can be removed adequately only by using the
appropriate solvent
10-9
Although PT can be applied to essentially any exposed surface, it is not used as frequently as MT
for NDE of piping systems. This is mostly because it requires more extensive surface preparation
than MT, yet results in only minimal increase of sensitivity. Also, unlike MT, it is not able to
detect near-subsurface discontinuities because the penetrating dye requires a path to the
discontinuity that is open to the surface.
More commonly for piping systems, PT is used by default for surface inspections of non-
ferromagnetic materials, such as austenitic stainless steels, where it is not possible to apply MT.
Advantages
The advantages of PT are the following:

• Inexpensive
• Fast and simple
• Better surface preparation and the use of liquid fluorescent dyes improves sensitivity
• A permanent record can be produced by photography
Disadvantages
The disadvantages of PT are the following:

• Variable quality; dependent on human factors
• Requires good surface preparation and care to prevent laps that close off surface
discontinuities
• Complete cleaning and removal of the dye is not always possible
• Requires good illumination for visible dye penetrants or a darkened location for fluorescent
10-10
Eddy Current Testing
Overview
ET is used to inspect the surface or near-surface of electrically conducting materials. The test
probe, typically with a coil-like construction, induces an electrical current into the near-surface
volume of the test area adjacent to it. When a discontinuity is present in the test volume under
the probe, it distorts the electromagnetic field that was created by the probe. Such distortion is
detected by the probe, and its indication on the instrument screen can be interpreted by the expert
analyst as to the type, size, location, or any other parameter of the discontinuity that was
incorporated into the calibration process.
The theoretical depth of the surface region that can be inspected is governed by three parameters:
frequency of the excitation current, the electrical conductivity of the test piece, and the relative
magnetic permeability of the test material. The other parameters that affect depth of penetration
and sensitivity are the probe size and type; these are determined mostly empirically. Because the
relative permeability of nonferromagnetic materials is 1, and the electrical conductivity is a
material constant, the depth of penetration, for a simplistic model, can be varied by the selection
of the test frequency.
When applying ET to ferromagnetic materials (for example, carbon and alloy steels) the relative
magnetic permeability does not equal 1 and could vary across the surface as a result of
compositional and heat treatment nonuniformities. The eddy currents induced into such test
pieces would be affected mostly by limiting the depth of penetration and the ability to measure
crack depth by the phase angle shift method. Still, the ability to detect cracks is not diminished,
but rather enhanced, by the effect of the permeability being greater than 1, and the ability to
detect surface-connected cracks that go below the calculated skin depth is not affected. However,
when the parameters of interest are affected by permeability, it is possible to negate the effect by
magnetically saturating (fully or partially) the test location next to the probe.
Electromagnetic NDE techniques for ferromagnetic materials include remote field eddy current,
flux leakage, and partial saturation.
Conventional ET is not often used for the inspection of piping systems. Mostly, it is applied for
the detection of seam welds where there is no visual indication of the weld’s presence or
location. Otherwise, ET can be used in lieu of other surface techniques, replacing MT or PT, but
at a greater cost. Advanced ET techniques, such as remote field and flux leakage, are more
commonly used for the inspection of boiler tubes rather than for large-diameter piping systems.
10-11
ET is limited to inspecting the surfaces of conducting materials; it is an alternative technique to

MT and PT inspection.
Advantages
The advantages of ET are the following:

• Probes can be constructed to be very small so they can enter components that are inaccessible
to other techniques.
• There is little need for surface preparation. In many cases it is possible to inspect through
surface layers such as paint.
• There is no need for dyes and developers, making ET attractive in applications where waste
and contamination must be minimized. Similarly, no contact is necessary between the test
probe and the examined surface, as long as the probe proximity can be precisely controlled
during scanning
• A permanent record can be created by the instrumentation
• ET can be easily automated.
Disadvantages
The disadvantages of ET are the following:

• The signals produced on the instrument screen can be complex, they require a higher level of
training and experience to interpret, and the equipment is relatively expensive. However,
much recent work has been aimed at developing equipment that can assist with data
interpretation and flaw classification that minimize such concerns.
• The presence of geometric features and discontinuities near the region where flaws are
expected can complicate the examination. The selection of proper test coils for such cases
can reduce or eliminate the problem.
• A careful assessment by an expert is required in order to make the proper inspection
technique selection.
Conventional Ultrasonic Testing
Overview
UT technology encompasses a wide range of applications that vary dramatically in technological

sophistication, complexity, required equipment, implementation constraints, speed of
application, detection reliability, sizing accuracy, requisite operator skills, and so forth. The
10-12
technology has evolved to a point at which very few components are inspected according to
generic procedures. That is, specific techniques and application procedures designed to address
certain desired performance characteristics are used for most components. What is optimum for
one application simply might not be adequate, or in some cases even possible, for another.
Consequently, it is difficult to provide guidance that is concise and easy to understand and yet
provide sufficient detail for educated decisions.
UT is generally described as the introduction of high-frequency sound waves—generally in the

range of 0.5 MHz to 50 MHz—into a component, part, or structure for the purpose of
determining some characteristic of the material from which the component, part, or structure is
made. Material characteristics that can be and have been determined ultrasonically include such
items as material structure, stress (both residual and applied), hardness, anisotropy, and others.
However, for fossil power plant inspection, ultrasonic inspection is used primarily for flaw
detection, classification, and sizing, and for dimensional measurement (thickness). Other
applications are possible and should be considered along with other competing or
complementing technologies for the objective of determining other material characteristics.
UT, as used for flaw detection and thickness measurement, is analogous to active sonar. A short-
duration pulse of sound is generated in the part by a transmitter, immediately following which
the ultrasonic instrumentation is switched to a listening mode. Any detected return signal
indicates the presence at some point in the sound field of a reflector that has redirected the
propagating wave in the direction of the receiver.
Flaw detection and thickness measurement applications of ultrasound operate on two

fundamental principles. First, for a specific propagation mode, sound travels in a given material
at a constant velocity. Therefore, a precise measurement of the propagation time between
initiation of the pulse and detection of a signal at the receiver provides the basis for calculating
the position of the reflector relative to the transmitter and receiver positions. Second, the
response from a reflector is a function of characteristics of the transmitted beam, the material
through which it propagates, and certain characteristics of the reflector that causes the response.
If ultrasonic practitioners can extract, or deconvolve, those characteristics of the response that
are attributable to the beam and propagation material, they are left with a response that is
characteristic of the reflector. If they can further extract from this remaining reflector response
the information that is related most directly to the feature of interest, for example flaw size, then
they might have a reasonable chance of estimating that feature.
Flaw sizing, flaw classification, and extraction of other useful information are described later in
this section. However, at this point, it is more important to concentrate on basic inspection
approaches, displays, and other factors that will be found in use throughout the power plant.
The traditional ultrasonic implementation means and display were developed on the basis of the
two fundamental principles—that time and amplitude are the main features of interest. Short-
duration sound pulses are used such that the instrumentation can quickly be switched to the
listening mode for the detection of reflectors located close to the transducers, therefore having
short propagation paths and correspondingly small propagation times. A cathode ray tube (CRT)
10-13
display is used where the horizontal axis of the display represents time, increasing from left to
right, and the vertical axis represents intensity, increasing from the base level to saturation. The
listening interval is set at sufficient duration to allow the wave to propagate to the maximum
inspection depth and back to the receiver before the next pulse is generated. Because propagation
velocities are typically in the range up to 1 in./μs (2.54 cm/μs), pulse repetition rates in the
hundreds or even thousands of pulses per second are achievable for most materials and typical
material thicknesses, while still providing sufficient listening time. By synchronizing the CRT
sweep with the pulse rate such that each sweep represents a new pulse, at such high pulse rates
the CRT display appears as continuous without perceptible flicker. In more modern, computer-
based ultrasonic systems, these same features (and others) are converted to graphical displays
that present responses in spatially correlated images, thereby adding position to the presented
time and amplitude information.
Probably 75% of all UT performed in power plants involves conventional S-wave or L-wave
techniques. The term conventional is used as a descriptive term for pulse-echo or pitch-catch
testing (pitch-catch only when the transducer elements are operated on the same surface in close
proximity to each other) using broad beams whose beam characteristics are controlled only by
transducer size and frequency and the inherent material considerations.
However, these techniques have been found to be unsuitable for certain applications—in some
cases even for detection, but more often because of unacceptable sizing error. In certain
instances, flaw detection is inadequate because sufficient beam intensity cannot be produced in a
conventional inspection mode to detect the flaw of interest. This is normally attributable to flaw
orientation relative to the achievable beam angle or simply because detection requirements are
beyond the detection capabilities of this type of inspection, as affected by certain material
characteristics including material attenuation. To a degree, the design of a particular inspection
approach can affect detection capabilities. Careful selection of transducer size and frequency to
optimize detection over the required depth range (for example by moving the peak beam
intensity point, or near field limit, to the appropriate depth) and properly control the beam spread
can have a significant effect. Material attenuation is a function of test frequency, with higher
frequency being more susceptible to attenuation than lower frequencies. In addition, basic
detection capabilities, as dictated by physics, improve (that is, smaller flaws are theoretically
more readily detected) with increased test frequency. Consequently, optimum test design often
involves a compromise among basic detection sensitivity, attenuation, near field limit, and beam
spread, as controlled by transducer size and frequency.
Flaw sizing is even more variable than detection when using conventional ultrasonic approaches
in all but very limited cases for very specifically defined flaws. The measured parameters are
limited to time and amplitude, where time is generally used to determine reflector location and
amplitude is the basis of size estimates. Response amplitude is affected by a number of
parameters, some of which are attributable to the beam (including the material effects such as
attenuation) and others are attributable to the flaw. Beam characteristics, primarily the beam
shape and intensity at the flaw, can be either removed using deconvolution algorithms or at least
10-14
accounted for during calibration. Similarly, compensation can be applied for material effects
(mainly attenuation). However, reflector efficiency is a function of many other variables in
addition to reflector size, including reflector shape, reflector orientation relative to the beam,
reflector morphology or surface roughness, and the material composition of the reflector. For
specific cases in which shape, orientation, and morphology are uniform, regular, and known, size
can be estimated from response amplitude with reasonable accuracy. That is, for flaws that are
flat, smooth, of regular shape, and oriented normally to the beam, amplitude-based sizing is
acceptable. However, any unknown deviations can have a profound impact on sizing accuracy.
The mapping of wall thickness, mainly of piping elbows, is an application whose goals are
satisfactorily achieved by conventional UT without the need to resort to advanced methods.
Advantages
The advantages of conventional UT are the following:

• It is relatively inexpensive. It requires the least investment in equipment as compared to other
UT techniques.
• Simple examinations can be performed by inspectors who are minimally trained.
• The equipment is highly portable and battery-powered, making it accessible to difficult-to-
reach locations.
Disadvantages
The disadvantages of conventional UT are the following:

• Good results are obtained only from locations and conditions that have simple geometry and
favorable alignment with a sound beam.
• Accurate sizing of indications typically ranges from poor to none.
• It is of variable quality, dependent on human factors.
Advanced Ultrasonic Testing
Time-of-Flight Diffraction
Overview
A particular tip diffraction technique called time-of-flight diffraction (TOFD) has been developed
such that some of the limitations of other tip diffraction techniques are overcome. TOFD is
implemented using two transducers that are positioned facing each other on opposite sides of the
10-15
area of interest in the component. The general TOFD arrangement is shown in Figure 10-1. The
transducers are operated in a pitch-catch mode, with one operating as the transmitter and the
other as the receiver, and the beam is specifically designed to flood the entire volume with sound
(that is, to produce broad beam spread in the through-thickness direction). In this arrangement,
forward-propagating tip signals from flaws lying between the transducers at essentially any depth
can be detected without scanning laterally. Consequently, linear volumes (that is, those having
finite width but significant length, such as welds) can be inspected using a uniaxial scan along
the length of the volume. By eliminating the need for two-dimensional raster scanning,
inspection time can be reduced significantly. Operation in a mode to optimize the detection of
forward propagating tip signals eliminates the possibility of confusing specular reflections with
tip diffraction signals in all but a few special cases. In most instances, specular reflections are
directed away from the receiver and are therefore not detected.
Figure 10-1
Transducer Arrangement and Coverage Volume for Time-of-Flight Diffraction
In the TOFD mode, with the transducers facing each other, two signals are present, regardless of
the position of the transducers on the part. One, the lateral wave, represents travel of the beam
just under the test surface, and the second represents the backwall reflection. The lateral wave
represents the shortest possible propagation time in the volume, and the backwall represents the
longest propagation time. This arrangement is shown in Figure 10-2.
Figure 10-2
Time-of-Flight Diffraction Standing Waves
10-16
Any indication falling between these two signals is indicative of a flaw between the front and
back surfaces of the component. Any mid-wall flaw having significant through-wall dimension
produces two tip signals—one from the near tip and a second from the far tip—that are displaced
in time proportional to their depths. This is shown in Figure 10-3.
Figure 10-3
Tip Signals from Mid-Wall Flaw
Transducer relative position, or probe center spacing (PCS), and beam angle are the critical setup
parameters. These are selected such that beam spread provides coverage of the entire volume of
interest. Tip depth calculations are based on PCS and measured pulse transit time for the tip
signals based on simple triangulation algorithms. Because pulse transit time is the basis for depth
measurements, including through-wall dimension, it is important that PCS be maintained at a
constant value during a scan and that the time base be properly calibrated for the selected PCS.
Simple transducer holders are used to maintain PCS during a scan.
A single D-scan image showing the length and depth of the volume inspected is generally used
for the TOFD display. An example image is shown in Figure 10-4. Data are acquired
sequentially along the length of the inspection volume at a specified interval and correlated
positionally using an optical encoder or similar device to acquire position data along the length
of the scan. Flaw length, depth, and through-wall extent can be measured accurately from the
D-scan image; however, lateral position is lost. If lateral position (for example, determination of
which side of a weld the flaw is located on) is important, either a small scan can be conducted
across the weld at the point of the flaw or offset scans can be conducted along each side of the
weld at the appropriate point. The transverse scan shows the position directly, while the offset
scans indicate position by increased signal strength on one side scan and diminished strength on
the other side.
10-17
Figure 10-4
Typical Time-of-Flight Diffraction Image Showing Lateral Wave, Backwall Reflection, Mid-
Wall Flaw, and Small Back Surface Flaw
Most test systems built with a specific TOFD mode of operation feature real-time data
presentation—that is, the image forms on the computer screen as the scan progresses. They also
have a convenient sizing feature, typically invoked through cursor position or a mouse, such that
size can be measured directly from the screen. They also typically have other features, such as
synthetic aperture focusing technique (SAFT) and certain image-straightening capabilities that
can be used by the operator to enhance data analysis.
One limitation of TOFD lies in its ability to resolve flaws near the test surface, particularly for
situations in which broad PCS is used to increase the volume of coverage. Because all flaw
signals represent a triangular beam travel path from the transmitter to the flaw tip and then to the
receiver, very shallow flaws do not differ sufficiently in travel time from the lateral wave signal
to be resolved. In certain instances, this can be overcome by shortening PCS, which increases the
relative time difference between the flaw signal and the lateral wave. For thicker components,
this can require more than a single scan pass with PCS adjusted to cover depth zones rather than
the entire thickness in one pass. Alternatively, supplemental inspection techniques can be applied
in a multichannel mode of operation
A special technique that was developed specifically for axial inspection of shafts and similar
long, narrow components to detect transverse flaws is the cylindrically guided wave technique.
When a broad-beam L-wave is introduced from the end of a long, relatively thin component, the
10-18
portions of the beam that reach the side walls are mode-converted to shear. They then travel at
S-wave velocity, with reflections and additional mode conversions occurring as they travel down
the component, arriving at the receiver later in time than the primary L-wave because of the
longer travel path and travel at least partially in the slower S-wave mode. The display shows a
series of subsidiary signals following the L-wave. Analysis of this portion of the presentation by
a trained operator provides information on the presence of side-wall flaws that are not obvious if
one is looking only for direct L-wave reflections. This technique has proven useful for the
inspection of shafts and other long components, for example for fatigue cracks that initiate at the
outer surface in a transverse direction due to cyclic bending, where the outer surfaces are covered
with other components or are otherwise inaccessible for inspection by more conventional surface
NDE methods.
TOFD is generally applicable to the inspection of a volume with a relatively simple and uniform
geometry. However, it is primarily used for the examination of seam welds and circumferential
welds in piping systems.
Advantages/Disadvantages
Advantages
The advantages of TOFD are the following:

• It provides both detection and sizing capabilities in a single scan.
• Data analysis can be performed off-line, which speeds up the acquisition process.
• The scan data are saved as a digital image, which provides for a permanent record and a
baseline for future monitoring.
Disadvantages
• It requires highly trained inspection and analysis personnel.
• The equipment is costly.
• It is not applicable to highly attenuative materials (for example, austenitic and cast
microstructures) or thick sections.
• It is not easily adapted to sections with complex geometry.
• The image does not provide the lateral position of indications, only their depth and the
location along the scan line.
10-19
Phased Array Ultrasonic Testing
Overview
An array is a type of ultrasonic transducer that has been segmented into many individual,
parallel elements. Each array element is connected to a separate pulser, receiver, and analog-to-
digital converter. The system operator can control the time at which each element is pulsed and
the time delay applied to the response received by each element. After application of the
reception delays, the elements’ received waveforms are summed to form a single, resultant
waveform. Beam focusing and angle control result from the application of precisely controlled,
nonlinear delays to both the emission pulse and the received pulse for each element in an array of
transducers. By controlling the timing, or phase, of each element’s excitation and reception, a
single array probe can be made to simulate many different conventional probes. Without moving
the probe, sound beams of many angles can be generated sequentially, inspecting a large portion
of the component’s cross section.
In this manner, a slice of a component can be scanned electronically in milliseconds instead of

being scanned mechanically in a few seconds. Instead of the slow, two-dimensional scan pattern
necessary to scan a weld joint using conventional methods, the probe can simply be swept along
the length of the weld one or more times at different array setback positions to achieve similar
results. The ability to use this line scan procedure versus the more conventional raster scan can
reduce scan times by at least an order of magnitude.
A typical phased array system includes a portable, multichannel phased array instrument (either
linked to a laptop PC or with a built-in computer processor and the array software), and a
multielement piezoelectric array probe unit.
A phased array system permits the inspection of a cross-sectional area of interest with a minimal
number of probe positions. However, additional probe positions are sometimes added to improve
coverage or in an attempt to improve the accuracy of flaw sizing. Figure 10-5 illustrates the
coverage on a typical double-V seam weld that is being examined using a phased array probe and
a line scan technique. The multiple beam angles effectively interrogate the entire fusion line
region of the seam weld. By using a large number of angles, it is easy to visualize the potential
improvements that can be realized in both speed and flaw detection and sizing capabilities.
Figure 10-5
Phased Array Coverage of a Seam Weld from Two Probe Positions
10-20
In addition to improved coverage, the automated phased array technique offers a much simpler
means of analyzing the resultant data. Even with automated UT techniques, the analysis of
conventional ultrasonic data generally takes longer than the acquisition of the data, especially if
many flaws are detected. Using phased array technology, the data analysis process tends to be
simpler, faster, and more reliable than conventional data analysis. By reviewing the B-scan
images of the different beam angles, a flaw can be very clearly identified.
Phased array technology is most beneficial in locations that have limited probe scanning space
and complex geometries. Typical examples are inspection of header ligaments and pipe welds
(mostly circumferential welds) where geometrical limitations to TOFD favor the use of phased
arrays.
The advantages of phased array UT are the following:
Advantages
• By virtue of dynamic focusing and beam sweeping, volume coverage at complex geometries
can be achieved with minimal or no probe movement.
• Both detection and sizing information can be gleaned from a single image.
• Data analysis is simpler than for other UT techniques and can be performed off-line, which
speeds up the acquisition process.
• The test data can be saved as a digital image, which provides a permanent record and a
baseline for future monitoring.
Disadvantages
The disadvantages of phased array UT are the following:

• The equipment is costly.
10-21
Acoustic Emission Crack Detection
Overview
Acoustic emission crack detection (AECD) is based on the theory that a growing crack will emit
energy in the form of sound waves, which can be detected by piezoelectric sensors attached to
the component. In order to propagate the crack, the component must be stressed when the
sensors are attached, and one of the most common methods of stressing components is by a
hydro test. An array of sensors is usually used, so that the signals from a growing crack can be
collected by sophisticated computers and the location of the crack can be identified by
triangulation.
Currently, AECD is used primarily to monitor seam-welded HRH lines.
Advantages
The advantages of AECD include the following:

• A large volume of material can be tested very rapidly.
• The data can be stored digitally for future recall.
• Sensors can be used in conjunction with waveguides that transmit the sound waves (usually
through a stainless steel rod) to the sensor. For insulated structures, only enough insulation
must be removed to enable installation of the waveguides.
It is this advantage of AECD that makes it attractive to utilities with long runs of insulated
high-energy piping. Insulation removal and reinstallation represents a major portion of the
cost of inspecting a high-energy line using conventional techniques such as MT, PT, and UT.
Disadvantages
The disadvantages of AECD include the following:

• It is sometimes difficult to separate the signal noise from background, even with the use of
the most advanced (and expensive) instrumentation.
• Source location can be very difficult in complex geometries.
• If transient conditions are required to activate the source, a very narrow window of
opportunity might exist to detect the flaw(s).
10-22
Pulsed Eddy Current Testing
Overview
Pulsed eddy current testing (pulsed ET) technology is showing promise for measuring pipe wall
thicknesses without the requirement to remove the thermal insulation first. This provides the
opportunity to perform inspections while the plant is on load when it might be more convenient
logistically, and it also reduces or eliminates the costs of insulation removal and reinstatement.
Conventional ET generally uses a single high-frequency excitation to inspect the near surface of
a component. Pulsed ET, on the other hand, uses a burst of low-frequency excitation. The
progress of the generated currents and their reciprocal effect on the probe coil are measured as a
function of time. In this way, changes in the decay of the interaction can be converted into
measurements of the thickness of the component.
The primary use for pulsed ET is to measure wall thickness reductions caused by FAC. In this
case, the metal loss is on the inner surface of the pipe, but the technique works equally well when
the wastage is on the OD. Therefore, it can also be used to find corrosion underneath insulation.
Advantages
The advantage of pulsed ET is the following:

• It eliminates the high cost of insulation removal and restoration by making the wall thickness
measurement through the insulation and the thin aluminum cladding.
Disadvantages
The disadvantages of pulsed ET are the following:

• It is not as accurate as UT wall thickness measurement techniques.
• Its spatial resolution is much coarser than UT; thickness values represent an average of a
relatively large area.
• The equipment is expensive and highly dedicated; it cannot be applied to perform other ET
work.
10-23
Radiographic Testing
Overview
Radiography, or radiographic testing (RT), has been a primary weld inspection technique for
many years. This technique passes gamma radiation through the component and records the
exiting backside radiation by either photographic or electronic means. The gamma radiation can
be produced either by a radioactive source or by an X-ray machine.
Radioactive sources commonly use the radioisotope iridium-192 for activity up to 370 E10 bq
(100 Ci), and cobalt-60 for higher activity levels. X-ray machines produce gamma radiation by
bombarding a metallic target with fast electrons in a vacuum. Whether an X-ray machine or a
radioactive source is appropriate for a particular inspection depends on a number of factors,
• X-ray machines produce a directional radiation field that is concentrated in a smaller area.
This tends to reduce the peripheral shielding and safety requirements associated with the test,
as well as limiting the size of the area that is inspected.
• X-ray machines of sufficient power to inspect large, thick-walled components are usually
stationary. This means that the component must be brought to the X-ray machine. Normally,
material handling equipment associated with the X-ray machine is used to rotate or otherwise
move the component to allow a complete inspection. A common example is a circumferential
weld in a pressure vessel. To inspect this weld using an X-ray machine, the vessel can be
rotated. The stationary X-ray machine makes successive readings through the rotating weld
until the entire weld has been inspected.
• Radioactive sources produce an omnidirectional radiation field, which must be limited by
careful design of the source container or the use of auxiliary shielding, or both. Generally,
safety requirements such as area evacuation during the test can be more restrictive for the use
of radioactive sources than for X-ray machines.
• The radioactive source can be transported to the component, so it is usually superior to X-ray
machines for field inspections.
• The omnidirectional radiation field provided by a radioactive source can be used to inspect
large areas quickly. A common example is inspecting a circumferential weld in a pressure
vessel. The source can be placed at the center of the vessel, and the outside of the
circumferential weld can be wrapped with X-ray film. If the radioactive source is then
triggered, the entire weld is inspected at the same time. Unlike the X-ray machine, no
component rotation is required.
Generally, radiography is used to inspect welds. The most common use in power plants is for
inspecting repair welds in boiler tubes. It is ideal for detecting macroscopic defects that are
common to welds, such as porosity or slag inclusion.
10-24
Advantages
The advantages of RT include the following:

• It is a nondestructive method.
• A permanent film record of each inspection is available for archiving and later review.
• In the United States, radiography is the most commonly recognized method for inspecting
numerous types of welds.
Disadvantages
The disadvantages of RT include the following:

• There are significant safety requirements. The test procedure must protect personnel from
radiation exposure, and radioactive sources must be handled properly by qualified personnel.
• It is nonquantitative; defects cannot be located (depth) or sized precisely.
• Results for components with complicated, nonuniform section thickness can be difficult to
interpret.
Guided Wave Ultrasonic Testing
Overview
In guided wave UT, the ultrasonic wave propagates in the axial (longitudinal) direction in the test
specimen. The test probe is typically a flexible strip or belt equipped with multiple transducers
along its length. This belt is wrapped around the outer surface of the pipe using an inflatable
bladder, which forces the transducers to form a tight contact with the OD surface of the pipe. The
guided wave transmitted from the sensors propagates in the axial direction of the pipe, and when
it encounters an anomaly (for example, wall loss, a bracket, or a t-branch) a transmitted wave is
reflected back to the sensor. The distance from the sensor to the location of the anomaly is
measured by recording the round-trip travel time of the guided wave.
The nature and magnitude of the anomaly can be deducted from an analysis of the detected
waveform of the returning echo. Interpretation of the data is also aided by drawings of the
pipeline that show the location of welds, branches, valves, and any other feature that deviates
from the smooth pipe configuration. The reach of the guided wave can extend to several hundred
feet from the location of the sensor belt. Actual effective length of coverage depends on the
contact that the pipe is making with other media on the ID and OD sides (for example, whether
the pipe is insulated or not, whether it is full of water or empty, or whether it is in contact with
wet, compacted soil or just loose gravel).
10-25
Guided wave UT applies most commonly to the inspection of buried or otherwise inaccessible
pipelines; therefore, it is used to inspect service water lines. Because of its versatility, guided
wave UT can also be applied to monitoring loss of wall of insulated lines with only minimal
removal of insulation.
Advantages
The advantages of guided wave UT include the following:

• It allows the inspection of buried or otherwise inaccessible pipes from a small, exposed
location.
• It allows the inspection of insulated lines without complete the removal of the insulation.
• The data acquisition step is very rapid and minimally invasive.
Disadvantages
The disadvantages of guided wave UT include the following:

• It is not as accurate as conventional UT wall thickness measurement techniques.
• Its spatial resolution is much coarser than conventional UT; measured thickness values
represent an average of full circumference at the location of the anomaly.
10-26
11
METALLURGICAL EXAMINATION AND ANALYSIS
AND MATERIAL CHARACTERIZATION
Introduction
Postexposure characterization of fossil plant materials is commonly conducted in two instances:

1) after a failure has occurred, material analysis is typically performed during a root-cause
investigation, and 2) if a proactive Level III investigation and prediction of remaining life is
being conducted, quantitative knowledge of the current material condition is required, which
often necessitates destructive sampling, laboratory analysis, and property determinations.
Destructive sampling of exposed material can be used as part of a comprehensive assessment

program to determine the current actual accumulation of material degradation. Often laboratory
analysis of piping material can provide more accurate degradation assessment and engineering
design detail on the existing condition of the component than can be obtained through NDE
techniques alone. However, there are several drawbacks to material sampling, including the
following:
• Material sampling is expensive and time consuming, and it typically requires some form of
repair or remediation
• Repair or remediation activities can often lead to a more damage-susceptible section of
piping.
• The most susceptible materials can be difficult to reach, which can make sampling difficult,
expensive, and sometimes dangerous.
• Statistically meaningful material sampling can be difficult to achieve, and material that
shows limited damage can be collected for analysis within 2 ft (61 cm) of an area with
extensive degradation, which can result in false life estimation.
11-1
Metallurgical Examination and Analysis and Material Characterization
Table 11-1 outlines many of the invasive testing options for high-energy piping.
Table 11-1
Invasive Testing Options for High-Energy Piping
Sample Type Test Technique Data Acquired
Replication Fusion line, interior weld metal, HAZ

damage (limited to exposed surface)
Hardness testing
Cavitation
Liquid penetrant testing (PT)
Cracking
Magnetic particle testing (MT)
Slag inclusion density
On-pipe (grind out to Spheroidization

subsurface) Sulfide segregation
Hardness profile
Grain size and type
Fusion line cracking
Removal of OD crack or weld flaw
(adequacy of weld repair preparation)
Replication Fusion line cracking

Hardness testing Interior weld metal damage
Optical micrograph Cavitation
Electron micrograph Inclusion density
Cryo-cracking Spheroidization
Boat or core plug
Cross-weld stress rupture test Fine-grain HAZ damage
sample
on miniature tensile sample
Weld centerline
Type IV
Hardness profile
Grain size and type
Desired inspection interval confirmation
11-2

Invasive Testing Options for High-Energy Piping
Sample Type Test Technique Data Acquired
Replication Fusion line cracking

Hardness testing Interior weld metal damage
Optical micrograph Cavitation
Electron micrograph Inclusion density
Cryo-cracking Spheroidization
Ring sample
Cross-weld stress rupture test Fine-grain HAZ damage
Tensile and toughness tests Weld centerline
Type IV
Hardness profile
Grain size and type
This section briefly reviews several destructive sampling and analysis techniques that can be a
vital part of an effective high-energy piping assessment program.
Material Sampling
Direct laboratory analysis and testing of material removed from plants has been widely used to
provide evidence regarding condition. However, the ability to undertake sampling in critical
locations is often limited, so the advantages of detailed metallographic characterization and
testing are not always realized. Improved techniques for specimen removal have recently been
established. Indeed, the ability to remove material in an effectively nondestructive manner has led to
the development of a range of advanced approaches for measuring critical material properties
from miniature tests. The following sections review methods of material removal and describe
recent advances in the measurement of properties.
Large-Sample Collection Methods
Large metal samples can allow full-size materials testing and multiple types of testing from a
single sample. Several techniques have been developed for removal of large pieces of material
from components. Each technique requires good access in the region of interest both for sample
removal and, where appropriate, post-sampling repair.
11-3
Boat Sampling
Boat samples are removed from the surface of components by the cutting action of a slightly
concave, circular saw blade. Two adjacent cuts are made into the surface and the sample released
resembles that of a boat hull. Significant amounts of material can be removed in this way with
sample lengths typically in the range of 1–4 in. (25–100 mm). However, it is usually necessary to
weld repair the sampled location.
Uncertainties regarding the effects of local weld repair on future component performance usually limit
the use of boat sampling to regions where extensive damage has been detected and major repairs are
known to be required. In this case, the boat samples are used to characterize the damage present.
In situations where samples of this type have been removed to evaluate the condition of
undamaged components, experience shows that the repair of the sampled region can itself develop
cracks if the repair process is not carefully controlled.
Plug Sampling
Cylindrical plug samples have been removed from header and piping components. With this
approach, a hole saw is passed through the component wall to remove a through-thickness section of
material. Where no component feature is present to establish the orientation of the plug, the
component should be marked before sampling to allow sectioning and laboratory investigations to be
performed with reference to selected component directions. Samples of approximately 1–3 in. (25–
75 mm) in diameter have been removed. Repair procedures usually involve capping the hole with
a blank, oversized stub or socket-welding a purpose-made section of material into the hole. This
approach has been successfully used to provide metallographic information and specimens for
postexposure testing. The method is limited to locations where good access is available for both
sample removal and repair.
Small-Sample Collection Methods
Often, large sample removal either is not practical because it will require significant material
repair or there is limited access, or is not possible because there is insufficient material available
for large sample removal. In recent years, small-sample analysis techniques that can be
correlated to standard test results have increased the viability of small sample removal. Several
small-sample collection methods are described in the following paragraphs.
Small Cone Sampling
Small cone samples of approximately 0.2 in. (5 mm) base diameter and 0.2 in. (5 mm) height
have been removed using a device based on the air abrasive technique used for hole cutting
during residual strain measurement. A cutting head was developed that holds the nozzle of the
abrasive jet at the correct angle and distance from the selected location and permits orbital
movement such that a cone-shaped sample can be removed. The cutting head and its driving motor
are secured to the component by mechanical clamps, and sample removal is achieved by
bombarding the surface with a stream of abrasive particles. The samples can be used to examine the
material microstructure using optical or electron microscopy.
11-4
Laboratory trials were performed to optimize the operating parameters of air pressure, powder type
and flow, nozzle orbital rate, and nozzle distance to the component. Although these trials were
successful in overcoming a number of difficulties, problems of nozzle erosion were reported. In
addition, having successfully removed the conical specimen, the sampled region must be blended
to minimize stress concentrations.
Sample Removal by Drilling
A method for removing shallow, prismatic samples of material from headers using a chain drilling rig
has been developed. With this method, the rig is attached to the component using straps and then a
series of drilling operations are carried out. When the drilling operations are complete, a section of
material approximately 0.8 in. (20 mm) in length and 0.4 in. (10 mm) in depth is removed. This
material could be subjected to a range of metallographic studies, but the particular application
reported was to machine a blank cylinder approximately 0.1 in. (3 mm) in diameter by 0.6 in.
(15mm) in length. This cylinder was then used to manufacture a miniature test sample for
postexposure creep testing. The method was developed primarily to extract material from thick-
section components where excavations of approximately 0.5 in. (12 mm) could be blended
without the need for repair. By modifying the drilling jig, it is possible to remove larger samples.
However, in this case, repair of the component would usually be required.
Surface Sampling System
The surface sampling (SSAM) system was developed to remove material from the surface of plant
components without introducing thermal or mechanical damage to the sample removed or the
component [11-1]. Thus, no post-sampling treatment is required before further operation.
A sample, approximately disc shaped, is removed by the action of a hemispherical shell cutter. The
cutter is a hardened steel, hemispherical shell that is 2 in. (5.1 cm) in diameter and 0. 01 in. (0.25 mm)
thick. The cutting surface consists of cubic boron nitride grit applied to the edge of the shell. This
shell is spun about its axis of symmetry at over 4000 RPM and rotated about an orthogonal axis
through the material being sampled.
The sample thickness depends on the depth to which the spherical cutter is set before beginning
the cut, and the width depends on the depth of the cut, the cutter radius, and the contour of the
sampled surface. Typical depths are from 0.03 to 0.1in. (0.76 to 2.5 mm), with widths varying up to
1 in. (2.5 cm).
The machine that drives the cutter is designed for operation in confined spaces as small as 3 in.
(76 mm) in diameter. Thus, the equipment can be used inside relatively narrow tubes and pipes or
inside the bores of turbine rotors. The device is positioned by the use of a rod coupled to the rear
trunnion. In general, the sampling location is identified by visual examination or surface NDE.
After the device has been located, a clamping shoe is actuated by an air cylinder that engages the
upper surface. Cutter drive-motor current and cutter feed position information are provided to the
operator. The feed rate is controllable to accommodate the very shallow entry angle that the cutter
makes with the part and to maintain a constant cutting torque throughout the cut.
11-5
The cutter is mounted on a spindle and trunnion that is rotated to feed the cutter into the work.
This feed motion is controlled by a stepper motor, gear train, and lead screw mechanism to
maintain a desired load on the cutter. The cutter is driven through a flexible shaft to
accommodate the feed rotation.
Coolant is delivered to the inner diameter of the shell, where it flows outward along the cutter shell
as a result of centrifugal force, clearing the cutter swarf and cooling the process. Coolant is
recovered through a suction tube and is recycled. When the cut is complete, a magnet attached to
the underside of the cutter trunnion captures the sample. Deactivation of the clamp allows the
device to rise up on its suspension, so that the cutter is clear of the interior surface. The device,
with the sample, is then removed.
Remediation
Following any sampling program, remediation of the damage caused by sampling is often
necessary to maintain structural integrity in the component. Remediation of sampling damage
can include repair welding buildup with filler material, repair welding overlays with weld metal,
repair welding with pad overlay, welding of material plugs into extraction holes, pipe cutout and
replacement, and so on. In all cases, it is important that proper welding procedures with post- and
preweld heat treatments be performed to minimize the variation in materials properties from the
base metal to the weldment. Weldments are always more sensitive to a variety of degradation
mechanisms, and the repair weld can become a preferential location for future damage. Post-
repair inspection is important, and special attention should be paid to remediated areas. It is also
important to understand the nature of the damage that is being removed and repaired. Cracks will
often continue to propagate into a newly welded region; therefore, material removal does not
always guarantee defect elimination.
Hardness Testing
Overview
Hardness is defined as the resistance of a metal to indentation, scratching, cutting, and so forth.
When hardness is measured by pressing a very hard ball or diamond point into the metal under
restrained conditions, the depth of penetration can be correlated with the material’s tensile
strength. This process is conducted with hardness testing machines or indenting equipment on
scales including Rockwell, Brinell, Knoop or Vickers, which differ in the type, size, and
geometry of indenter as well as the level of indentation force. There are other types of hardness
measurements; for example, Equotip testers use a spring-loaded impact body that is propelled
against a test piece. The ratio of impact to rebound velocity is compared to a Leeb scale to
determine material hardness.
Portable indention or impact hardness testers come in many varieties and are useful as NDE tools
because they can indicate hard or soft spots in components, which can be indicative of
component damage. Because the microstructural changes that are created during high-
temperature exposure affect tensile strength, theoretically they should also impact hardness.
11-6
Therefore, estimates of hardness for high-energy piping components can be of assistance in

predicting remaining life. Hardness traverses across welds can indicate whether the weld has
been stress relieved. Because of its low cost, simplicity, and rapid data acquisition, this technique
has many applications in a plant NDE program.
It has been suggested that hardness measurements made under ambient conditions can reflect the
amount and rate of high-temperature damage development. However, hardness measurements taken
under plant conditions are susceptible to wide scatter, making accurate life assessment difficult if
not impossible. The scatter in plant data can be explained in part by surface preparation; the level of
surface roughness affects hardness, particularly at low loads for softer microstructural forms.
Figures 11-1 and 11-2 indicate that significant variations in hardness versus load were observed
in 1 Cr 1/2 Mo steel parent or weld metal for surfaces ground to 300 grit finish versus those
polished to l µm diamond finish (using standard metallographic preparation), both within the
population of a specific grinding technique and comparing one technique to another.
Figure 11-1
Variation in Measured Hardness with Indenter Load for a 1 Cr 1/2 Mo Steel Sample Ground
to a 300-Grit Finish
11-7
Figure 11-2
Variation in Hardness with Indenter Load for a 1 Cr 1/2 Mo Steel Sample Polished to a 1-μm
Diamond Finish
For the same material, only small changes in hardness with indenter load were found for samples
prepared with repeat polish and etch cycles (see Figure 11-3). Measurements on similar weld metal
specimens indicated similar trends, but with the overall effect being somewhat reduced. The
results obtained in this investigation illustrate how mechanical preparation results in a worked
surface layer. The extent of this worked layer increases for coarser mechanical operations and for
softer substrates.
Figure 11-3
Variation in Hardness with Indenter Load for a 1CrMo Steel Sample That Had Been
Repeatedly Polished
11-8
It has been suggested that the following factors that will influence hardness values for a given material:
• Surface preparation
• Number of measurements
• Workmanship
• Wall thickness
• Degree of surface flatness
• Measuring orientation
• Type of tester
• Indenter load
• Oxidation or decarburization of the surface
A number of evaluations have examined the changes in hardness that occur with aging at elevated
temperature. In several cases, the decrease in hardness with increased tempering is sensible.
Therefore, hardness can be described using a time and temperature factor in a similar manner to
the LMP, using equations of the form shown in Equations 11-1 and 11-2.
HV = A - B * P Eq. 11-1
where A and B are material constants and P is calculated from
P = T (20 +log f) Eq. 11-2
Thus, if proper care is taken in preparing the surface and making the measurements, it is apparent
that hardness data can be used to differentiate between hot and cold regions of a component.
Moreover, where repeat measurements have been taken at different times at a given location, the data
should allow a reasonable estimate of the equivalent operating temperature.
To use hardness measurements to estimate remaining life, one must ignore the well-known fact that
hardness is affected by factors other than precipitate size and distribution (for example, grain size)
and make simplifying assumptions regarding the relationship of hardness with interparticle
spacing. Where large databases have been developed for widely used alloys, analysis indicates
that trends in behavior can be identified. Thus, for 2-1/4 Cr 1 Mo steel, it appears that it is
possible to apply a lower bound criterion to provide a realistic minimum remaining life indicator.
Although this approach can be used as a guide to remaining life in some situations, it should not
be applied when accurate estimates of condition are required.
11-9
Alloy Identification
Identifying component alloy chemistry is critical to predicting material degradation and

predicting life. With time, documentation of materials of construction can be lost, necessitating
alloy identification. In addition, accidental substitution of materials occurs and can have
catastrophic results in critical applications should a lower grade of material be mistakenly
substituted for the properly specified material. Field identification or verification of the materials
of construction for fossil power plant components consists of various techniques, some of which
can be performed in situ.
The three primary methods are manufacturer’s identification, qualitative field identification, and
quantitative field identification. The manufacturer method relies on the use of documentation and
physical markings on components to identify or verify the materials of construction. Qualitative
field techniques include analysis of materials through tests other than chemical analysis.
Quantitative identification is performed through the use of chemical analysis (in situ or
otherwise). Most field methods are nondestructive, so that the removal of a material sample is
unnecessary; however; a minimal amount of surface preparation is required.
Manufacturer’s Identification
Manufacturer’s identification relies on the use of documentation and physical markings on the
actual components. In general, manufacturers provide material certifications with critical
components. These certifications include certificates of heat analysis (or mill certs), which
provide a chemical analysis of an ingot or billet that was used as the starting point in the
fabrication of a component, and certificates of product analysis, which provide a chemical
analysis of the actual component after fabrication. Materials specifications contained in materials
lists, design drawings, owners manuals, and so forth should not be used interchangeably with
certificates of analysis. Furthermore, the use of manufacturer’s identification necessitates an
absolute correlation of the analysis certificate with the actual component. This correlation is
typically carried out through the use of physical markings.
Physical identification of materials includes the use of symbols or markings that provide a code
to the material identification of a component. These symbols or markings include foundry marks
embossed on the exterior of castings, color coding or stenciling of new materials, and stampings
or embossing on forged components. Foundry markings on castings can provide information on
the ASTM grade, foundry name or logo, heat number, and alloy type. Additional information
such as design pressure and temperature rating can also be included. Similar information on
ASTM grade, forge shop name, heat number, and design pressure and temperature rating can be
found in the stampings on forged components. When foundry or forging markings are not
identifiable or are questionable, in situ alloy identification using qualitative or quantitative
methods can be used.
11-10
Qualitative Alloy Identification
Qualitative techniques include analysis of materials through tests other than chemical analysis.
These methods use the physical properties of the material—including metal color, magnetic
behavior, density measurements, spark testing, chemical spot testing, thermoelectric testing,
metallographic examinations, and optical emission spectroscopy—in the identification process,.
The use of metal color is a method to sort different alloy groups that exhibit unique color
differences (such as dark yellow bronzes from reddish coppers or silvery white aluminums) but
not to sort alloys within a group. Magnetic behavior can be used as a simple test to separate
magnetic materials from nonmagnetic materials. Even more sophisticated alloy identification
techniques based on ET are available.
Quantitative Alloy Identification
Quantitative field techniques sort and identify material by actual chemical analysis of the
component at one or more locations. Although in situ chemical analysis techniques do not
typically analyze for all elements present in a material, they are typically comprehensive enough
to identify unknown materials and provide certain compositional data with a high degree of
accuracy. These techniques are based on X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy (XRF). In XRF, an
X-ray beam impinging on the surface of an unknown material causes the surface atoms of
specific chemical elements in the material to emit fluorescent X-rays. These fluorescent X-rays
have unique energy levels and wavelengths that are characteristic of the specific chemical
elements in the unknown material. These characteristic X-rays are passed through detectors to
measure either the energy level or the wavelengths. Typically, the measurements are analyzed by
a microprocessor that compares the percentages of the chemical elements present in the unknown
material to programmed compositions of specific alloys. The instrument then identifies the alloy,
if the measured composition matches a programmed alloy, and displays the percentages of the
measured elements.
Many instruments used for this method of alloy identification are very portable for field
applications and provide quantitative analysis results in an efficient and timely manner. In
addition, a range of instruments exist. The selection of which instrument to use depends on time
constraints, number of elements to be analyzed, and precision required from the measurements.
In general, the accuracy of measurements depends on the specific instrument and the surface
conditions at the test location. Typically, some degree of surface preparation is required for the
effective use of these instruments. Specifically, a test location must be selected that is
representative of the bulk of the component because the fluorescent X-rays are obtained from
only a comparatively thin layer of the material. Also, the test area should be sufficiently large for
the particular instrument. Surface curvature and irregularities should be minimized, and all
extraneous surface materials (scale, oxide, deposits, coatings, paints, oils, or greases) must be
removed. In addition, the surface finish must be controlled through the use of grinding unless the
test location is a finished or machined surface.
11-11
Material Testing
Several forms of destructive materials testing techniques can reveal not only the mechanical
properties of a material but also the fundamentally microstructural constituency that is producing
those properties. The following subsections describe various forms of mechanical testing and
metallographic examination.
Mechanical Testing
Structural alloys are selected by and used for their combination of strength, ductility, and crack
resistance. Therefore, there must be ways of measuring and categorizing material behavior in a
laboratory that will indicate mechanical performance in service. Many standard laboratory
mechanical tests can determine the mechanical properties of a material, including tensile testing,
toughness testing, creep testing, fatigue testing, and fracture mechanics testing. The most
relevant of these are described in the following paragraphs.
• Tensile Testing. Basic strength properties—including yield strength, ultimate tensile
strength, elongation, and reduction in cross-sectional area—are determined with a tensile test.
Tensile tests can be performed with a variety of round or flat specimen geometries. During
the test, a uniaxial tensile load is applied continuously until the test specimen fails; the
applied load and change in gauge length are measured. Engineering stress and strain are
calculated by dividing the applied load by the original cross-sectional area and the specimen
extension by the original gauge length.
• Toughness Testing. Toughness is the ability of a material to absorb energy in the form of
plastic deformation without fracturing. The toughness of steels is directly related to the rate
at which energy is imparted to the material and the temperature at which the testing is
conducted. Most steels go through a ductile-to-brittle transition at low temperatures (near
32°F [0°C] depending on several factors), in which the steel loses the ability to absorb
impact-type energy and becomes brittle. Toughness can be evaluated by either measuring the
ductile-to-brittle transition temperature through a Charpy V-notch or other impact testing
method or by using fracture toughness tests such as crack opening displacement testing. An
extensive description of toughness testing for high-temperature components can be found in
Damage Mechanisms and Life Assessment of High Temperature Components [11-2]. A small
punch test can be used to determine the fracture appearance transition temperature (FATT) of
service-exposed material [11-3]. The method relies on empirical correlations developed
between the transition temperature (the temperature range over which the ductile-brittle-
transition occurs) measured on small punch tests to the Charpy FATT values acquired on
standard sized Charpy specimens.
• Creep Testing. Creep testing measures the high-temperature response of a material to tensile
loading. Creep properties can be measured by creep, creep relaxation, and creep rupture tests.
The measured creep rate response can be used directly in life estimations or indirectly in
time-dependent stress analyses or creep crack growth analyses. Creep tests measure
deformation of a metal as a function of a constant load (typically a uniaxial dead weight) and
temperature. Creep relaxation tests, of less interest for power plant steels, are similar except
that the load is continually decreased during testing instead of remaining constant. In both
11-12
cases, strain is measured during the testing. Stress-rupture and time-to-failure tests are similar
to creep and creep rupture tests, except that no strains are measured. Accelerated creep-
rupture testing has become a common method for determination of the remaining life of
components subject to creep damage; it is described in detail in the “Accelerated Creep-
Rupture Testing” subsection of this section.
For the most part, testing can be conducted in a laboratory with postexposure material if
sufficient material is available to make standard specimen sizes. In all cases, mechanical
properties are directly related to microstructural morphology. Because steel morphology changes
with exposure to time at temperature, mechanical properties change, as well. If the original
mechanical properties (in the as-delivered condition) are known, then comparison to
postexposure properties can indicate the amount of microstructural damage and remaining life
can be estimated. Weldments are often the primary locations of interest because their inherent
morphological variation and resultant property inhomogeneity make them susceptible to many
degradation mechanisms. Considering the material volume requirements for standard testing, the
difficulties in obtaining statistically meaningful representative samples, and the focus on welds,
it can be difficult to obtain a sufficient amount of postexposure material for accurate laboratory
testing. With relatively large samples, laboratory evaluation can be performed using normal
practices. Intermediate-sized samples are amenable to metallographic evaluation, but
postexposure testing normally requires the fabrication of sub-sized specimens.
Metallographic Examination
Metallography first gained prominence in the 1800s, when the first modern metallurgists
discovered that if a metal surface was properly prepared and attacked with acid, the fundamental
“cell” structure (actually the crystal structure) could be revealed. Metallographic sample
preparation became an art form; it includes the following three basic steps:
1. Grinding. The first step in metallographic preparation is to grind a metal surface to a fine
finish by using abrasives of decreasing coarseness. Typically, sand paper of increasing grit
size (decreasing coarseness) is used to grind grooves of finer and finer indentation on the
surface of the metal at different angles for each grit size. The surface is ground until the
grooves from the previous grit size are no longer evident. Depending on the hardness of the
metal being examined, metallographers will start with 200 grit paper and reduce to a final
paper size of approximately 800 grit.
2. Polishing. The second step is to take the finely ground surface and polish it to a mirror finish
by using abrasive solutions of decreasing particle size. Typically slurries of diamond or
alumina particles of a common particle size distribution (mesh size) are produced in colloidal
suspensions. The fluids are dispersed on a mechanically rotating polishing wheel that has
been covered with some form of paper or cloth, which collects and holds the polishing
medium while preventing contamination of other sized hard particles that could scratch the
surface. Again, depending on the hardness of the material being polished, a cascading order
of decreasing particle size starting around 9 μm and finishing around 0.05 μm is used to
continually decrease the size of the abrasive polishing marks until a mirror finish is achieved.
11-13
Ultimately, the goal of the grinding and polishing process is to create a perfectly flat surface
that reflects light.
3. Etching. The final step is to attack the perfectly flat surface with an acid and create
controlled surface relief. Each of the various phases and microstructural constituents within a
polycrystalline structure has a different level of internal energy. Grain boundaries (borders
between crystals) and other discontinuities within the crystalline matrix have higher energy
levels than the surrounding perfect crystal. When an acid is applied, the first locations to
become anodes and corrode are the high-energy locations. As specific locations on the
perfectly flat, polished surface corrode preferentially, the surface begins to have areas of
surface relief that scatter and reflect light. When the etched surface is examined under a light
microscope, the preferentially etched areas show as darker than the surrounding untouched
matrix, which still reflects all of the light back like a mirror. In this way, the various
microstructural features can be seen on a pseudo-two-dimensional plane.
The type, size, and distribution (known as morphology) of microstructural constituents determine
the macroscopic mechanical properties of any structural alloy. Because all microstructural
constituents have varying thermodynamic stability, which depends on exposure time to a specific
temperature (amount of input energy), microstructural morphology can and does change during
high-temperature service exposure. In fact, there is a well-defined series of microstructural
evolutional changes as a function of time at operational temperature. Therefore, microstructural
examination can indicate 1) the effective service temperatures of a specific component, and
2) where the component is currently with respect to overall property degradation.
For example, many of the steels used in high-temperature service derive their creep resistance from
a dispersion of second-phase precipitates. Despite the fact that most of these steels typically enter
service in the normalized and tempered condition, aging occurs during operation. In the majority
of cases, this aging reduces the strength of the component. Attempts have been made to link the size and
distribution of precipitates present with thermal history. While in most cases the uncertainties present
render direct life assessment inaccurate, success has been achieved linking aging characteristics to an
equivalent operating temperature. Thus, in circumstances where a representative value of operating
temperature is required for calculation purposes, these estimates are valuable.
Initial work in this area involved microstructural assessment using optical metallography with the
microstructures classified using a simple assessment of the degree of spheroidization. Five categories
were established and related to creep strength by conducting laboratory tests. Although this was a
reasonable approach where extreme aging had taken place (for example where overheating occurred in
tubing), in general, it does not provide sufficient detail for acceptable operational performance.
Detailed assessment of changes in the precipitates present requires the application of electron
optics (which have higher resolution than light metallographic sample preparations). Thus,
assessment of carbides in metallic samples removed from a plant or by undertaking specialist
replication procedures allows assessment of coarsening behavior through application of an
equation of the form shown in Equation 11-3.
d3t-d30=Kt Eq. 11-3
11-14
Where:
do is the initial carbide size.
dt is the average carbide size after time, t.
K is a temperature-dependent constant for a given alloy.
For a particular component, the value of K can be determined by repeated sampling. Comparison
with values obtained from laboratory aging studies then allows the effective temperature to be
determined. Alternatively, an assessment of the remaining component life can be made by
assuming the average particle size to give failure, df, by using Equation 11-4.
d3f -d3t = K tf Eq. 11-4
Where:
tf is the failure time.
An average particle size of 330 nm has been measured at failure in 1/2 Cr 1/2 Mo 1/4 V pipe
material in laboratory tests conducted above 1112°F (600°C). No information is available for
tests under typical service conditions.
Metallurgical Replication
Overview
Replication is an in situ nondestructive method for reproducing the surface topography from a
component. Similar to the metallographic techniques described in the previous subsection, the
replication process can reproduce spatial geometry and orientation as well as morphological
details comparable to those from optical metallography and in some case electron optics.
Examination of replicas using either optical or scanning electron microscopy is useful for
evaluating and characterizing the microstructural morphological characteristics of the surface
material of the component. Replication can be performed using a wide range of materials and
procedures depending on the features to be reproduced and evaluated. The most commonly
referred to replication method is the reproduction of microstructural features using metallurgical
replication; however, casting replicas are also commonly used in the assessment of component
condition.
Casting Replication
Quantitative assessment of macroscopic surface geometry is often a necessary step in the

evaluation of numerous damage mechanisms that cause macroscopic changes. Silicon rubber or
acetate castings (replicas) can be made of components for laboratory examination of features
associated with erosion, corrosion, dimensional changes, and cracking. In addition, castings can
be sectioned to provide direct measurements of feature dimensions. However, it must be realized
11-15
that the dimensional accuracy retained in a casting replica is highly dependent on the replication
material used, curing times and temperatures, and local environmental factors.
This form of replication is also routinely used as an effective method for the removal and
preservation of surface deposits or contaminates for subsequent chemical analysis and
identification. In addition, these replicas provide archival evidence of the dimensions and
morphology of a surface condition or feature against which future results can be compared to
establish specific rates of change.
Metallurgical Replication
Metallurgical replication is a field-implemented technique that allows for NDE of material

microstructure and metallurgical condition. It is the most commonly used form of replication in
the condition assessment of fossil power plant components. In lieu of replicas, a metallurgical
evaluation of material condition or an identification of relevant damage mechanisms requires the
destructive removal of material samples from a component, submittal of the samples to a
metallurgical laboratory, preparation and analysis of the sample, and repair of the sampled
location—all tasks that require significant time and expense to complete. Metallurgical
replication allows metallurgical analysis of large numbers of locations in a timely manner
without requiring repair, provided that the surface of examination is accessible.
Metallurgical replication is performed following standard metallographic techniques used in a

laboratory; however, replication is performed in situ on the component under examination.
Specifically, portable equipment is used for the grinding stages to prepare the surface for
subsequent polishing. As with grinding, polishing is carried out in progressively finer steps to
remove scratches and the deformed surface layer that can interfere with detailed microstructural
interpretation. After polishing is completed, the surface is etched with a suitable etchant solution
to reveal the microstructural features of interest. When preparation is complete, a thin piece of
acetate film is moistened in acetone and applied to the prepared surface. The acetate conforms to
the surface, duplicating the surface features (although in reverse). When the acetate film is dry, it
is removed from the component and placed on a slide for analysis using a standard metallograph
or portable microscope. Following proper procedures, replicas can be produced that can be
interpreted using optical microscopes at magnifications up to 1000X or scanning electron
microscopes with up to 5000X magnifications.
The characterization of microstructures, with emphasis on identifying fabrication history

(forging, casting, or welded construction), heat-treatment (annealed or as-fabricated), and typical
structures (decarburization, quenched structures, spheroidization, and graphitization) can be
carried out on-site with the use of replication. Characterization can also include the separation
and identification of benign fabrication-induced defects (laminations, forging laps, slag, porosity,
or liquation cracking) from deleterious service-induced damage. Service-induced damage
mechanisms could include spheroidization, graphitization, creep, fatigue (mechanical or
thermal), hydrogen cracking, stress corrosion cracking, and corrosion. Each mechanism can be
identified so that only the appropriate remedial actions are undertaken, which minimizes
unnecessary maintenance efforts.
11-16
Metallurgical replication is used extensively for the evaluation of microstructural degradation

(such as thermal softening, spheroidization, precipitation, graphitization, and decarburization)
that occur due to long term exposure elevated temperatures. It must be realized that these
changes can affect critical properties (such as creep ductility and strength) of the material, and
thus affect the service life. When these microstructural changes are observed, they can affect the
materials properties selected in subsequent analytical assessments. Therefore, replication can
provide assistance in the selection of critical material properties in the analytical prediction of
crack growth or remaining life.
Historically, the most important use for metallurgical replication in the fossil power industry has
been in the assessment and prediction of useful life of components subject to creep damage, and
specifically high-energy piping systems. Creep is a progressive damage mechanism that begins
as isolated grain boundary cavities. (See Section 7, Damage Mechanisms and Models, for
details.) As damage progresses, the density of cavities increases until microcracks form.
Microcrack development is followed by macrocrack formation and propagation. Creep damage
detected through replication can be described using qualitative or quantitative approaches, such
as the Neubauer system and A-parameter method, respectively [11-4, 11-5].
The Neubauer system allows rapid (however, subjective) classification of creep cavitation and
cracking that, when used with generalized correlations of life-fraction, allows for the qualitative
development of reinspection intervals and serves as a baseline to estimate damage rates based on
subsequent inspection results.
In the A-parameter method, quantitative metallography is performed on each creep-damaged

microstructural zone (that is, base metal, fine-grained HAZ, coarse-grained HAZ, or weld metal)
to statistically correlate the number of damaged grain boundaries with the particular zone.
Although the A-parameter method requires more evaluation effort and thus increases replication
costs, it provides an objective approach for classifying creep damage, minimizes differences in
classification among different examiners, and provides for a quantitative measure of change in
creep damage between inspections.
Like all material assessment techniques, metallurgical replication has both strengths and
weaknesses associated with its implementation.
Advantages
Replication has the following advantages:

• Replication is nondestructive.
• Replication can be performed in situ.
11-17
• Replication can provide rapid analysis to enable repair or replace decisions to be made in a
short time and without requiring samples to be evaluated at a laboratory.
• When taken to a laboratory, replication samples can provide extensive and timely
metallographic or scanning electron microscope information regarding microstructural
evolution or damage.
• Replication is a much less expensive technique than destructive sample collection and
analysis.
Disadvantages
Replication is technique sensitive and includes the following disadvantages:

• Replication provides microstructural morphological information comparable to standard
metallographic techniques, but only to limited magnifications.
• Replication does not provide information on chemical makeup of phase constituents or
second-phase particles.
• Replication does not provide information on the measurable mechanical properties of the
component.
• Replication provides information on only the surface material of the component. The
microstructure can vary through the thickness of the pipe as a result of a number of
fabrication, stress, and temperature factors. Replication does not record this variation and can
under-predict the level of degradation below the surface replicated.
• Unlike many other NDE techniques that allow remote collection of data, replication can be
performed only at locations that are easily accessible to personnel.
• It requires the transport and use of hazardous materials (etchants, alcohol, and solvents).
• Replication is extremely technique dependent; it must be performed by highly skilled
inspectors with specific expertise and extensive experience.
Accelerated Creep-Rupture Testing
Accelerated creep-rupture testing has become a common method for determination of the
remaining life of components subject to creep damage. Because creep degradation follows an
Arrhenius functionality (that is, the degradation rate is an exponential function of temperature),
constant-load testing at temperatures higher than actual in-service temperatures can lead to
ruptures that occur in useful timeframes (typically in-service ruptures occur after many years of
exposure). The specimen is stressed under a constant tensile load at a constant temperature until
separation occurs. The resultant data from multiple tests are plotted on a temperature versus
time-to-rupture plot. Extrapolation to the service temperature is then used to estimate the
remaining life of the component. Stress rupture as a measure of component life is used mainly
because the tests are relatively easy to perform.
11-18
High-temperature design is generally based on the stress to cause rupture (rupture strength) of a
laboratory specimen in 100,000 hours. For example, the ASME BPVC, Section II, Part D
allowable stress is usually 67% of the average or 80% of the minimum stress to cause rupture in
100,000 hours at the design temperature.
Stress rupture does not require measurement of creep strain during the test; it simply measures
the time to specimen failure. This is in contrast to the more difficult job of measuring strain
conducted in creep testing.
However, the extrapolation of accelerated stress rupture testing data to service conditions is far
from straightforward [11-6]. There are a number of reasons for this, including the following:
• There is uncertainty about actual field stresses.
• The tests are uniaxial, whereas the service stress state is almost always multiaxial.
• Cyclic loads are often present in the service condition that can considerably shorten life, but
they are not accounted for in creep-rupture testing.
• Welds are particularly problematic, including the issues of stress redistributions,
inhomogeneous materials properties, stress concentrations, and general inability of tests to
simulate the locations or causes of field failures.
A first consideration before embarking on accelerated creep-rupture testing is to make sure that
the component life is indeed limited by creep and creep rupture. Rupture testing is largely
irrelevant in components where life is controlled by environmental degradation or where lifetime
is controlled by crack growth rate. In the latter case, where localized cracking is the majority of
the lifetime, rupture testing is mostly limited to helping characterize the crack initiation portion
of the total life.
Two major problems arise with the use of literature creep-rupture data for remaining life
prediction [11-6]. First, the use of worst-case creep-rupture data results in extremely
conservative life prediction. Second, the considerable scatter in the literature data results in large
uncertainties in remaining life predictions. Testing of actual service-aged material can reduce the
uncertainty in life predictions. Postexposure testing provides a direct measure of creep or creep-
fatigue life remaining in a component.
References
11-1. L. H. Bisbee, J. D. Parker and D. Mercaldi, “SSAM—A System for Non-Destructive

Material Removal,” Condition Monitoring and Diagnostic Engineering Management,
Adam Hilger, 1991, pp. 520–524.
11-2. R. Viswanathan, Damage Mechanisms and Life Assessment of High Temperature

Components, ASM International, 1989.
11-19
11-3. J. Foulds and R. Viswanathan, “Small Punch Testing for Determining the Material
Toughness of Low Alloy Steel Components in Service,” Journal of Engineering
Materials and Technology, Vol. 116, 1994, pp. 457–464 (1994).
11-4. B. Neubauer and U. Wedel, “Rest Life Estimation of Creeping Components by Means of
Replicas,” in Advances in Life Prediction Methods, D. A. Woodford and J. R. Whitehead
(eds.), American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, 1983, pp. 307–314.
11-5. B. J. Cane and M. Shammas, “A Method for Remanent Life Estimation by Quantitative
Assessment of Creep Cavitation on Plant,” CEGB report TPRD/L/2645/N84, 1984.
11-6. Metallurgical Guidebook for Fossil Power Plant Boilers. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2006.
1011912.
11-20
12
INSTRUMENTATION AND MONITORING
Introduction
Efficient operation of high-energy piping systems and components requires the monitoring of
several critical operational characteristics such as fluid pressure, temperature, and flow, as well
as steam quality and purity. Instruments that provide measurements of these characteristics are
required to provide accurate readings (of adequate quality) over an extended period of time.
Instrumentation packages for units constructed through the 1980s utilized strip and circular
charts to record operating data. With the introduction of digital data acquisition and recording
methods, significant improvements in instrument accuracy and data availability have been
realized.
The high-energy piping system characteristics that are most frequently monitored are associated
with physical displacements of the piping. Measurements are typically performed at the support
locations, but it is not uncommon for specific displacement pointers to be installed in areas of
concern. This section describes selected instruments and techniques that provide the required
data inputs for any comprehensive piping management effort.
Thermocouples
Two types of temperature-measuring instruments are most frequently used in power piping
applications: thermocouples and electrical-resistance thermometers. Both instruments are based
on the relationship between temperature and the subject material’s electrical properties. Of these
two instruments, the thermocouple is by far the most widely used because of its ruggedness,
versatility, rapid response time, and ease of use.
A thermocouple consists of two dissimilar metal conductors joined at their ends to form an
electrical circuit. Based on the Seebeck effect, if one junction is heated or cooled with respect to
the other, a voltage gradient and, therefore, a current is produced. The magnitude of the current is
a function of the temperature difference and the materials used in the junction. For a calibrated
circuit, if one junction is maintained at a known temperature, the temperature of the other
junction can be determined by measurement of the circuit current produced.
12-1
Instrumentation and Monitoring
Thermocouples are available in different combinations of metals, also known as calibrations.

These calibrations are standards established by the National Institute of Standards and
Technology [12-1]. The four most common calibrations are J (iron-constantan), K (chromel-
alumel), T (copper-constantan), and E (Chromega-constantan). There are also high-temperature
calibrations for temperature measurements greater than 2500°F (1371°C): R, S, C, and GB. Each
calibration has a different temperature range and environment, although the maximum
temperature varies with the diameter of the wire used. That is, a very thin thermocouple will
have a faster response time but might not reach the full temperature range. In addition, a thinner-
wired thermocouple will be more susceptible to corrosion. Specifications and selection guides
for thermocouples can be readily found from commercial suppliers.
The type of thermocouple best suited for a specific application depends on several factors,
• The temperature range
• The need for corrosion resistance
• The need for abrasion or vibration resistance
• Installation requirements (any new equipment might be required to be compatible with
existing equipment; existing holes might determine the probe diameter for new
thermocouples)
In power generation environments, sheathed thermocouples have become more common. In a

sheathed thermocouple, the wires are insulated with an inert insulation material (typically
stainless steel or Inconel) to protect them from deteriorating as a result of extended
environmental exposure. Sheathed thermocouple probes are available with one of three junction
types: grounded, ungrounded, or exposed. At the tip of a grounded junction probe, the
thermocouple wires are physically attached to the inside of the probe wall. This results in good
heat transfer from the outside, through the probe wall, to the thermocouple junction. In an
ungrounded probe, the thermocouple junction is detached from the probe wall. Response time is
slower than the grounded style, but the ungrounded offers electrical isolation. The thermocouple
in the exposed junction style protrudes out of the tip of the sheath and is exposed to the
surrounding environment. This type offers the best response time, but is limited in use to
noncorrosive and nonpressurized applications.
Figure 12-1
Thermocouple Junction Types
12-2
Strain Gauges
When external forces are applied to a stationary component, stress and strain result. Either the
component can elastically absorb the applied energy or it can plastically deform to accommodate
the applied energy. Stress is defined as the component’s internal shape-change resisting forces,
and strain is defined as the displacement and deformation (elastic and plastic) that occurs. For a
uniform distribution of internal shape-change resisting forces, stress can be calculated by
dividing the force (F) applied by the unit area (A). Strain is defined as the amount of deformation
per unit length when a load is applied. Strain is calculated by dividing the total change in length
by the original length. For material stressed in the elastic range, typical values for strain are less
than 0.002 in./in. (0.002 cm/cm). Strain can be compressive or tensile, and it is typically
measured by strain gages. It was Lord Kelvin who first reported in 1856 that metallic conductors
subjected to mechanical strain exhibit a change in their electrical resistance. This phenomenon
was first put to practical use in the 1930s.
Fundamentally, all strain gages are designed to convert mechanical motion into an electronic
signal. A change in capacitance, inductance, or resistance is proportional to the strain
experienced by the sensor. If a wire is held under tension, it gets slightly longer and its cross-
sectional area is reduced. This changes its resistance (R) in proportion to the strain sensitivity (S)
of the wire’s resistance. When a strain is introduced, the strain sensitivity or gage factor (GF) is
given by Equation 12-1.
ΔR
GF = R Eq. 12-1
Strain
The ideal strain gage changes resistance only as a result of the deformations of the surface to
which the sensor is attached. However, in real applications, temperature, material properties, the
bonding media, and stability of the metal all affect the detected change in resistance. Because
most materials do not have the same properties in all directions, knowledge of the axial strain
alone might be insufficient for a complete analysis. Poisson, bending, and torsional strains might
also require measurement.
The first bonded, metallic wire-type gages consisted of a grid of wire filament (a resistor) bonded
directly to the strained surface by a thin layer of epoxy resin. The foil diaphragm and the
adhesive bonding agent work together to transmit the strain data, and the adhesive also serves as
an electrical insulator between the foil grid and the surface.
When selecting a strain gage, one must consider not only the strain characteristics of the sensor
but also its stability and temperature sensitivity. Regrettably, in power plant applications,
component temperatures greater than 400°F (204°C) are common; the most desirable strain gage
materials are sensitive to temperature variations and tend to change resistance as they age. For
short-duration tests, this variation might not be a concern; however, for continuous measurement,
temperature and drift compensation must be considered.
12-3
Each gage wire material has its own characteristic gage factor, resistance, temperature coefficient
of gage factor, thermal coefficient of receptivity, and stability. Typical materials used for strain
gauges include constantan (copper-nickel alloy), Nichrome V (nickel-chrome alloy), platinum
alloys (usually tungsten), nickel-iron alloys, or nickel-chrome alloy wires, foils, or
semiconductor materials. The most popular alloys used for strain gages are copper-nickel alloys
and nickel-chromium alloys.
For high-temperature applications in the range of typical main steam and HRH system operation
(approximately 1000°F [538°C]) free filament or weldable gages are typically used. In free
filament gages, the sensor wires are not encapsulated but instead are bonded directly to the
subject component by flame spraying or with ceramic cement. In weldable gages, the sensors are
usually prebonded to a superalloy shim stock using ceramic materials and are subsequently
attached to the component using spot welds around the periphery of the shim stock.
Creep-FatiguePro On-Line Damage Monitoring
The principal degradation mechanisms affecting the long-term reliability of high-energy piping
systems are creep and fatigue. The accumulation of material damage during the course of power
generation operations eventually leads to crack initiation and propagation. It is not a question of
whether it will occur, but rather a matter of when. In extreme cases, the growth of these cracks
can lead to leakage or rupture. The monitoring and prediction of the rate of accumulation of
creep-fatigue damage is, therefore, essential in developing an effective life assessment strategy
for any component or system.
Current methods of life assessment use sophisticated stress and defect initiation and propagation
analysis methods to determine current damage levels and predict rates of future accumulation.
Both calculations are based on a review of past operating data (such as number of starts and time
of operation) that is used to assemble a history of operational experience and assist in projecting
current operating experience into future performance. Typically, the analyst makes conservative
assumptions regarding service history characteristics (frequency of occurrence, magnitude, and
duration) to provide confidence that the analysis results are conservative. Clearly, the implication
is that by providing more accurate and current operating data, less conservatism will be included
and a more cost-effective evaluation will result.
To address this issue, EPRI sponsored the development and implementation of two stand-alone
Windows software-based computer programs: Fatigue Pro for nuclear applications (components
subjected to only fatigue damage) and Creep-FatiguePro for fossil plant applications with
components operating in the creep range [12-2, 12-3]. Both programs have the ability to access
and process actual, real-time, plant operating data to track fatigue and creep-fatigue damage
accumulation, respectively.
12-4
The monitoring approach used by Creep-FatiguePro can be summarized as follows (see

Figure 12-2):
• Applicable operating parameter data (temperature, pressure, flow rate and load for high-
energy piping) for each monitored component are collected from the plant’s data collection
system at prescribed time intervals and stored in a form that can be processed by Creep-
FatiguePro.
• Component-specific stress transfer functions are programmed into Creep-FatiguePro to
determine creep and fatigue stresses as a function of time from the collected operating data.
• Creep and fatigue damage increments (initiation and propagation) are calculated using the
monitored temperatures, determined stresses, and defined material properties.
• The determined damage accumulation rates are projected into the future to predict the
calendar time required to reach critical damage levels.
Figure 12-2
Flowchart Illustrating the Creep-FatiguePro Monitoring Approach
Plants exhibiting the following characteristics are excellent candidates for a monitoring system
such as Creep-FatiguePro and can expect to achieve cost benefits through its use.
• Plants with components recently inspected and found to contain significant service-induced
damage or cracks.
• Plants approaching the age at which service-related damage is expected (around 15 years)
and that has limited personnel available at the plant for life assessment and inspection
planning activities.
12-5
• Plants currently operating under, or contemplating a shift to, load-following or on-off cyclic
operation. In this case, plants can expect acceleration of component life consumption rates
compared to that of base-load operation.
On-line monitoring is the best alternative for tracking remaining useful life and equipment wear
and tear, which is one of the most difficult costs of unit cycling to quantify. Monitoring tools
such as Creep-FatiguePro allow plants to develop economic models that convert monitoring
results into plant cycling costs.
To date, more than 30 power plants are using Creep-FatiguePro or its nuclear counterpart,
FatiguePro. Each plant has realized considerable cost reduction through lengthened inspection
intervals, reduction in unnecessary component replacement, changes to operating procedures,
and avoidance of in-service component failures.
In the cost-competitive deregulated environment, accurate and timely information on component
condition is vital for input to repair or replacement decisions and outage planning and
scheduling. Through automation of damage accumulation and remaining life computation, in
addition to basing calculations on actual operating conditions, Creep-FatiguePro offers the
following benefits:
• By accounting for periods of low-stress operation, more accurate damage predictions than
those based on maximum design or operating conditions are obtained. This enables decreased
inspection frequency and extension of the predicted life of critical components.
• Advanced data trending and analysis tools allow users to identify and adjust operating
procedures to minimize creep and fatigue damage at monitored locations. In addition, the
effects of potential operation revisions can be evaluated before implementation.
• Automated tracking of damage in critical components eliminates the need for manual
remaining life calculations.
Acoustic Emission On-Line Damage Monitoring
As a corollary to the quantitative analytical tracking of damage development and progression

provided by a system such as Creep-FatiguePro, acoustic emission (AE) technology has been
applied in high-energy piping systems by several utilities to act as an “early warning system” for
damage development.
Acoustic emissions are the audible stress waves produced by the sudden internal stress
redistribution of a material, created by changes in its internal structure. Possible causes of
internal structure changes include crack initiation and growth, crack opening and closure,
dislocation movement, twinning and phase transformation in crystalline materials, and fiber
breakage and fiber-matrix debonding in composites. Most sources of AE are damage-related;
therefore, the detection and monitoring of these emissions are commonly used to predict material
failure.
12-6
AE has been demonstrated as a viable technique in the detection of defect initiation and
propagation through fatigue [12-4]. In high-temperature applications associated with high-energy
piping, the goal has been the detection of the formation of creep cavities. No documented
validation of the detection of creep void formation through the use of AE currently exists.
Research in this technology continues, sponsored by EPRI and others.
The difference between AE and other NDE methods is that AE detects changes occurring inside
the material while they are occurring, while other NDE methods examine the internal structure of
the material (in whatever state it is in at the time of inspection). AE needs only the input of one
or more sensors on the surface of the component being examined. AE systems are designed to
monitor acoustic emissions during system operation.
One of the disadvantages of AE is that commercial systems typically estimate only qualitatively
how much damage is present in the material at the time acoustic emissions are detected, and no
historical information is acquired. Therefore, other NDE methods are needed to provide more
quantitative results. In high-energy piping applications, service environments are generally
noisy, and the AE signals are usually weak. Therefore, signal discrimination and noise reduction
are difficult challenges, yet they are extremely important for successful acoustic signal
interpretation.
Over the past five years AE instruments have transitioned to digital signal processing. This has
opened up a new range of technical capabilities for the AE method—the frequency domain. The
ability to capture full waveforms allows advanced post-test analysis; previously, real-time wave
form analysis was performed on a small set of features that were measured with bulky electronic
circuits.
Water Chemistry
Water cleanliness is important to all waterside boiler and steam transport components. Water
impurities can lead to boiler tube failures and carryover of solids in the steam, which in turn can
result in superheater tubing problems and turbine blade deposits. Flushing of loose debris from
the feedwater system and boiler in combination with the use of high-quality water must
supplement waterside surface cleaning efforts.
Water sources used to provide feedwater to a boiler are never 100% pure. They always contain
varying amounts of suspended and dissolved materials. Clearly, the type and amount of materials
present will depend on the water source (river, lake, and so on). Aside from organic material that
might be present, water contains solids that are either dissolved or suspended. Suspended solids
are those that do not dissolve in water and can be removed or separated by filtration; these types
of solids include mud, silt, clay, and metallic oxides. Dissolved solids are those that are present
in solution, and therefore cannot be removed by filtration; the primary dissolved solids in most
waters include iron, silica, calcium, magnesium, and sodium.
12-7
Chemistry control begins with treatment of the feedwater to the boiler. To minimize corrosion,
feedwater and condensate must be maintained at the proper pH and ORP levels and free of
dissolved carbon dioxide and oxygen gases. In general, plants maintain water pH between 8.0
and 9.5. High pH levels can lead to foaming, and consequently an increase in the amount of
carryover solids. The optimal pH level for a given unit will be the one that results in the least
amount of iron and copper corrosion products.
Because corrosion of steel typically involves the reduction of dissolved oxygen in water, oxygen
gas dissolved in solution increases corrosion rates of waterside surfaces, typically through
pitting. Therefore, the best defense is to maintain an airtight system. Deaerators are used to
capture and expel gases, while chemical treatments with sodium sulfite (up to 1800 psi
[12.411 MPa]) or hydrazine act to scavenge oxygen that is dissolved in solution.
Water chemistry control for drum-type boilers is typically performed by one of four chemical
additions:
• Phosphate-hydroxide
• Coordinated phosphate
• Chelant
• Volatile
The choice of chemical is usually governed by the pressure range in the unit. Phosphate-
hydroxide (<1000 psi [<6895 kPa]) and coordinated phosphate (all pressures) methods target
water pH and precipitate calcium and magnesium compounds so they can be removed in
blowdown. Chelants (<1000 psi [<6895 kPa]) are complex acids that are added to react with
metal ions, calcium, magnesium, and iron to form soluble complexes that can be removed during
continuous blowdown. During volatile treatment (all pressures), no solid chemicals are added—
only amines, typically ammonia. Volatile treatment is sensitive to water hardness (because no
phosphates are used) and condenser leaks. All methods use either sulfite or hydrazine to control
free oxygen.
Dimensional Measurements
One of the basic characteristics of a high-energy piping system is its physical size. This consists
of not only the outside diameters and wall thicknesses of the constituent piping but also the run
lengths and elevation points that define the overall geometry of a system. The long-term
temperature and stress exposure of the piping material results in inelastic, permanent
deformation of the system (through creep). It is not a question of whether it will occur, but when
and how much. Monitoring the position of selected points in a system and the magnitude of
motion that occurs in a system when transitioning from ambient to operating conditions can
provide indication of support malfunction and help identify those locations that are most
susceptible to damage.
12-8
Recording the hot and cold dimensions of a piping system is an integral part of any piping
management program. As-built, construction, and design drawings in many instances might not
reflect the current configuration of a system. This becomes more evident as systems age and
exposure time increases. To ensure a correspondence between the system geometry and the
drawing record, selected system dimensions should be checked.
With the intent of tracking the general deformation of a system, selected locations should be
monitored to periodically record the pipe position in space. In its basic form, this monitoring is
accomplished by performing periodic walkdowns, recording support indicator readings, and
correlating those readings with the travel range of the support. When more accurate positioning
is required at a position not coincident with a support, pointers or other indicators can be fixed to
the piping and used as reference points for collecting position data.
In addition to positional measurements, spool diameters and wall thicknesses should be

measured as accurately as possible to provide a basis to monitor swelling and assist in stress
evaluations. Swelling of the pipe cross section can occur as a result of overpressure or extensive
creep deformation. Pipe OD measurements can be performed with outside calipers or PI tape
measures, which provide ample accuracy to detect swelling strains in excess of 2%. For wall
thickness measurements, ultrasonic methods should be used. Pipe spools are ordered to a
specified minimum thickness. Actual thicknesses of delivered spools are typically thicker than
the specified minimum diameter (usually by 10%). Knowledge of the actual wall thickness of a
pipe segment allows more accurate modeling of the piping by eliminating the assumption of
minimum wall thickness.
References
12-1. G. W. Burns, M. G. Scroger, G. F. Strouse, M. C. Croarkin, and W. F. Guthrie,

Temperature-Electromotive Force Reference Functions and Tables for the Letter-
Designated Thermocouple Types Based on the ITS-90, National Institute of Standards
and Technology. Monograph 175 (1993).
12-2. FatiguePro: On-Line Fatigue Usage Transient Monitoring System. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:
1988. NP-5835-SP.
12-3. Creep-FatiguePro: On-Line Creep-Fatigue Damage and Crack Growth Monitoring

System. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 1992. TR-100907.
12-4. J. E. Coulter, T. P. Sherlock, et al, “Acoustic Emission Monitoring or Fossil Power

Plants,” Paper presented at the Third EPRI Conference on Incipient Failure Detection in
Power Plants, Philadelphia, PA (March 1987).
12-9
13
DATA STORAGE, RETRIEVAL, AND EVALUATION
Introduction
Implementation of an effective piping management program involves the integration of several

key elements, including the following:
• Materials. Identification of damage mechanisms allowing application of appropriate initiation
and propagation models
• NDE. Detection and quantitative characterization of damage
• Engineering analysis. Projections of damage development related to specific operating
practices. Basis development for safe operating periods and expected remaining life
• Monitoring. Verification of prediction inputs, identify damage-producing operating modes
and optimize component operation
• Repair technology. Should be designed and implemented to have minimal impact on
continued degradation and maximum serviceability
• Inspection, repair, and replacement planning. The combination of engineering analyses and
financial and safety consequences in light of unit availability targets
Another key element missing from this list but essential to the effective implementation of any
program is data management. Institution of consistent data gathering and structured cataloging
and storage of information provides the foundation for analyses and evaluations required by the
key elements. Data management provides the unifying line among the elements. Data must be
stored in useable format that is easily queried for analysis. Storing large volumes of data that
nobody can access is not useful. Having large volumes of data is insufficient; after they are
stored, data must be trended and analyzed to detect trends and issues before they become
problems. Effective data collection, storage, retrieval and analysis are the lifeblood of any
optimally operating process.
How many times have you heard someone say, “I wish I knew then what I know now”? Utility
experience (with respect to data collection, storage, and review) in many cases implies that this
statement be reworded to say, “I wish I knew now what I knew then.” The underlying meaning
of this last statement is that without good historical records you will receive minimal value from
collecting further data.
13-1
Data Storage, Retrieval, and Evaluation
Advancing technology, shifts in management philosophy and personnel changes collectively

influence how data (and knowledge) are collected, used, and archived. This section describes the
evolution of data storage and analysis as it relates to high-energy piping and provides guidance
concerning the criteria for its management.
Traditional Methods
Before the proliferation of computer technology in the 1980s, data collection was, of necessity, a
manual task resulting in the generation of hardcopy records. Hardcopy records required
significant personnel and physical space commitments for their organization and storage. As a
consequence, a large percentage of information was not analyzed to assess its meaning regarding
component reliability. In many instances, recordkeeping was locally driven by plant personnel
responsible for specific equipment, and program overviews were not developed.
Regardless of the specific methods used to secure plant data, it is essential that the information
be available from some central location to facilitate its distribution and analysis. Traditional
methods of data analysis involve plotting information and identifying trends. Evaluation methods
from hardcopy data are usually less quantitative because more assumptions are made during
interpretation of written data. In addition, failure to centralize data places an unnecessary burden
on staff to actively search for information pertinent to the problem at hand.
PC-Based Applications
The increase in computer applications for both data acquisition and analysis has greatly
expanded the volume of information available, creating the potential for data overload.
Computers can store all forms of information—records, documents, images, sound recordings,
videos, scientific data, and so on—but the basic problem of managing the information and
putting it to good use remains.
Many PC-based software tools have been developed to facilitate the management and analysis of
piping data. Spreadsheet programs and database applications such as Microsoft Excel and
Microsoft Access provide platforms for the collection of component information. Analysis tools
provide plant personnel with the ability to perform comprehensive quantitative evaluations of
component and system life. Planning software is available to help evaluate multiple inspection
and replacement scenarios and view the problem from a financial perspective.
Aside from the ability to collect more data and perform sophisticated evaluations, logistical
problems—specifically, maintaining current software versions and ensuring their compatibility
with operating system changes—exist.
13-2
Web-Based Applications
The next generation of data management systems is already in use, using the Internet to eliminate
the need for local software. The only requirements are Internet access and a web browser. It
should be the goal of each station to have the ability to use real-time information to track and
evaluate components and systems. To achieve this goal requires involvement of information
technology (IT) personnel to ensure rapid data transmittal, data integrity, and security. Areas that
should be addressed when developing a web-based data management system are described in the
following subsections.
System Isolation and Security
The control system must be isolated by an effective firewall and traffic must be monitored by
intrusion detection sensors. Only specific traffic should be allowed into the system network, such
as supplemental data for the historian, virus protection definitions, and remote support. Virtual
Private Network (VPN) encryption technology and managed routing should be used as part of a
security plan for remote support.
Periodic security evaluations by an expert third party should be performed to ensure that
effective security protections, policies, and procedures are in place to protect the system. Your IT
department should also conduct corporate security assessments at periodic intervals.
Software Changes, Patches, and Upgrades
In many instances, web-based systems take advantage of readily available computing

components and operating systems. The disadvantage of this open system is the increased
vulnerability to hacking and virus attacks. Increased costs associated with the use of proprietary
systems force many users to accept this increased risk. The trade-off for using a nonproprietary
system is the increased frequency of operating system patches and security upgrades. This forces
hardware upgrades and increases maintenance. Installation of patches and updates should be
approached with caution.
Data Collection Periods
The time period over which data is maintained should be decided. It is suggested that—as a
minimum—two to three years of information should be directly accessible on the system. A
procedure for archiving data that exceeds the established limits should be developed.
13-3
Remote Access
While security is the primary concern, the benefits of remote access to the system for data review
or support should be considered. By using Virtual Private Network connections and specific
transmission control protocol/Internet protocol (TCP/IP) ports, a firewall can allow the
connection of defined users for remote console control.
System Capacity
Depending on the architectures selected for a production system, the amount and frequency of
data collection and the techniques used to meet the other requirements (system isolation and
security; software changes, patches, and upgrades; data collection periods; and remote access),
additional system capacity might be required. To ensure adequate system performance, IT
personnel should be part of station meetings regarding data collection, project planning, and
support.
13-4
14
REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT
Introduction
As a result of either regular inspection protocols or an unanticipated occurrence, damage can be
detected in piping systems that requires repair or replacement of the component to ensure
continued safe operation. Damage can occur at any point in the piping system, but is most
frequently associated with high constraint regions including valves, wyes, tees, or attachment
welds. Specific damage mechanisms associated with each piping system within a fossil generating
station will be described in Volume 2, Performance of Steam Piping, and Volume 3, Performance
of High-Energy Water Piping, of this report.
When damage is identified, a decision for repair or replacement will be based on a number of
technical, financial, and risk factors. Technical factors include the type, location, extent, and
severity of the damage. Financial factors include unit availability requirements, timing of the
repair or replacement, availability of craft labor, and availability of replacement material. Risk
factors include the time to predicted failure, consequence of a failure, and impact of a failure on
surrounding equipment.
Based on these competing factors, consideration must be given to the type of repair to be
performed. Before any decision of repair or replacement is made or undertaken, it is necessary to
fully characterize the location, type, and extent of damage. Section 9, Piping System Surveys, of
this volume describes available inspection techniques, and Volumes 2 and 3 provide specific
guidance regarding the best-suited NDE techniques for each damage mechanism associated with
specific piping systems, as well as suggestions for ongoing damage assessment.
Governing Codes
The design codes address fabrication and erection of new piping systems. These codes generally
serve to provide guidance for any repair or replacement. However, after the piping system has
been commissioned, alteration and repair of the piping systems are generally performed under the
National Board Inspection Code NB-23 [14-1]. The applicability of NB-23 or the original
fabrication code depends on implementation by the local jurisdiction.
Type and Extent of Repair
Repairs can be considered long term or temporary. Temporary repairs can be performed to allow
operation of the generating unit until a more permanent repair can be affected; however, a
14-1
Repair and Replacement
thorough understanding of the extent of damage, impact of the repair on the progression of
damage, and a conservative estimate of the service life of the temporary repair must be made and
communicated to responsible individuals.
Whenever damage is detected, consideration should be given to the inspection of similar locations
on the affected unit or other units in the fleet that are operating under similar conditions. After the
cause and extent of damage have been quantified, the need to incorporate an inspection protocol
for similar damage into an overall condition assessment program should be evaluated.
Permanent Repairs
Permanent repairs normally require complete removal of the defect. If damage remains after the
repair, the remaining service life should be quantified; if it is determined to extend beyond the
remaining life of the facility, periodic reinspections should be performed to assess damage
progression within a timeframe based on a conservative calculation of damage accumulation.
Available life prediction tools are described in this volume; however, repairs can impart
unanticipated stresses that can be difficult to quantify, and repair techniques can locally modify
the microstructure and thus the performance characteristics of the material.
Defect removal typically involves grinding or machining to either remove the defect or reduce the
defect to an acceptable size. The use of thermal processes such as arc gouging should be restricted
because the localized heat input can cause an existing defect to run. If thermal processes are used,
complete removal of the heat-affected material is recommended. NDE should be performed to
confirm removal of the defect. If the defect is eliminated by localized removal of material, the
depth and extent of the excavation must be quantified. If the minimum wall thickness has not
been violated, the excavation area can be blended into the surrounding material and no further
repair might be required. If the minimum wall thickness has been violated, a local thin area
calculation should be performed to determine whether sufficient reinforcement is provided by
adjoining material; if it is not, weld repair is required.
For more extensive damage, material or component replacement might be required. The need for
redesign to eliminate the reoccurrence of damage should be evaluated.
Temporary Repairs
In some instances, temporary repairs can be performed to allow operation of the unit until a
permanent repair can be designed and implemented. Often replacement components are not
readily available and require extensive lead times to procure. When considering the
appropriateness of a temporary repair, the consequence of the failure of the repair must be
considered. The use of temporary repairs should be limited to only those applications that are
considered safe with limited exposure to consequential damage.
When temporary repairs are implemented, the life of the repair should be established by analysis
or experience, and this life should be communicated to responsible individuals. It is
14-2
recommended that systems be established to ensure that a permanent repair or replacement is

effected in a timely manner. Particular attention should be given to the repair of longitudinal seam
welds because of long-term serviceability issues and the risk of catastrophic failure.
Piping System Support or Restraint
Before any repair is performed, the component should be properly supported and restrained. To
prevent weld cracking and limit additional creep damage from the stresses imposed by welding
and PWHT, it is necessary to eliminate or minimize stresses in the repair area until PWHT has
been completed. This can require the use of temporary supports. The supports and restraints will
also support the component during the required PWHT and prevent sagging or movement of the
piping system.
Small-diameter, light-wall piping systems typically can be adequately supported and restrained by
using mechanical means (chain falls or come-alongs) and by pinning adjacent hangers. Limited
input from the system design engineer is required for the repair of small diameter piping systems.
For large-diameter or heavy-wall piping systems, greater care must be taken to ensure that
adequate restraint and support are provided during the repair operation. Involvement of the
system design engineer is often required, particularly if the system was designed and installed
with significant cold spring. Heavy rigging and the installation of temporary structural steel will
often be required to support and restrain a large-diameter, heavy-wall piping system during a
repair.
Repair Design
Depending on the nature of the repair, a number of alternative repair designs can be considered. A
brief description of these options is included in this section. The designs represent typical repairs
that can be encountered, and they contain applicable cautions. If these repair approaches cannot
be performed as shown, or if the specific repair approach is not addressed within the text of this
procedure, than a more detailed analysis is required to ensure the structural integrity of the repair.
Pipe or Component Replacement
When a pipe or component is to be replaced, a standard weld joint design should be used
(Figure 14-1). When reestablishing the weld bevel on a pipe or component that will be reused, it
is recommended that the original HAZ be removed. This can typically be accomplished by
machining back into the base metal approximately 1/4 in. (6.4 mm) from the original weld toe.
Caution: Because the HAZ has been removed, the pipe or component will be
shorter than originally installed. A stress analysis can be performed to determine
whether the additional stresses that are introduced into the system are
acceptable. Alternatively, the length of pipe removed can be made up in the
replacement pipe or component.
14-3
Figure 14-1
Standard Weld Joint Details
When a pipe or component is replaced, it might be necessary to counterbore the pipe or

component to bring the inside diameters within the tolerances required by the fabrication code.
The counterbore shall not reduce the wall thickness below minimum design wall thickness and
the counterbore length should, as a minimum, equal the wall thickness of the pipe. A typical
counterbore is shown in Figure 14-2.
14-4
Figure 14-2
Typical Counterbore Design
Complete Weld Removal—Through-Wall Weld Repairs
If a weld is to be completely removed and the pipe or component is to be reused, the HAZ must
be removed from both sides of the weld. As with the replacement of a pipe or component,
removal of the weld and adjoining HAZs will shorten the section of piping system. A stress
analysis can be performed to determine whether the additional stresses that are introduced into the
system are acceptable, or the pipe or component length can be reestablished by buttering one end
as shown in Figure 14-3. The final weld bevel shall be as shown in Figure 14-1.
Caution: If the pipe or component requires buttering to reestablish the length, it

might be necessary to remove the component (valve, elbow, and so on) or a
section of pipe to allow this to occur. If the second cut occurs in an existing weld,
the HAZ of that weld must also be removed and the length reestablished by
buttering that location, as well. This additional weld must be factored into the
decision to use this repair method. Alternatively, a stress analysis can be
performed to determine whether the additional stresses introduced into the system
by shortening a spool are acceptable.
14-5
Figure 14-3
Weld Buttering to Reestablish Pipe or Component Length After Removal of Heat-Affected Zone
Non-Through-Wall Weld Repairs
Non-through-wall weld repairs do not penetrate through the full thickness of the material. Non-
through-wall weld repairs can remove the entire circumference of the weld to a specified depth, or
they can be localized. The maximum depth of the excavation should be no more than the
thickness of the component minus 1/4 in. (6.4 mm) for heavy-wall applications, but in no case
should it be less than 1/8 in. (3.2 mm).
14-6
Circumferential Repairs
For repairs in which the full circumference of the weld is removed, the excavation should be
made with a clam-shell cutter using a formed tool bit cut to produce an excavated bevel
equivalent to the original weld bevel (see Figure 14-4). The edges of the excavation should be
located approximately 1/4 in. (6.4 mm) beyond the toes of the weld to ensure complete removal
of the original HAZ. If the excavation is performed by thermal processes or by grinding, care
should be taken to follow the original weld bevel contour while minimizing the width of the
excavation.
Figure 14-4
Typical Non-Through-Wall, Full-Circumferential Weld Repair Detail
14-7
Localized Repairs
Localized excavations prepared by thermal processes or by grinding should remove the HAZ and
should approximate the original weld bevel. The local weld excavation should be as shown in
Figure 14-5.
Figure 14-5
Typical Non-Through-Wall, Local Weld Repair Detail
14-8
Through-Wall Defects
In some instances, a non-through-wall repair can be implemented for a through-wall defect. The
defect should be excavated to within 1/4 in. (6.4 mm) of the ID for heavy wall applications, but in
no case should it be less than 1/8 in. (3.2 mm) of the ID (see Figures 14-4 and 14-5). The weld
repair is then made, leaving a small area of damaged material near the ID surface of the repair.
Caution: This repair requires an engineering evaluation to ensure the adequacy of

the repair. In addition, state or local jurisdictional requirements might apply. Such
a repair is considered a temporary repair. A permanent repair should be
implemented within the repair design life specified by the engineering analysis.
Base Metal Repairs
Base metal repairs might or might not penetrate through the full thickness of the material.
Through-wall repairs should result in a full penetration weld repair. Base metal repairs can be
longitudinal or circumferential, but typically would not be used for a full-circumferential repair.
When through-wall repairs are made, appropriate NDE must be implemented to ensure the
complete removal of the flaw. In addition, during the excavation of through-wall repairs, care
must be taken to minimize contamination by foreign material. The base metal excavation should
be as shown in Figure 14-6.
14-9
Figure 14-6
Typical Base Metal Excavation Details
14-10
Plug Sample Repairs
When plug samples are removed, the remaining hole can be repaired by installing a radiographic
plug or a capped Weldolet or Sockolet style boss, as shown in Figure 14-7.
Figure 14-7
Plug Sample Repair Methods
Radiographic Plugs
Radiographic plugs must be designed and installed according to the requirements of PFI ES-16,
Access Holes, Bosses, and Plugs for Radiographic Inspection of Pipe Welds [14-2].
The plug material should be fabricated from a material similar to the base metal and must be
listed in the applicable code of construction (see Figure 14-7). To minimize the risk associated
with oxidation of the thread profile and the resulting loss of strength, the use of nonthreaded
gamma plugs should be considered.
A plugged or capped Weldolet or Sockolet style boss must be designed and fabricated to the
applicable code requirements. The materials used should be similar to the base metal and must be
listed in the applicable code of construction (see Figure 14-7).
Other Repair Designs

In addition to the repair designs highlighted in this section, other types of repairs, such as
structural weld overlays, might be suitable for temporary or permanent repairs. These repair
designs require an engineering analysis to ensure the structural integrity of the repair and establish
a design life for the repair.
14-11
Repair Considerations
Flaw Excavation
Flaw excavation can be by machining, grinding or air carbon arc gouging. Machining is the
preferred method because it does not affect the material properties. In addition, machining allows
flaw excavation and weld bevel preparation to be carried out in one operation.
The use of carbon arc gouging is generally discouraged. Thermal stresses from the arc gouging
process can propagate the crack, and the temperature of the process can adversely affect the
surrounding material. In addition, it can be more difficult to follow the defect and ensure
complete removal during arc gouging than is possible when grinding. If air carbon arc gouging is
used for flaw excavation, preheat should be established and maintained during the gouging
process. The preheat temperature should be as specified by the applicable welding procedure to be
used in the repair. Gouged surfaces should be cleaned back to bright metal.
If grinding is used for flaw excavation and weld bevel preparation, care should be taken not to
overheat the base metal. If the ID of the component will not be accessible after flaw excavation,
care must be taken to ensure that foreign material does not enter the system during cavity
excavation. When the excavation has been completed, complete removal of the flaw or the
reduction of an acceptable size should be verified by appropriate NDE or metallographic methods.
Fit-up, Tack Welding, and Temporary Attachments
Fit-Up
Before and during welding, parts to be joined might require being fit, aligned, or restrained in
position. Tolerances for fit-up should meet the requirements of the fabrication code and qualified
welding procedure.
Cleaning
Before fit-up, surfaces to be welded should be cleaned to bright metal. Adjacent internal and
external surfaces should be cleaned to bright metal for a minimum of 1/2 in. (12.8 mm) back from
the surface to be welded. The cleaned areas should be free of oil, dirt, moisture, rust, scale, and
any coating or contaminant. On vertical sections of line, surfaces above the weld should be
cleaned of loose contaminants (such as scale or dirt) for 2 in. (51 mm) above the joint.
Areas to be welded must be free of moisture. Typically, preheat will remove any residual
moisture. If welding will be done outdoors, an appropriate shelter should be erected to protect the
weld area from inclement weather. If welding processes incorporating shielding gasses are used
for repair, the work area should be protected from direct exposure to wind such that any wind at
the joint should not exceed 15 mph (24 kph).
14-12
Alignment
Weld joint alignment should be as specified in the applicable fabrication code. Any misalignment,
within the allowable tolerance, should be faired to at least a 3:1 taper over the width of the weld.
Additional weld metal can be added to improve the transition. When tolerances for diameter, wall
thickness, or out-of-roundness exceed fabrication code allowables, counterboring should be used
to provide an adequate alignment.
Tack Welding
Tack welds should be made by qualified welders using a qualified weld procedure. A sufficient
number of tack welds should be made to maintain alignment; in no case should tack welds be less
than 1/2 in. (12.8 mm) in length The ends of the tack welds should be feathered to allow proper
tie-in. Any tack weld that is not incorporated into the final weld should be removed by grinding.
Tack welds should, as a minimum, be visually inspected and should be of a quality equivalent to
the root pass. Any cracked or otherwise defective weld should be repaired before root pass
welding.
Temporary Attachments
Temporary attachments are plates, bars, strong backs, lifting lugs, and similar items that are
welded to the component to assist in fit-up and alignment of the weld joint. Items such as
insulation pins used to hold resistant heating pads in place are also considered temporary
attachments. Tack welds that will be incorporated into the weld, clamps, or other mechanical
means are preferred over temporary attachments.
Temporary attachments should be made from material with a similar chemical composition to the
base metal and should be welded to the component with an approved welding procedure by a
qualified welder. Temporary attachments can be made of mild steel if all areas that will contact
the base material or will be welded to the base metal are first buttered with a filler material
matching the base metal composition. The temporary attachments can then be welded to the
component with an approved welding procedure. If PWHT is required for the base metal,
temporary attachments should be made only in areas that will be included in the PWHT of the
repair.
Temporary attachments should be removed, unless otherwise specified. Temporary attachments

can be removed by grinding, machining, or thermal cutting. Removal of temporary attachments by
hammering or otherwise breaking the attachment away from the base metal is not allowed. If the
temporary attachments are removed by thermal cutting, the temporary attachment should be cut no
closer than 1/8 in. (3.2 mm) from the surface of the component, and the remaining material should
be removed by grinding until flush with the surrounding base metal. The location from which
temporary attachments were removed should be inspected by MT or PT before and after PWHT.
14-13
Preheating and Post-Weld Heat Treatment
General
Proper application and control of heating operations is critical when making welded repairs.
Rigorous control of preheat, interpass, and PWHT operations is necessary to avoid cracking and
to ensure that the desired toughness and creep resistance are developed and maintained. Preheat
and post-bake operations can be performed using oxy-fuel torches, electric resistance, or electric
induction heaters.
Caution: The use of oxy-fuel torches is not recommended for preheat or post-
bake operations except for very thin sections or under tightly controlled
conditions. On heavy sections, there is a tendency for the surface of the work area
to reach the required temperature while the temperature below the surface remains
significantly below the required preheat temperature.
When oxy-fuel torches are used for preheating, extra care must be taken to prevent localized
overheating of the material. One to two minutes should be allowed to elapse after removal of the
flame and before the preheat temperature is measured. This will determine whether the material is
uniformly heated through the entire thickness.
For PWHT, only electric resistance or induction heating is recommended. Localized oxy-fuel
heating is not acceptable for PWHT. An exception would be PWHT of components in a
temperature-controlled oxy-fuel furnace.
Preheat
Preheat should be uniformly applied to the joint including a minimum of 2 in. (50.8 mm) on either
side of the weld, before any welding begins. After it is initiated, preheat should be maintained
until all welding is complete. If preheat is interrupted for any reason, the weld should be inspected
by MT before the resumption of welding.
Accurate temperature monitoring of preheat is critical for successful repairs. For preheat during
welding operations, temperature-indicating crayons, contact or infrared pyrometers, or direct-
reading thermocouples can be used. If temperature-indicating crayons are used, a crayon for the
minimum preheat temperature and a crayon for the maximum interpass temperature must be in
possession of the welder at all times. The preheat and interpass temperatures should be checked
regularly on the base metal adjacent to the weld groove to ensure uniform heating. To avoid
contaminating the weld, temperature readings should not be taken in the weld groove. If contact
or infrared pyrometers are used, the preheat and interpass temperatures should be checked
regularly on the base metal adjacent to the weld groove to ensure uniform heating. Direct-reading
thermocouples attached to a strip chart recorder are the preferred method for temperature
monitoring. Thermocouples should be attached on both sides of the weld in sufficient locations to
ensure uniform heating.
14-14
The preheat and interpass temperatures should be as specified on the Welding Procedure
Specification. An increase in preheat temperature of 100°F–200°F (38°C–93°C) above that
specified might be required for highly restrained repairs, but in no case should the preheat exceed
the maximum interpass temperature.
Post-Weld Heat Treatment
For many repair or replacements activities, PWHT will be required by the governing code or can
be used to enhance the material properties. PWHT should follow the requirements of the
governing code with additional consideration given to the recommendations in the remainder of
this subsection.
Prerequisites
• PWHT should be performed using electric resistance or induction heaters. PWHT with oxy-
fuel gas is typically not allowed unless the PWHT is being performed in a temperature-
controlled oven.
• PWHT should be limited to one weld at a time in any straight run of pipe unless the pipe is
free to expand lengthwise.
• All weld repairs and required inspections should be completed before PWHT.
• The area to be treated by PWHT should be clean and free of all foreign materials and the
component should be free of fluids and drafts on the ID.
Temperature Measurement
It is recommended that PWHT temperatures be monitored and controlled using chromel-alumel

(ISA type K) thermocouples, extension wires, and corresponding strip chart recorders.
Thermocouple wire can be high-temperature glass insulated or sheathed types. The recommended
wire size is AWG20. Heavier wire is not recommended because it is less responsive to
temperature change.
Thermocouples, extension wires, and connectors should be checked before use, including the
following:
• Verify that screws are tightened at the terminal connections.
• Verify that the thermocouple extension wire polarity is correct; red is negative (alumel,
slightly magnetic), and yellow is positive (chromel, nonmagnetic).
• Verify that the insulation is not damaged and the connectors are tight.
• Verify the function of thermocouple extension wire and strip chart recorder.
14-15
Thermocouples should be attached directly to the component using a low energy (125 W/s
maximum) capacitive discharge welder. The thermocouple junction ends must be less than 1/4 in.
(6.4 mm) apart. Other methods of thermocouple attachment are not recommended. The hot
junction end of each thermocouple wire should be protected from radiant heat by ceramic putty or
a small piece of insulation. Thermocouple wires should be insulated from each other and from
any metal surface, except at the hot junction. Thermocouple wires should be run along the
component in a uniformly heated area for at least 2 in. (50.8 mm) before being routed out of the
insulation.
The heat treatment cycle should be monitored and recorded on a strip chart recorder. The
temperature should be monitored when the temperature exceeds 200°F (93°C) on heating and is
above 600°F (316°C) on cooling.
Post-Weld Heat Treatment Procedure
Careful control of the PWHT operations is necessary to avoid cracking and to ensure that the
desired toughness and creep-resistance is developed and maintained. For this reason, a detailed
PWHT procedure should be prepared and reviewed by a qualified individual before the start of
the repair. The procedure, as a minimum, should address all of the following items:
• Maximum PWHT temperature. The PWHT temperature should be as specified by the
governing code and as specified in the applicable welding procedure specification. PWHT
temperature should not exceed the lower critical temperature of the material; for normalized
and tempered materials, the PWHT temperature is typically maintained 50°F (10°C) below the
original tempering temperature.
• Support and restraint. The support and restraint of the repair weld should be evaluated to
ensure adequate support and minimum loading on the weld to be PWHT.
• Thermocouple placement. Thermocouple placement is critical to performing an acceptable
PWHT. Thermocouples should be attached near the centerline of the weld and on each side of
the required heating band and at least in the following locations:
– In each separate heating zone.
– For pipes or components of 10 in. (254 mm) diameter or less, thermocouples should be
located at the 6 o’clock and 12 o’clock positions.
– For pipes or components greater than 10 in. (254 mm) diameter, thermocouples should be
placed at the 12 o’clock, 3 o’clock, 6 o’clock, and 9 o’clock positions.
– In the anticipated hottest and coldest locations. This is of particular importance when
significant thickness transitions occur in the heating band zone.
– For thick components, thermocouples should be attached on the ID if it is accessible.
– A spare thermocouple wire should be attached at each location in the event the primary
thermocouple fails. All thermocouples and extension wires should be clearly labeled as to
their location on the component.
14-16
Resistance Heating Pad Installation
Heating pads should extend completely around the circumference of the component. The width of
the area heated should be as specified by the applicable fabrication code, along with the following
guidelines:
• When the axis of the component is within ±15° of horizontal and over 10 in. (254 mm)
diameter, it is recommended the heating pads be placed to allow the top and bottom of the
component to be heated separately.
• When the axis of the component is within ±15° of vertical, it might be necessary to offset the
heating pads toward the lower half to compensate for convection heat loss. Alternatively,
separately controlled heating pads can be placed above and below the weld.
• When component wall thickness varies by more than 25% or 3/8 in. (9.5 mm), whichever is
greater, separately controlled heating pads should be placed on each side of the weld.
Heating pads should be brought into tight contact with the pipe or component. Particular attention
should be given to thickness transition areas. Failure to maintain a tight contact could prevent
areas of the repair from reaching minimum PWHT temperature.
Post-Weld Heat Treatment Schedule
The PWHT cycle should begin by heating to 400°F (204°C) and holding for 15 minutes. During
the hold time, the setup should be checked for uniform heating and proper operation of the
heaters, thermocouples, strip chart recorder, and control equipment.
To minimize thermal stresses, at no time during the heat up, hold, or cold down cycle should any
two thermocouples within the heat band have a temperature difference of more than 100°F
(38°C). If this temperature differential is approached, the rate of heating or cooling should be
slowed. If any temperature difference cannot be corrected, the component should be cooled to
200°F (93°C), and the PWHT setup should be reevaluated.
During the PWHT, if the maximum hold temperature is exceeded, the repair weld will require
further evaluation to determine suitability for service after completion of the PWHT. This
evaluation, as a minimum, would include replication and hardness testing to assess the
metallurgical condition of the weld.
Nondestructive Evaluation Following Completion of Post-Weld Heat Treatment
When the pipe or component has cooled to room temperature, the weld should be inspected
according to code requirements. In addition, it is recommended that all thermocouple removal
areas and temporary attachment removal areas be inspected by MT or PT.
14-17
Alternatives to Post-Weld Heat Treatment
In some situations, it might not be advisable or even possible to perform PWHT to the
requirements of the original fabrication code. In such cases, alternatives to PWHT—such as
temper bead welding and the alternative heat treatment rules given in the National Board
Inspection Code—can be considered and can provide an acceptable repair [14-1]. Application of
these alternative methods must meet the requirements of the applicable code (including
qualification of welding procedures) and should include an engineering evaluation to determine
whether they are appropriate for the intended service. In addition, such alternative methods must
be acceptable to the applicable jurisdictions and, if required, be approved by a National Board-
authorized inspector.
Component Replacement
When components are replaced, consideration should be given to the cause of the failure and
whether changes in material or design are required to provide a satisfactory repair or to extend the
life of the component.
Like-for-Like
Like-for-like replacements are made when the anticipated service life of the repair meets or
exceeds that of the piping system. In such cases, no additional engineering work is required. Like-
for-like replacements can also be used as a stopgap method to provide the necessary time to
procure upgrade material or complete an improved design.
Upgrading by Design or Material Improvement
If a material has proven unsatisfactory for the intended service or if the anticipated life of a repair
is deemed unacceptable, a change in material or design can be considered. Material changes can
include changing to a higher alloy or different heat treat condition. Such improvement must meet
all the applicable code requirements and be evaluated for the service condition.
Examples of design improvements include changes to the support systems or changes in the
operating temperature or pressure of the system. As with material changes, any such change must
meet the applicable code requirements and be suitable for the intended service.
References
14-1. National Board Inspection Code: NBIC NB-23. National Board of Boiler and Pressure
Vessel Inspectors. Columbus, OH. 2004.
14-2. PFI ES-16, Access Holes, Bosses, and Plugs for Radiographic Inspection of Pipe Welds.
Pipe Fabrication Institute, New York, 2004.
14-18
Export Control Restrictions The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), with major
Access to and use of EPRI Intellectual Property is granted with the locations in Palo Alto, California; Charlotte, North Carolina; and
specific understanding and requirement that responsibility for ensur- Knoxville, Tennessee, was established in 1973 as an independent,
ing full compliance with all applicable U.S. and foreign export laws nonprofit center for public interest energy and environmental
and regulations is being undertaken by you and your company. This research. EPRI brings together members, participants, the Institute’s
includes an obligation to ensure that any individual receiving access scientists and engineers, and other leading experts to work
hereunder who is not a U.S. citizen or permanent U.S. resident is collaboratively on solutions to the challenges of electric power. These
permitted access under applicable U.S. and foreign export laws and solutions span nearly every area of electricity generation, delivery,
regulations. In the event you are uncertain whether you or your com- and use, including health, safety, and environment. EPRI’s members
pany may lawfully obtain access to this EPRI Intellectual Property, you represent over 90% of the electricity generated in the United States.
acknowledge that it is your obligation to consult with your company’s International participation represents nearly 15% of EPRI’s total
legal counsel to determine whether this access is lawful. Although research, development, and demonstration program.
EPRI may make available on a case-by-case basis an informal as-
Together...Shaping the Future of Electricity
sessment of the applicable U.S. export classification for specific EPRI
Intellectual Property, you and your company acknowledge that this
assessment is solely for informational purposes and not for reliance
purposes. You and your company acknowledge that it is still the ob-
ligation of you and your company to make your own assessment
of the applicable U.S. export classification and ensure compliance
accordingly. You and your company understand and acknowledge
your obligations to make a prompt report to EPRI and the appropriate
authorities regarding any access to or use of EPRI Intellectual Prop-
erty hereunder that may be in violation of applicable U.S. or foreign
export laws or regulations.
Program:
Boiler Life and Availability Improvement Program
© 2007 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Inc. All rights reserved. Electric Power
Research Institute, EPRI, and TOGETHER...SHAPING THE FUTURE OF ELECTRICITY are
registered service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc.
Printed on recycled paper in the United States of America
1012201
Electric Power Research Institute

3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338 • PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 USA
800.313.3774 • 650.855.2121 • askepri@epri.com • www.epri.com

FossilPlantHigh-EnergyPipingDamage EPRI PDF

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

FossilPlantHigh-EnergyPipingDamage EPRI PDF

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Effective December 6, 2006, this report has been made publicly available in

accordance with Section 734.3(b)(3) and published in accordance with Section

Fossil Plant High-Energy Piping Damage:

Place Image Here

Interim Report, June 2007

EPRI Project Manager

ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE

(A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I)

(B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER

ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT

Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.

This report was prepared by

Structural Integrity Associates, Inc.

Results and Findings

Challenges and Objectives

Applications, Value, and Use

4 WELDING FUNDAMENTALS ................................................................................................4-1

5 MANUFACTURE, FABRICATION, AND ERECTION ............................................................5-1

7 DAMAGE MECHANISMS AND MODELS .............................................................................7-1

8 PROGRAMMATIC APPROACHES TO LIFE MANAGEMENT OF PIPING SYSTEMS ........8-1

9 PIPING SYSTEM SURVEYS..................................................................................................9-1

10 NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING ..........................................................................................10-1

11 METALLURGICAL EXAMINATION AND ANALYSIS AND MATERIAL

12 INSTRUMENTATION AND MONITORING ........................................................................12-1

13 DATA STORAGE, RETRIEVAL, AND EVALUATION.......................................................13-1

Figure 2-1 Configuration of a Constant Load Support .............................................................2-15

Although repair of selected locations (such as circumferential welds) might be required

Similarly, recent occurrences of circumferential weld damage have frequently developed in

When possible, fabrication practices should be documented, and compositional

The Design Process

Design Codes and Regulations

Piping stresses are categorized by the following three types:

PDO 0.75iM A 0.75iM B

PDO 1000(0.75i ) M A 1000(0.75i ) M B

f is the stress range reduction factor for cyclic conditions.

Dead Weight Loads

Pinned-end conditions Mmax = (1/2)WL2 and FEnd = 1/2WL Eq. 2-4

Fixed-end conditions Mmax = (1/12)WL2 and FEnd = 1/2WL Eq. 2-5

Lmax = (10ZSALL/W)1/2 Eq. 2-6

Safety-related nonnuclear piping must be designed to withstand seismic loads. Accurate

FSeismic = ZKCW Eq. 2-9

Pressure Relief Loads

Δ Thermal = αLΔT Eq. 2-11

6 EIΔ Thermal 12 EIΔ Thermal

System Supports, Design, and Function

Basic Design Steps

Support Locations. Determination of support locations within a system depends on several

∑Mi = 0 and ∑Vi = 0 for i = x, y, and z directions Eq. 2-13

Δ thermal = αLΔT Eq. 2-14

FSupport = FInitial + KΔ Eq. 2-15

Flow Considerations and Modeling

Flow-Related Dynamic Load Events

Service-related damage in low-temperature piping systems predominantly occurs as a result of

Pipe Diameter Maximum Grid Size

Assessment approaches for FAC can be classified as preinspection or postinspection activities.

Attemperator Design and Function

Comparison of Material Standards

Material Pipes and Tubes Plates Castings Forgings

A53, A106, A134,

A199, A213, A182, A336,

Product ASTM/ANSI BS DIN JIS

Table 3-2 (continued)

Product ASTM/ANSI BS DIN JIS