Proceedings of the 2012 9th International Pipeline Conference IPC2012 September 24-28, 2012, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

IPC2012-90427
FULL SCALE CYCLIC FATIGUE TESTING OF DENTED PIPELINES AND DEVELOPMENT OF A VALIDATED DENTED PIPE FINITE ELEMENT MODEL
Sanjay Tiku , Vlado Semiga , Aaron Dinovitzer , Geoff Vignal
1 1 1 2

[1] BMT Fleet Technology Limited, 311 Legget Drive, Kanata, ON, Canada, K2K 1Z8 Tel.: 613-592-2830; Fax: 613-592-4950; email: stiku@fleetech.com [2] Enbridge Pipelines Inc., 10201 Jasper Av., Edmonton, AB T5J 2J9 Tel.: 780-420-5288; Fax: 780-420-5234; email: geoff.vignal@enbridge.com ABSTRACT Dents in buried pipelines can occur due to a number of potential causes; the pipe resting on rock, third party machinery strike, rock strikes during backfilling, amongst others. The long-term integrity of a dented pipeline segment is a complex function of a variety of parameters, including pipe geometry, indenter shape, dent depth, indenter support, pressure history at and following indentation. In order to estimate the safe remaining operational life of a dented pipeline, all of these factors must be accounted for in the analysis. The paper discusses the full-scale dent testing being completed to support the development of pipeline integrity management criteria and is a continuation of the work discussed in previous IPC papers [1,2]. The material and structural response of the pipe test segments during dent formation and pressure loading has been recorded to support numerical model development. The full scale experimental testing is being completed for pipe test specimens in the unrestrained and restrained condition using different indentation depths and indenter sizes. The dents are pressure cycled until fatigue failure in the dent. This paper presents typical data recorded during trial including indentation load/ displacement curves, applied pressures, strain gauges along the axial and circumferential centerlines, as well as dent profiles. The use of the full-scale mechanical damage test data described in this paper in calibrating and validating a finite element model based integrity assessment model is outlined. The details of the integrity assessment model are described along with the level of agreement of the finite element model with the full scale trial results. Current and future applications of the integrity assessment model are

described along with recommendations for further development and testing to support pipeline integrity management. 1 1.1 FULL SCALE TESTING

Testing Overview A detailed dent fatigue life database is presently being created for plain dents, dents interacting with welds and dents interacting with simulated metal loss under cyclic pressure loading. The test variables include three pipe materials, three d/t ratios, two restraint conditions, four indenter sizes and five indentation depths. Fifty seven (57) full scale tests have been carried out to date. Table 1 details the test parameters carried out on vintage (1950s) Grade X-52, 457 mm (18) diameter, 7.9 mm (0.312) nominal wall thickness seamless pipe that was removed from service and donated to PRCI for the current test program. The full scale test parameter details for modern steel pipes and the detailed material properties generated for the three pipe materials have been described in the previous IPC and JTM papers [2,3]. The indenters used were made from pipeline end cap fittings with a 2:1 ellipsoidal shape with nominal diameters of 60.33mm (2.375), 114.30mm (4.5), 219 mm (8) and 323.85 mm (12). The specimens were indented while the pipe was at zero pressure, 40% SMYS pressure or at 80% SMYS pressure. Following indentation the test specimens were first subjected to 80% or 100% SMYS equivalent pressure levels and subsequently all test specimens were subjected to 10% - 80% SMYS equivalent cyclic pressure loading. The tests were stopped and number

Copyright 2012 by ASME

of cycles to failure recorded when a leak occurred at the dent location.

12%

The pipe specimens were instrumented with strain Restrained Dents gauges placed close to and away from the dent. Load, 9% strains and indenter travel were recorded during indentation, Unrestrained Dents strains and pressure loadings were recorded at regular intervals during pressure cycling and dent shapes were 6% recorded after indentation, after indenter removal, after pressure rerounding (in case of unrestrained dents) and after test completion. 3% Figure 1 shows the range of dent depths (1% -10% OD) measured after the second pressure cycle, for unrestrained dents and at the end of the test for restrained dents for the tests for which the detailed data was available 0% at the time of writing the paper. Figure 2 shows the range of Figure 1: Dent Depth Range in the Full Scale Test fatigue lives, in number of cycles to failure (leak), obtained Program in the current test program, (ranging from 2500-125000 cycles). Table 1: Full Scale Test Parameters Plain Dents Specimen # Nominal Indenter Diameter (mm) Indenter Travel (% OD) Dent Restraint Indentation Pressure
Dent Depth (%OD)

Initial Pressure Cycle (%SMYS)

Cyclic Pressure Range (%SMYS)

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

60.3 114.3 60.3 219 219 323.8 219 60.3 60.3 60.3 60.3 114.3 323.8 323.8 323.8 114.3 323.8

5 10 7.5 7.5 7.5 5 7.5 15 10 15 15 15 20 15 20 20 20

R R R R R R R U R U U U U U U U U

0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 40% 100% 0% 100% 80% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 40% 100% 80% 100% 0% 80% 40% 80% 0% 100% 80% 105% 0% 100% 0% 80% *Failed outside dent region

10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80% 10%-80%

Dent Depth After Testing Complete (%OD) 3.1 6 4.9 4.1 4.4 3 4.3 2.9 6.3 4.3 4.8 2.5 1.3 1.0 1.4 2.5 0.8

Cycles to Failure

69099 69393 30604 54036 58532 125525* 61865 23482 30604 16600 12131 9226 18636 47702 21018 15473 14091

Copyright 2012 by ASME

150,000

120,000

Restrained Dents

Number of Cycles

Unrestrained Dents 90,000

the start of the automated cyclic loading. This procedure was adopted due to the high failure rate, seen in the gauges placed close to the dent during indentation and dent rerounding. Since dent re-rounds during the first pressure cycle the hoop strain range at 100 mm away from dent center is around 4%. For the second pressure cycle strain change is less than 0.5% as there is not a significant change in dent depth. The dent shape and strain data discussed above shows that unrestrained dents of 1-3% OD depth range identified by in line inspection tools may have seen significant pressure re-rounding and significant strain cycle especially in situations where pipeline has been subjected to hydro test pressure cycle.
250

60,000

30,000

Figure 2: Range of Fatigue Lives in the Current Test Program. 1.2 Experimental Data This section shows some example plots of the data collected during the full scale fatigue testing. The objective of the detailed data collection in the program is to help develop and validate finite element models that can subsequently be used to develop engineering tools for pipeline dent assessment. Figure 3 shows an example plot of load versus displacement data recorded during dent formation for three different indenter sizes. For the first 10-15mm of indenter displacement, load versus displacement values are similar for the three indenter sizes. The initial indenter displacement results primarily in elastic deformation where the pipe is ovalized rather than actual dent formation. After the initial 10-15 mm of displacement, the loads for the larger 324 mm indenter are higher for the same displacements when compared to the two smaller, 60 and 114 mm indenter diameter. Figure 4 shows dent depth plots for unrestrained dents after removal of the indenter. Indenter displacements of 15% and 20% OD were used to create these dents. The resulting dent depths range approximately between 6.5%11% OD. Figure 5 shows the same dent depth plots after the first pressure cycle (either 80% SMYS or 100% SMYS). The resulting dent depths due to pressure rebound range approximately between 1% to 3.5% OD. Figure 6 shows an example plot of strains recorded during dent formation in the axial and hoop direction at 100 mm away from the dent center on the OD surface. The strain values range from approximately negative 4% strain in the hoop direction to positive 2% strain in the axial direction. Figure 7 shows hoop strain values for the same specimen at the same location after the first two 80% SMYS pressure cycle. The strain gauges in the experimental program are reset to zero after the indentations and before

200 324 mm Indenter

Load (kN)

150

100
60 & 114 mm Indenter

50

Spec 41 Spec 42 Spec 46 Spec 48 Spec 52 Spec 54 Spec 56 Spec 57

0
0 25 50 75 100 Indenter Displacement (mm)

Figure 3: Load Versus Displacement Plots during Dent Creation

Distance from Dent Peak (mm)
-750
Relative Pipe Displacement (mm)

-500

-250

250

500

750

0
10 20 30 40

Spec 48 Spec 52 Spec 54 Spec 56 Spec 57

50

Figure 4: Unrestrained Dent Depths after Elastic Rebound

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Distance from Dent Peak (mm) -750 -500 -250 0 0 250 500 750

the validated models could then subsequently be used to calibrate and validate different fatigue life estimation approaches. The numerical dent model developed as part of this project is a nonlinear finite element analysis model created and analyzed using the ANSYS 12.1 software package. The fully nonlinear model includes large displacements, large strains and nonlinear material behavior to accurately predict the behavior of a dented pipeline specimen. The numerical model development effort included a mesh refinement convergence study to ensure the element size utilized resulted in stable, accurate estimates of the nodal and element results . The generic finite element model, shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9, consists of the experimental specimen including the pipe body and hemispherical end caps, which are both modeled using 8-noded quadratic shell elements. The indenters are modeled using rigid contact elements where shape of each of the indenters is based on the detailed geometry of the actual indenters used in the experiments. A nonlinear kinematic hardening material model (CHABOCHE) was developed for each of the three pipe materials used in the experimental program and is described in detail previously [2]. The accuracy of the material model was assessed by comparing the predictions of the stressstrain hysteresis loops using a finite element analysis model against the experimental cyclic stabilized hysteresis loop generated for a typical round bar strain life test specimen. Material anisotropy (i.e. longitudinal versus circumferential) was modeled where applicable using a Hill plasticity model. The loading procedure used in the finite element analysis closely matched the sequence used during the actual experiments and includes the following steps: 1. Displacement of the indenter into the pipe body to the specified depth keeping internal pressure the same as in the test specimen. 2. If the specimen being modeled is unrestrained, the indenter is withdrawn until no contact exists between it and the pipe body. If the specimen being modeled represents a restrained indenter, the indenter is rigidly held in place at the specified depth throughout the remainder of the analysis. 3. Apply the first maximum internal pressure cycle (either 100% SMYS or 80% SMYS depending on the specimen). 4. Apply the second maximum internal pressure cycle (80% SMYS). 5. Apply three cycles of the cyclic pressure range (from 10% to 80% SMYS).

Relative Pipe Displacement (mm)

10
20 30 40 50 Spec 48 Spec 52 Spec 54 Spec 56 Spec 57

Figure 5: Unrestrained Dent Depths after Pressure Rebound

25000

Microstrain

25

50

75 Spec 57 4" Hoop Spec 57 4" Axial

100

-25000

-50000

Indenter Travel (mm)

Figure 6: Indentation Strains during Dent formation.

60000 Spec 57_Cycle 1 80%P_4in Hoop

Spec 57_Cycle 2 80%P_4in Hoop

40000

Microstrain
20000

0 0 500 1000 Pressure (psi) 1500

Figure 7: Dent Strains during First Two Pressure Cycles FINITE ELEMENT MODELING Experimental data from the full scale tests was used to further develop and validate a finite element modeling approach to predicting the dent shapes and the local pipe wall stress and strains. Stress and strain data from 2.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Symmetry

Y X
Vertical

Restrain t Figure 8: Finite Element Model of a Pipe Specimen

showing Symmetry and Support Conditions.

displacement. Pipes in the test rig were resting on a cross beam with an 8 mm thick rubber pad underneath the pipes, used to avoid metal to metal contact with the cross beam. Indenter displacements were measured using a string pot fixed between the two cross beams and therefore included measuring of the displacement of the rubber getting squeezed underneath the pipe. Depending upon indenter displacement and the loads involved in different tests it is estimated that actual indenter displacement could be 5-12% less than the measured displacements. On the other hand, in the finite element models, all pipes were assumed to be perfectly straight and round and having a uniform wall thickness. In the case of the vintage pipe specimens, there is evidence of ovality and local and general metal loss due to corrosion that has not been incorporated into the models and therefore would contribute to the scatter in indentation loads.
300

FE Model Load (kN)

200

100

0 0 100 200 300 Full Scale Test Load (kN)

Figure 9: Finite Element Model of Hemispherical Indenter Indenting the Pipe 2.1 Finite Element Model Validation This section provides a brief overview of the finite element modeling results along with a comparison against the full scale experimental test data. The experimental test program involved some duplicate testing and not all duplicate tests were modeled.

Figure 10: Comparison of Loads during Dent Formation. Figure 11 shows the comparison of experimental dent depths and the finite element model predictions. Dent depth predictions are in reasonable agreement with experimental data although there are data points that are outside +/- 10% scatter band. The reason for these variations may be the same as explained above.

Figure 10 shows the comparison of indentation loads due to dent formation. The solid line in the graph represents one to one correlation between the FE and experimental results and the dashed lines on either side of solid line represent +/- 10% variation. The FE results predict slightly higher loads as compared to experimental data but most of the data falls within +/- 10% scatter band. The source of scatter in the loads can be inherent in both the experimental data and FE predictions. In the experiments, scatter in loads can be due to the stiffness/compliance of the test frame resulting in lower indenter displacement in the pipe body than the measured

Copyright 2012 by ASME

10%
FE Relative Dent Depth (%OD)

8%

pipe surface (ID) in the axial direction for the restrained dent fatigue tests carried out in the current test program. Based on the strain range data, circumferentially oriented fatigue cracks should initiate in the ID surface, away from the dent center in the dent shoulder in restrained dent fatigue test.

5%

3%

3000

Axial SG close to Dent Center

FE Strain Range ()

0% 0% 3% 5% 8% 10% Full Scale Test Relative Dent Depth (%OD)

2000

Figure 11: Comparison of Final Dent Depths. Figures 12 and 13 show the comparison of the experimental hoop strain ranges and axial strain ranges, due to cyclic pressure loading, with finite element model predictions. Strain gauge data shown in the graphs is from the strain gauge placed closest to the indenter which varied between 50 mm and 100 mm from the dent center depending upon the size of the indenter used. The strain range predictions are in reasonable agreement with the experimental data. Additional source of variation in the strain gauge data could be due to the actual position of the strain gauge relative to the dent center. High strain gradients present in the vicinity of dents could lead to large variations in measured strain due to slight changes in strain gauge locations.

1000

-1000
-1000

1000

2000

3000

Full Scale Test Strain Range ()

Figure 13: Comparison of Axial Strain Range during Cyclic Pressure Loading. Figure 15 shows a typical restrained dent pipe specimen after test completion. The dent center is at the cross hair marked on the pipe while the ruler shown is placed parallel to the pipe longitudinal axis. The fatigue crack is circumferentially oriented and located in the axial dent shoulder. In all restrained dent fatigue tests carried out to date in the present program, fatigue cracks were oriented circumferentially and located in either one or both of the axial dent shoulders.
3000 OD Hoop Strain Range

5500 Hoop SG close to Dent Center

Maximum Strain Range (microstrain)

FE Strain Range ()

OD Axial Strain Range

3500

2000

ID Hoop Strain Range ID Axial Strain Range

1500

1000

-500

1500

3500

5500

Full Scale Test Strain Range ()

0 -1000

100

200

300

400

500

Figure 12: Comparison of Hoop Strain Range during Cyclic Pressure Loading. Figure 14 shows a typical strain range path plot along the axial centreline of the model, for a restrained dent, predicted by the finite element model, due to the cyclic pressure loading used in the present test program. As shown in the plot, the maximum strain range was observed on the inner

Axial Distance From Dent Centerline (mm)

Figure 14: Strain Range Path Plot for a Restrained Dent (Specimen 41).

Copyright 2012 by ASME

on the observed maximum strain range values, axially oriented fatigue cracks should initiate on OD surface, away from the dent center in the dent shoulder region in unrestrained dent fatigue test. Figure 18 shows a typical un-restrained dent pipe specimen after the test completion. The dent center is at the cross hair marked on the pipe and the ruler shown is parallel to the pipe longitudinal axis. There are multiple fatigue cracks in the axial orientation present on the dent shoulders. In most of the un-restrained dent fatigue tests carried out to date, except two cases (will be discussed later) in the present program, fatigue cracks were oriented axially and located in either one or both the axial dent shoulders (that are along pipe longitudinal axis).
4000
Maximum Strain Range (microstrain)
OD Hoop Strain Range OD Axial Strain Range ID Hoop Strain Range 2000 ID Axial Strain Range

Figure 15: Circumferential Fatigue Crack in the Dent Shoulder in a Restrained Dent (Specimen 41). Figure 16 shows a typical photograph of the fracture surface of a fatigue crack from a restrained dent fatigue test. The cross section shown is normal to the pipe longitudinal axis with the ID surface at the top of the photograph and the OD surface at the bottom of the photograph. The crack length is longer on the pipe ID surface and multiple crack initiation sites can be seen on the ID surface. The circumferential crack orientation, crack initiation location on the inner surface away from the dent center in the dent shoulder location is in agreement with finite element model predictions, as shown in Figure 14, for a typical restrained dent fatigue test observed in the current test program.

100

200

300

400

500

-2000 Axial Distance From Dent Centerline (mm)

Figure 17: Strain Range Path Plot for an Unrestrained Dent (Specimen 48). Figure 19 shows a typical photograph of the fracture surface of a fatigue crack from an un-restrained dent fatigue test. The cross section shown is parallel to the pipe longitudinal axis with OD surface on top of the photograph and ID surface on the bottom the photograph. The crack length is longer on the pipe OD surface and multiple crack initiation sites can be seen on OD surface. The large steps seen in the macro are due to the presence of multiple parallel fatigue cracks being broken open.

Figure 16: Fracture Surface of a Fatigue Crack in a Restrained Dent. Figure 17 shows a typical strain range path plot for an unrestrained dent, predicted by the finite element model, due to the cyclic pressure loading used in the present test program. In unrestrained dent fatigue tests carried out in the present program, the maximum strain range was observed on the outer pipe surface (OD) in the hoop direction. Based

Copyright 2012 by ASME

crack locations are close to or at the dent center as compared to earlier observations, Figure 18, where the fatigue crack location is away from the dent center and at the dent shoulder. In both the test specimens (57 and 54) the final dent depth was around 1%OD or lower. Figure 22 and Figure 23 show the strain range plots for the two specimens as predicted by element models. In both cases, the maximum strain range is at the dent center as compared to the earlier example, Figure 17, where the maximum hoop strain range was away from the dent center. It appears that shallow unrestrained dents created by the larger indenter at zero internal pressure, in the present program, lead to a higher hoop strain range at the dent center and therefore promoted fatigue cracking in the dent center.

Figure 18: Axial Fatigue Cracks in the Dent Shoulder in an Un-Restrained Dent (Specimen 48)

Figure 20: Axial Fatigue Cracks Located in the Dent Center for 1% Un-Restrained Dent (Specimen 57) Created with 324mm Indenter.

Figure 19: Fracture Surface of a Fatigue Crack in an Un-Restrained Dent. The axial crack orientation, crack initiation location on outer surface (OD) away from dent center in the dent shoulder location is in agreement with finite element model predictions, as shown in Figure 17, for a typical unrestrained dent fatigue test observed in the current test program. 3. OTHER TEST OBSERVATIONS Figure 20 and Figure 21 show photographs of two unrestrained dent fatigue test specimens, specimen 57 and 54 respectively where the 324 mm indenter was used to create dents at zero internal pressure. In both cases, fatigue

Figure 21: Axial Fatigue Cracks Located in the Dent Center for 1% Un-Restrained Dent (Specimen 54) Created with 324mm Indenter.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

4500 57_OD Hoop 57_OD Axial 57_ID Hoop 2500 57_ID Axial

Microstrain Range

500 0 250 500 750

-1500 Distance from Dent Center Along Axial Centerline (mm)

Figure 22: Strain Range Path Plot for Shallow UnRestrained Dent Created using Large Indenter.
3000

Figure 24: ID Axial Stress Range Contour Plot for Restrained Dent.

Maximum Strain Range (Microstrain)

2000

54_OD Hoop 54_OD Axial 54_ID Hoop 54_ID Axial

1000

0 0 -1000 Axial Distance From Dent Centerline (mm) 250 500 750

Figure 23: Strain Range Path Plot for Shallow UnRestrained Dent Created using Large Indenter. In the present full scale test program, fatigue crack orientation was circumferential in restrained dent tests and axial in unrestrained dent tests. In restrained dent tests, there was one dominant fatigue crack, Figure 15, as seen from outside in either one or both the axial dent shoulders. In unrestrained dent fatigue tests (except the two shallow dent cases discussed above), there were multiple fatigue cracks, Figure 18, observed in either one or both the axial dent shoulders. Figure 24 shows the ID axial stress range contour (nodal) plot for a restrained dent (specimen 41). The maximum stress range is localized and confined to the two dent shoulders and therefore appears to promote the formation of a single dominant fatigue crack in the circumferential orientation. Figure 25 shows the OD hoop stress range contour (nodal) plot for an unrestrained dent (specimen 48). As shown, there is a wide area around the dent shoulders that experiences a large stress range and therefore results in promoting multiple fatigue cracks in the axial orientation in unrestrained dent fatigue test.

Figure 25: OD Hoop Stress Range Contour Plot for UnRestrained Dent The multiple fatigue cracks seen in unrestrained dent cases, as shown in Figure 18 earlier and shown in Figure 26 below, resemble stress corrosion crack (SCC) colonies as seen in pipelines. However, in the current tests the multiple cracks are similar to what is typically seen in low cycle fatigue tests. The cyclic pressure ranges used in the test program are 10%-80% SMYS which are considered very aggressive and not typically seen in routine pipeline operation. The multiple crack indications in the current tests were present even in the shallow dents, around 1% deep or lower (Figures 20 and 21), so it is conceivable that there can be scenarios present in existing pipelines where deeper unrestrained dents (>1%OD) but experiencing smaller pressure ranges (30-40% SMYS) typical of liquid pipelines may see similar stress ranges as generated in the present test program and therefore promote multiple low cycle fatigue cracks and may potentially be mischaracterized as SCC colonies on the basis of appearance.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

4.1 Application of Model and Future Considerations As demonstrated above, the finite element model can be used to estimate the stress and strain behaviour of dents in pipelines and therefore used to determine safe remaining operational life of a dented pipeline. Practical applications of the finite element model can assist pipeline operators in the assessment of individual dent features and the decision process to determine repair requirements. Another current application of the model forms the basis for the development of a detailed dent assessment procedure to develop criteria for ranking the severity of dents, assist in the assessment of larger population of dents and develop a simplified practical methodology for estimating the remaining life of dent features. This work is being conducted on behalf of PRCI. The full scale tests that have been completed to date were designed to cover a wide range of dent types that may be encountered during pipeline operation. Additional full scale test trials of shallow dents, dents with shallow scraping or scoring at the ID or OD and dents having complex geometric shapes would support further validation of the model for more common dent features that are often existing on operating pipelines. Examples of additional applications of the finite element model would be to support further validation and development of safe excavation guidelines for dent features, and to develop a criteria for the prediction of restrain condition of dent features based on shape data obtained through inline inspections. . 5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge PRCI for sponsoring full scale testing program and dent modelling and fatigue assessment program and US DoT for sponsoring the full scale test program. Acknowledgement also goes to Stress Engineering Services, Inc., in Houston, Texas for conducting all of the full scale tests. 6. REFERENCES 1. B. Bolton et alTowards a Validated Pipeline Dent Integrity Assessment Model, IPC2008-64621 2. B. Boton et al, Full Scale Cyclic Fatigue Testing of Dented Pipelines and Development of a Validated Dented Pipe Finite Element Model IPC 2010-31579 3. R. Batisse et al, Experimental Reference Database of Mechanical Damage Defects for Developing and Validating Defect Assessment Models 18th Biennial Joint Technical Meeting on Pipeline Research, San Francisco CA May 2011.

Figure 26: Multiple Axial Fatigue Cracks in the Dent Shoulder in an Un-Restrained Dent (Specimen 48) 4. CONCLUDING REMARKS A full scale test program is being carried out on behalf of PRCI and US DoT to develop an extensive experimental database of fatigue lives for dents. The test variables described in the present work include four indenter sizes ranging from 60 mm to 324 mm, creating dents at three different internal pressures of 0%, 40% SMYS and 80% SMYS and two restraint conditions. A brief overview of finite element model validation against the full scale test data has been presented. The validation effort involved comparing indentation loads during dent formation, dent shapes and strain ranges during cyclic loading. The model predictions are in reasonable agreement with the full scale test data. The maximum strain range orientation and locations identified by finite element models within a dent were in agreement with the fatigue crack locations seen in the test specimens. Fatigue cracks were initiated on the ID surface in the circumferential orientation in the dent shoulders in restrained dent fatigue tests. In unrestrained dent fatigue tests, fatigue cracks were axially oriented and initiated on the OD surface. The fatigue crack location for unrestrained dents, except two shallow dents, was in dent shoulders. For shallow dents created at zero internal pressure using large indenter, the fatigue cracks were also located in dent center. Multiple fatigue cracks, typical of low cycle fatigue cracks, were observed in unrestrained dent fatigue tests. Appearance of multiple fatigue cracks was very similar to SCC colonies.

10

Copyright 2012 by ASME