Professional Documents
Culture Documents
GT2012
June 11-15, 2012, Copenhagen, Denmark
GT2012-68800
2500 KW SHIP SERVICE TURBINE GENERATOR
CASING WELDED INCONEL PLUG FAILURE AND REPAIR ANALYSIS
John S. Shields, P.E.
US Navy NSWCCD-SSES
Steam Systems Branch
Philadelphia, PA, USA
William H. Shapiro
US Navy NSWCCD-SSES
Steam Systems Branch Head
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Eric C. Kolb
US Navy NSWCCD-SSES
Steam Systems Branch
Philadelphia, PA, USA
ABSTRACT
Six of seven US Navy Wasp Class (LHD) ships have 2500 KW Ship
Service Turbo Generator (SSTG) steam turbine casings that were
mistakenly manufactured with in-place first stage balancing holes in
both the inboard and outboard sides of the upper casing half. These
holes were intended for in-place balancing of the turbine rotor;
however, the US Navy did not request the access holes since in-place
balancing is typically not accomplished on in-service surface ship
SSTGs. To correct the mistake, the OEM, developed a procedure to
weld plugs into the holes. Unfortunately, cracks developed in the plug
weld heat affected zones (HAZs) on many of the in-service units. Some
cracks propagated entirely through the plug and leaked steam in
service. A failure analysis determined that the original plug (Inconel
X750) should have received post weld heat treatment (PWHT) to avoid
embrittlement and the subsequent cracking of the HAZ. If PWHT was
not to be accomplished, an alloy such as Inconel 600 should have been
selected. It is noted that PWHT risks warping the casing and cannot be
performed in-place. Inconel 600 repair plug installations were
performed in-place, permitting a fast repair turnaround time, which
allowed the affected ships to meet operational schedules.
To evaluate the repair integrity, the US Navy reviewed the failure
analysis data and repair procedure and performed a Finite Element
Analysis (FEA) and Fracture Analysis. Various improved plug
designs were also studied in parallel to determine if a different
geometry plug would better resist future cracking. During repairs,
minor radial cracks were discovered in the welding inlay originally
installed between the casing and plug weld. Because the inlay had to
be fully preserved to avoid complex and time consuming additional
repairs to the casing including PWHT, minor cracks were left in place
and consumed by the new weld
An important objective of this effort was to prove that if any cracking
ever reoccurred only minor steam leakage would result. The leakage
would be apparent to the operators long before there was potential for
INTRODUCTION
During 2008 post-overhaul steam testing on an LHD, minor steam
leakage was discovered coming from one of the SSTGs. A visual
inspection and dye penetrant (PT) inspection identified circumferential
cracking on both inboard and outboard upper turbine casing plugs. All
cracks occurred in the HAZ of the plug adjacent to the installation
weld. Figures 1, 2, and 3 show examples of the cracks.
During manufacture of the turbine casing, the OEM installed the plugs
into the 1-1/4 Cr-1/2 Mo (Cr-Mo) turbine casing by weld-depositing
an inlay of Inconel 600 alloy, followed by shielded metal arc welding
(SMAW) of the Inconel X-750 plug using a nickel base alloy filler
material. The failure was investigated by reference (1), which
concluded that inter-granular fracturing was the direct mode of failure,
likely caused by embrittlement from lack of PWHT. An in-place
repair procedure, reference (2), was developed and performed by
Norfolk Naval Shipyard (NNSY) which removed the current Inconel
X-750 plug and replaced it with an Inconel 600 plug to eliminate the
HAZ embrittlement problem. Following the first repair, visual and PT
inspections of all LHD SSTG casing plugs were performed, as directed
by Naval Message, reference (3).
Repairs were immediately
performed on SSTG casings that leaked steam. All Inconel X-750
plugs were eventually replaced with Inconel 600 plugs by utilizing the
NNSY developed repair process.
During these repairs, issues arose regarding preservation of the plug
hole inlay and minor radially oriented cracks discovered after removal
of the original plug. Normally, US Navy welding procedures do not
allow welding over cracks, no matter how minor. However, removal
of the cracks in this instance would require complete removal and
restoration of the welding inlay, followed by PWHT. PWHT requires
removal of the casing due to the risk of warpage, a 3-month process. A
1
This material is declared a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States.
Approved for public release. Distribution is unlimited.
1.
Choose a less susceptible alloy that does not harden by
precipitation heat treatment or choose an alloy that ages in a much
more sluggish fashion.
2.
The FEA stress plot generally indicated that pressure loads resulted in
nominal stresses, 6000 PSI maximum. The highest stresses were
concentrated at the underside of the plug. This finding could be
significant when thermal stress is superimposed on the mechanical
stress in the next phase of the stress analysis High stress was also
indicated on the four edges of the turbine casing. This result was
expected since the four edges were fixed. However, the high stress
zone on the turbine casing does not affect the study since it was far
enough away from the plug and weld. (See Figure 11 for a general
representation of the FEA stress plot).
Meshing Process
The meshing process divided the model parts into many small
elements. The elements can be refined in the area of interest to give a
more accurate result. Overly refined mesh will result in lengthy
calculation time and could distort the result. Therefore, the key was to
optimize the element number to strike a balance between accuracy and
calculation time. After the meshing process is completed, the FEA
result can be obtained (See Figure 10 for an example of meshing
process).
Component
Plug
(Inconel 600)
Casing
(Cr-Mo Steel)
Filler Weld
(MIL-RN82)
Inlay weld
(MIL-4N1A
or MIL-8N12)
The solid model geometry was imported into ANSYS mechanical FEA
software and meshed. Obtaining detailed results around certain
components required mesh refinements around the plug, inlay, and
filler. With all the refinements, the model contained approximately
174,000 nodes. The appropriate material properties are assigned to the
corresponding component in the model (See Tables 2 and 3).
Maximum Von
Mises Stress
Yield Stress
Tensile
Stress
17 KSI
31KSI
91 KSI
13 KSI
40 KSI
70 KSI
15 KSI
55KSI
80 KSI
9 KSI
55KSI
80 KSI
Plug
(Inconel 600)
Casing
(Cr-Mo Steel)
Filler Weld
(MIL-RN82)
Inlay weld
(MIL-4N1A
or MIL-8N12)
17 KSI
31 KSI
91 KSI
13 KSI
40 KSI
70 KSI
15 KSI
55KSI
80 KSI
9 KSI
55KSI
80 KSI
Plug
(Inconel 600)
Casing
(Cr-Mo Steel)
Filler Weld
(MIL-RN82)
Inlay weld
(MIL-4N1A
or MIL-8N12)
16 KSI
31KSI
91 KSI
12 KSI
40 KSI
70 KSI
14 KSI
55KSI
80 KSI
8 KSI
55KSI
80 KSI
19). Summary tables of all the FEA results are presented below (See
Table 8). A maximum stress value is also recorded for the entire plug
inner surface. The stress result for the original plug is highlighted in
gold. Plug designs with stress values lower than the original design
are highlighted in yellow for comparison.
Original
(No Curvature)
TABLE 8: SUMMARY TABLE OF FEA STRESS STUDY RESULT ON THE PLUG (UNIT PSI)
Average
Average
Average
Average
Stress (psi)
Stress (psi)
Stress (psi)
Stress (psi)
%
%
%
%
Whole Plug
Diff
Center
Diff
Middle
Diff
Outer
Diff
1286.58
0
996.082
0
1483.22
0
1800.29
0
Concave Outward
Less Curvature
|
|
|
More Curvature
Whole Plug
1434.93
1280.66
1434.93
1761.54
2310.98
11.5
-0.5
11.5
36.9
79.6
Center
1367.13
1090.09
1367.13
1938.91
2836.93
Concave Inward
Less Curvature
|
|
More Curvature
Concave Inward
Reinforced
Less Curvature
|
|
More Curvature
37.3
9.4
37.3
94.7
184.8
Middle
1311.46
1301.77
1311.46
1358.02
1423.81
Whole Plug
1518.17
1578.44
1676.81
1818.82
18.0
22.7
30.3
41.4
Center
1368.49
1443.86
1557.78
1701.38
Whole Plug
1288.3
1314.44
1294.68
1317.55
0.1
2.2
0.6
2.4
Center
1084.98
1066.51
1076.66
1088.67
Max
Stress
9926.03
%
Diff
0
-11.6
-12.2
-11.6
-8.4
-4.0
Outer
1616.35
1604.25
1616.35
1623.93
1603.09
-10.2
-10.9
-10.2
-9.8
-11.0
7003.52
7481.23
7003.52
5157.95
4761.54
-29.4
-24.6
-29.4
-48.0
-52.0
37.4
45.0
56.4
70.8
Middle
1739.35
1803.21
1918.16
2148.85
17.3
21.6
29.3
44.9
Outer
2009.6
2023.84
2069.63
2064.65
11.6
12.4
15.0
14.7
9458.58
9840.35
9205.51
8008.76
-4.7
-0.9
-7.3
-19.3
8.9
7.1
8.1
9.3
Middle
1575.73
1562.6
1607.92
1671.9
6.2
5.4
8.4
12.7
Outer
1786.42
1728.12
1803.9
1792.5
-0.8
-4.0
0.2
-0.4
9048.45
8974.92
9060.09
8849.56
-8.8
-9.6
-8.7
-10.8
FRACTURE ANALYSIS
A fracture/fatigue analysis of flaws found in SSTG plug welds was
performed as reported in reference (6). The fatigue and fracture
analysis of remaining flaws in the plug welds assumed worst case
scenario loading conditions (yield stress). The analysis focused on
the plug replacement repair with minor inclusions in the welds to
evaluate the possibility of defect growth under assumed conditions.
Based on service loads, defect behavior, such as failure mode and time
to failure can be obtained using the techniques described below.
10
FIGURE 23: ILLUSTRATION OF CLOSED FORM STRESS INTENSITY SOLUTION, REFERENCES (8) AND (9)
filler metal) and 3 crack sizes (1/8 inch, 1/4 inch and 3/8 inch) using
fracture toughness values for each material at elevated temperatures in
air or water, when available, to closely approximate the hot steam
environment contained by the SSTG casing. As this analysis was
performed at stresses well above the SSTG operating envelope, these
results shows that the current plug replacement weld repairs that may
contain small inclusions are likely to be safe and reliable. AFGROW
fatigue crack growth analysis software calculations also confirmed this
conclusion.
11
Crack
Depth
"2a"
(inch)
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
Crack
Length
"2c"
(inch)
Ratio
(depth/length)
=0
=45
0.125
8.0
15
14
40(min)
0.250
4.0
21
19
13
40(min)
0.375
2.7
26
23
19
40(min)
0.125
8.0
31
27
13
81
0.250
4.0
43
39
26
81
0.375
2.7
52
48
38
81
0.125
8.0
12
11
31
0.250
4.0
17
=90
15
10
31
0.375
2.7
20
18
14
31
0.125
8.0
21
19
55
0.250
4.0
29
26
17
55
0.375
2.7
35
32
26
55
0.125
8.0
20
18
16
55
0.250
4.0
29
26
17
55
0.375
2.7
35
32
26
55
KJC(KSI(inch^0.5))
78
CrMoSteel
(1000FAir)
147
INX750
(800FAir)
262
IN600
(640F
Air/Water)
365
EN82Weld
Metal
(129640F
Air)
335
EN82Weld
Metal
(640FWater)
8,139
187,702
12
7. If future plug repair is required, then the use of the new concave
outward design plug is recommended to reduce stress at the weld
based on the detailed design study.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors express their gratitude to the NNSY Propulsion Machinery
Branch and Production Codes who developed and executed the inplace repair process. NNSY efforts allowed the LHD Class Ships to
maintain operational commitments with minimal interruption. In
addition, the authors also express their gratitude for the efforts of
NSWCCD-SSES Machinery Technology Branch, Applied Joining and
Research Branch and Metals Engineering Branch, and the efforts of
the NAVSEA Non-Destructive Evaluation Branch and Materials
Branch.
REFERENCES
(1) Mid-Atlantic Regional Materials Test Laboratory Report
#2008NN04604, 6 November, 2008
13