Babcock Borsig Power Inc.

is now
Babcock Power Services Inc., a Babcock Power Inc. company.
www.babcockpower.com

TECHNICAL PUBLICATION
CONDITION ASSESSMENT
OF BOILER PIPING
AND HEADER COMPONENTS
by
James P. King
Senior Staff Engineer
Babcock Borsig Power, Inc.

Presented at the
2000 ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference
Seattle, Washington
July 23-27, 2000

Babcock Borsig Power, Inc.

Post Office Box 15040
Worcester, MA 01615-0040
www.bbpwr.com
RST-164

CONDITION ASSESSMENT OF BOILER PIPING

AND HEADER COMPONENTS
by
James P. King
Senior Staff Engineer
Babcock Borsig Power, Inc.

ABSTRACT
This paper provides current and cumulative experience with typical problems and failures associated with fossil fired utility boiler pressure piping and header components. The
background for the paper is the experience of DB Riley (now Babcock Borsig Power, Inc.) in
boiler inspections, testing, metallurgy and remnant life studies, performed on their own and
units designed by other original equipment manufacturers during the past fifteen years.
Case studies are presented which address the significance of cyclic boiler operation and
over-temperature conditions on header and piping components. The studies include the
assessment of cracking in high temperature superheater outlet headers, the evaluation of a
sagged reheat inlet header, and a study of a test spool piece taken from a hot reheat piping line.
The summary includes a table listing common problems with boiler piping and header
components including the description of damage, failure cause, inspection and nondestructive, and metallurgical testing tasks, with recommended remedial actions for each of the
major pressure components.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The performance of condition assessment, or life extension, programs has been an integral and ongoing activity for fossil fired utility boilers during the past eighteen years. These
programs were implemented, in part, due to a history of catastrophic component failures, the
aging of the equipment and to the cyclic or load following type of operation utilized for most
units. Historically, electric utilities scheduled unit outages on an annual or eighteen-month
cycle. Today, the interval of time between outages has been extended to as much as thirtysix months. This pattern of scheduling less frequent outages requires better record keeping
and more detailed planning for the inspection, assessment, and maintenance tasks performed during the outage.
Initially, the focus of a condition assessment program was on the major boiler pressure
and steam line components. However, over the years, the programs have been extended to
Babcock Borsig Power, Inc. 2001

include the structure and setting of the boiler and the many regions of water wall, economizer, superheater, and reheater tubing. Also, the boiler proper downcomer and crossover
piping, including branch lines and steam attemperator components are now a part of such
programs. In recent times, there has been much more attention given to the feedwater piping line components due to a number of reported failures which were attributed to flow accelerated corrosion. In addition, sloped horizontal steam piping lines should be evaluated for
the effects of water induction, especially if there is visual evidence of sagging or distortion.
In todays age of deregulation in the electric power industry, with many changes in plant
ownership, it is now more important than ever to have a continuing boiler condition assessment program in place. This provides easy availability of records, via previous detailed
reports with implemented recommendations, and a schedule of inspection, testing, and monitoring activities for future unit outages. Most importantly, a continuing condition assessment program helps to ensure safe and reliable operation of the units, and minimizes the
frequency of forced outages.

CURRENT EXPERIENCE
Babcock Borsig Power, Inc. (BBP) continues to be involved with condition assessment
and failure analysis studies of fossil fired boiler components. The aging of the utility boiler
fleet and the cycling and load swing modes of operation employed over the years has necessitated the periodic performance of condition assessment programs and the occasional failure analysis study.
It has been our experience that many of the boiler operational problems, with accumulation of fatigue damage, occur during the early years of unit service when events such as
turbine, boiler, and/or mill trips are most likely to happen.
Four case studies of recent failure or distress in critical boiler and piping pressure components are described in detail below.

CASES 1 AND 2: CRACKING IN HIGH TEMPERATURE

SUPERHEATER OUTLET HEADERS
BBP has been involved, with others, in two separate studies addressing cracking found
in regions of high temperature superheater outlet headers.
Case No. 1
This study was for a 1972 design, large utility boiler originally supplied by Riley Stoker
Corporation, described in the Reference 1 report. Circumferential cracking was found at one
girth weld location between the header shell and an outlet block forged tee. By ultrasonic
testing, the cracking was found to be through wall for the upper 180 portion and with less
depth for another 45 on either side.
The history of boiler duty, as related by plant personnel, included a period in the early to
mid-1980s with continuous load swing operation, including some times at loads as low as
10% of maximum. During low load operation, superheater temperatures can vary significantly from pendant to pendant and from tube to tube. The many cycles associated with
daily load swing operation can cause cumulative fatigue damage. Historically, the superheater has experienced higher temperatures towards the middle of the boiler, which was the
location of the cracked weld in the outlet header.
2

The repair program involved the removal of weld metal by thermal gouging and grinding, with confirmation of crack removal by magnetic particle examination.
Upon initial visual examination, it appeared that the thin, discontinuous circumferential
cracks had initiated on the outside surface of the header weld; however, during the repair
process, it became evident that the cracks were wider towards the inside surface, thus indicating crack initiation at the inside surface.
The metallurgical results of boat samples, taken prior to the repairs, showed transgranular cracking indicative of fatigue, with minor evidence of non-aligned creep voids. This indicates that fatigue was the primary failure mode, with some minor interaction from creep.
The greatest accumulation of fatigue damage would be during the period of cyclic operation
Extensive ultrasonic shear wave testing was performed on all similar locations of the
header with some minor subsurface indications found, which were recommended for monitoring.
At a moment restraint assembly near the cracked girth weld, some minor indications
were found in attachment welds, and some plate members were slightly twisted. This could
be indicative of some higher than anticipated external loading, from the outlet main steam
piping.
In conclusion, the appropriate testing and repair procedures were utilized by the owner,
and recommendations were given for continued monitoring, determining the causes of higher temperatures at the middle of the superheater and for the minimizing of cyclic and load
swing operation.
Case No. 2
This case involves a 1976 design large utility boiler, as described in the Reference 2
report. Circumferential cracking was found in the ligament fields, at many locations on twin,
high temperature superheater outlet headers, of this boiler. At the most severe locations,
through wall cracking was observed from tube hole to tube hole circumferentially. These
locations were at the outboard end of each header. See the Figure 1 photograph for a general view of the header. Historically, the superheater had recorded higher temperatures at

Figure 1 General view of the Case No. 2 H.T. superheater outlet header,
showing where the terminal tubes were cut away for later replacement.
3

these same ends. Also, the unit had been operated in a load swing mode during a number of
its years in service. Due to the orientation of the cracking, it was obvious that the combination of the longitudinal thermal bending and pressure stresses is greater than the value of
the circumferential (hoop) pressure stress.
A comprehensive ultrasonic testing program was performed for each of the ligament
fields on both headers. A map of crack locations and depths was generated for each header.
Boat samples were taken for metallurgical analysis from the circumferential ligament fields.
See the Figures 2 and 3 photographs. The results of this analysis showed the cracking to be
primarily due to thermal fatigue.

Figure 2 Area of the header where a boat sample was removed from the
circumferential ligament field for metallurgical analysis

Figure 3 A closeup view of the top of the header, showing a location of

removed terminal tubes, with the wide circumferential cracks
4

Due to the extent and severity of the cracking, replacement spool pieces were obtained,
machined and installed at the outboard ends of the headers before the unit was placed back
into service. A longer-term plan was initiated for complete replacement of both headers. The
new headers would have some redesigned features, including the use of SA-335 P91 material, rounding of all internal sharp edges especially at bore holes, increasing the circumferential tube spacing, and designing a more flexible inlet tube routing in the penthouse. P91
material has increased creep rupture strength and allowable stress values, which provides
for a thinner header and thus making it less susceptible to fatigue damage. Also, the need
for more evenly distributed temperatures is being evaluated by changes to the upstream
steam circuitry.
Once the header piece replacement program was established, the owner authorized a
failure study to determine the root cause of the cracking. Part of the study utilized sections
and specimens taken from a removed piece of header. As a conclusion of the failure study, we
determined that a major contributor to the cracking was the presence of a normal operating
(100F) cross-sectional thermal gradient from the top to bottom of the header, which has a
greater value (up to 200F) during start-up events. These temperature gradient values were
confirmed by a review of operational charts. A similar cracking (failure) scenario is described
in detail in the Reference 3 technical paper for the high temperature superheater outlet
header on a large utility boiler.
Case No. 3 - Sagged Reheat Inlet Header
Recently, BBP performed a complete condition assessment program for a sagged reheat
inlet header, located in a utility steam generating unit firing pulverized coal. See the
Reference 4 report. The unit has a maximum continuous rating of three million pounds of
steam per hour. The header was originally specified as 26 inch outside diameter by 1.25 inches minimum wall, SA 106 Grade C material.
According to the our field service files, the unit was first placed into service in 1972, and
some sagging of the header was first discovered as early as 1974. A testing program was performed by the owner, BBP, and the pipe support manufacturer in 1979. The testing tasks
included outside diameter and vertical deflection measurements, ultrasonic wall thickness
measurements and metallurgical analysis of header wall plug samples.
Only the metallurgical results were available in our files and they showed normal
microstructure with no evidence of spheroidization for the plug, header wall samples.
Information from the files indicated that the following additional future tasks were to be
implemented.

Performance of a complete stress analysis of the cold reheat piping from the turbine to the header including the reheat inlet header.

Break the flange welds connecting the header to inlet piping on each end and
check for relative movements and spring.

It is not known if these tasks were performed. Also, there is no historical information in
the files about any further inspections and testing of the header and piping components
between 1979 and the late 1990s.
The recent condition assessment program was initiated by the owner due to concerns
that the header sagging condition might have worsened. In the program, components of the
reheat inlet header and the cold reheat inlet piping and their supports were evaluated. The
program tasks included visual and internal video inspections, header outside diameter and
5

offset (sagging) measurements, ultrasonic thickness and magnetic particle testing, and surface replication and hardness testing.
The results of this current comprehensive inspection and testing program indicated
some problem areas. Obviously, the header sagging was of concern. This condition had been
known for a long time, but a visual inspection and measurements showed it had not worsened significantly. The sagging of the header, measured from a taut line, was found to range
from 7 to 9 inches at the lowest location over the 60 foot long header, an increase of one to
two inches over a twenty-year period. See the Figures 4 and 5 photographs.

Figure 4 The Case No. 3 reheat inlet header, located in the

convection pass of the boiler, showing obvious sagging

Figure 5 A view of a deformed support bracket at the

reheat inlet penetration of the left convection pass wall
6

The result of the current outside diameter measurements, ultrasonic thickness readings,
magnetic particle testing and internal video inspection for the header showed no serious
problems.
Surface replication was performed at two locations on the header. The 1997 microstructural results showed no evidence of creep voids. The results did show the presence of in-situ
spheroidization, opposed to the 1979 normal results, which would indicate normal degradation for a carbon steel component experiencing temperatures in the vicinity of 850F for a
long period of time. However, the design temperature for the reheat inlet header is 700F,
therefore the component has experienced higher than expected temperatures, either during
long-term operation or during a series of short term events.
The degree of spheroidization was judged to be Stage 3, as defined in the Reference 5 document, which is based on the Reference 6, Toft and Marsden technical paper. The estimate
of 850F temperature exposure is based on BBPs extensive experience.
The over-temperature condition is also confirmed by the hardness testing results, which
show some loss of material tensile strength at the header surface locations. Simplified
remaining life calculations were performed as a further means of verifying the microstructural conditions. Cases were input for temperature values of 800F and 850F for the life of
the header. Average Larson-Miller parameter values for stress rupture strength from the
Reference 5 document were input. The results showed infinite service life at 800F and
100,000 hours remaining life at 850F.
The physical walkdown and visual inspections of the cold reheat piping and supports
revealed some problem areas. See the photographs in Figures 6, 7, and 8. The most significant of these items is the evidence of some damaged and deformed support structural mem-

Figure 6 General view of the cold reheat

piping near its inlet to the boiler.

Figure 7 First support off right hand

side of boiler. Note that both structural
channels are bent and dented.
7

Figure 8 Constant force support on the cold reheat piping. Note the deformed structural
channels. Also, additional channels appear to have been added for stiffening; however,
they have been attached to the spring can cover, which is poor practice.
bers and dented pipe lagging, especially at the first and second support locations from the
reheat inlet connections on both sides of the boiler. This type of damage is most likely a
result of excessive loadings and movements experienced by the piping line components
due to abnormal or non-specified plant or system events. The cold settings for the constant
force supports showed normal travel indications. There was no hot walk-down performed
for this study.
Based on the review of records and the results of the many inspections, tests, and metallurgical tasks performed on the header, and the visual observations from the piping inspection, there is no obvious reason for the original and subsequent sagging of the header. The
most likely scenario is the occurrence of higher than designed loads imposed on the header
by the cold reheat inlet piping system, as evidenced by the damaged and deformed piping
support structural members adjacent to and at the boiler-to-piping interface. In addition, the
discovery of some minor to moderate overheating by the metallographic replica results taken
on the header surface has raised concern with the source of the overheating, and with any
possible future consequences.
Based on the findings and conclusions from the condition assessment program, the following recommendations were given to the owner in a detailed final report:

Institute a monitoring program for the reheat inlet header components. At a minimum during each major boiler outage, a complete visual inspection should be
performed, and diameter and sagging measurements taken. Also, replication
with hardness testing should be performed to provide the current condition.
These results should be compared with previous results for evidence of any further deterioration.

In the short term, it is recommended that header core samples be taken for
microstructural evaluation of original material, through the wall, with tensile
and stress rupture testing.
8

Investigate the source of the higher-than-design temperatures experienced by the

header. This could involve the installation of thermocouples to the header, and an
extensive review of applicable boiler temperature records. A part of this review
should include the frequency and duration of attemperation, via the two-reheat
inlet spray stations.

Have a stress analysis program performed for the complete cold reheat piping
system, including the header. Input as much current information as possible
including the condition of the supports. Computer cases should be run to represent normal loadings such as pressure, deadweight, thermal expansion, and cold
spring. Also include supplemental cases to represent any abnormal or additional
loadings such as those from over-temperature conditions, and valve thrust or
valve closure, from events such as a turbine trip. The resulting forces, moments,
and stresses from these load cases can be evaluated to the applicable ASME code
equations, and applied to the piping supports to determine adequacy. The external loadings on the reheat inlet header can also be evaluated for conformance. In
addition, the resulting moment values could also be used as inputs to a fatigue
evaluation of header and piping components.

In conjunction with the stress analysis program described above, a recommendation is given to proof test the first two constant force support assemblies on each
side of the boiler. The results of this test, which can be done on site, will determine
if the supports are still capable of carrying the loadings for which this 1972 boiler was originally designed.

As a maintenance-monitoring item, perform scheduled internal video inspections

of the inlet reheat spray station components to assure that the components are in
place and the spray nozzles and associated branch connection welds are adequate.

Case No. 4 - Hot Reheat Piping Spool Piece Testing

During an on-site scheduled condition assessment program for hot reheat steam piping
lines, indications were identified by ultrasonic shear wave testing and surface creep damage
was observed by metallographic replication in the longitudinal seam weld and girth welds
in portions of the piping. See Reference No. 7. In order to more closely examine and define
these indications, and to provide an assessment of the current condition of the piping and
weldment materials, a three-foot long piece of the pipe was removed for a comprehensive
analytical and testing program. This spool piece was cut out eighteen inches on each side of
a circumferential weld and contained two offset portions of long seam weld. See the Figure
9 photograph.
The subject hot reheat piping is part of a TURBO Furnace unit with a net output of 580
megawatts. The boiler burns low sulfur western coal and was designed to operate at 2620
psig, 1005/1005F, with a steam flow capacity of 4.3 million pounds of steam per hour. The
unit began commercial operation in 1980 and at the time of spool piece removal, had logged
approximately 106,000 hours of service with over 220 starts. The boiler was originally
designed to be base loaded; however, as with many such units, it is subjected to typical daily
load cycling from 35 to 100 percent of full load capacity.
Records for the first two years of operation reveal that the boiler experienced an excessive number of mill trips with associated boiler trips, and also severe steam temperature
control problems. Outlet steam temperatures ran as much as 200F above design values. The
installation of additional steam attemperation, along with control system modifications,
9

improved the temperature control considerably, whereby; the main and reheat steam line
outlet temperatures could be operated at their design values.
The hot reheat piping was originally fabricated from rolled and welded plate stock. The
material is ASTM A155-Class 2-1/4 alloy steel plate, which is joined with a longitudinal
seam weld. The finished pipe has a nominal wall thickness of 1.124 inches. The piping has a
design temperature of 1015F and a maximum operating pressure of 600 psig.

Figure 9 The Case No. 4 as-received test spool piece of the hot reheat piping,
showing the girth weld and a portion of the longitudinal seam weld.
This in-depth analytical and testing program consisted of the following tasks:

Visual Inspection and Nondestructive Testing

Visual Inspection
Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Testing
Radiographic Testing
Ultrasonic Testing
Physical and Chemical Evaluation
Optical Metallography
Scanning Electron Microscopy
Spectrochemical Analysis
Hardness Testing
Mechanical Testing
Stress-Rupture Testing
Elevated Temperature (J) Fracture Toughness Testing
Creep-Crack-Growth (C*) Testing
Remaining Creep Life Assessment

For the stress-rupture testing, two blanks oriented across the downstream leg of longitudinal weld were machined into tensile specimens with a 1/4 inch diameter by 2 inch long
gage section. The specimens were located so that the welds and heat-affected zones were in
the gage section. The specimens were loaded in tension in standard creep test frames and
heated in air using a standard laboratory test furnace. The tests were accelerated by using
10

1225 and 1250F temperatures, which are well above the maximum service temperature,
with a stress value of 7,000 psi. This stress value was chosen so that the results could be
compared directly with those of a past study conducted for the Electric Power Research
Institute. See Reference 8.
Based on the findings of the analyses and testing of the spool piece, which were conducted according to current industry guidelines (Reference 9) for detecting damage in the
weldments of high energy steam piping, the following conclusions were made for this component

Visual inspection yielded no evidence of gross defects in the spool piece. Unlike
the inherent limitations of in-situ inspection of piping, laboratory analysis offered
the obvious advantage of examining the internal surface of the spool piece, by
visual, nondestructive and destructive techniques. The Figure 10 photograph
shows a macroetched end view of the spool piece including the longitudinal weld
profile. The most significant finding was the presence of a non-uniform counterbore at the l.D. of the girth weld. This discontinuity was introduced during the
original joint preparation of the pipe ends prior to welding. This was initially
identified as a crack indication both by ultrasonic testing (UT) and radiography
(RT), since the internal surface of the pipe could not be seen in the field.

Figure 10 The macroetched, cut end of the spool piece,

showing the asymmetry of the double-V seam weld.

Indications were detected in the girth weld by both UT and RT. In the laboratory,
the largest indication was identified as a fabrication induced flaw, namely lack of
root fusion, by metallographic examination. No evidence of creep damage was
found to be associated with the flaw, when examined by optical microscopy.

No evidence of creep damage was observed in the metallographically prepared

specimens of the long seam or girth welds. The piping base metal showed only
beginning stage spheroidization indicating that service temperatures had not
seriously degraded the metal.

A significant concentration of nonmetallic inclusions was observed in the weld

metal of the upstream longitudinal weld, particularly evident along the fusion
line in the cusp region of the weld. Chemical analysis of the weld material showed
that the oxygen content is consistent with the use of an acid type flux during original fabrication. These inclusions are typical of those found in welds made by the
submerged-arc welding process. One study (Reference 10) suggests that high con11

centrations of nonmetallic inclusions near the fusion line of long seam welds, as
introduced by the welding process and acid type fluxes, may increase the likelihood for creep damage to initiate. Contrary to the observation of a high concentration of weld metal inclusions, the results of the cross-weld stress-rupture tests
indicate that the stress-rupture life of the longitudinal seam weld has not been
seriously degraded by their presence or by service conditions.

Remaining creep life assessment was done using the results of the stress-rupture
high temperature (J) toughness, and creep-crack-growth testing carried out on
specimen of the long seam weldment. The findings indicate that service temperatures and pressures have not significantly reduced the creep properties of the piping weldment, and furthermore, that the test results of the weldments are comparable to industry findings for 2-1/4CR-1Mo base metal. Specifically, (1) the minimum creep rupture strength is represented by the lower bound of creep rupture
strength for new 2-1/4Cr-1Mo steel, (2) the secondary creep rate (pre-cavitation
stage) is represented by the typical behavior of service exposed 2-1/4Cr-1 Mo
steel, and (3) the maximum creep-crack-growth rate is represented by the upper
bound of 2-1/4Cr-1Mo base metal.

Remaining creep life was estimated using: (1) a simplified model based on the
stress-rupture test results, and (2) a more conservative model in which a flaw has
been introduced to the weldment via a machined notch and fatigue pre-cracking.
In the first approach, a total remaining life of 3,811,000 hours was calculated
using the linear life-fraction rule. In the second, the predicted remaining creep
lives, using the creep-crack-growth model and typical operating parameters were
more conservative, a total remaining life of 721,000 hours is predicted.

The creep-crack-growth model shows that the average operating pressure of 509
psig and temperature of 1001F for this steam piping are reasonable based on the
parameters of the specimens tested and operational data reported. The specimens
prior to testing are shown in Figure 11. Adequate remaining life is expected under
steady-state conditions and in the absence of material flaws or sustained, undue
operational loading.

A calibration block has subsequently been fabricated from the spool piece for
future ultrasonic examination of the units steam piping.

Figure 11 The stress rupture and creep-crack-growth

specimens taken from the test spool piece.
12

SUMMARY
Recent experience in problem areas encountered with critical boiler header and piping
components has been described for cracking or distress found in such pressure retaining
components. These problems are a result of todays operational practices, including cyclic
duty and extended life for older boilers, which have accelerated the propensity for crack initiation and eventual failure of components.
For the two studies involving cracking in regions of high temperature superheater outlet headers, the on-site tasks of visual inspection and measurements, crack depth determination, component history including temperature exposure and metallurgy of removed header boat samples, all contribute to the establishment of a root cause. Also, the need for a decision on immediate repair, replacement or continued service for a finite time, possibly under
restricted operating conditions, can be ascertained.
The utilization of a header or pipe spool piece in a detailed study has provided much
information on the history of damage accumulation. Also, calibration blocks can be machined

Table 1 Typical boiler critical header and piping component problem areas
Component

Damage Type

Failure Cause
Erosion-Corrosion
Oxygen pitting
Flow accelerated corrosion
Thermal/corrosion fatigue
Erosion/corrosion
Thermal expansion fatigue
Thermal (shock) fatigue
Economizer steaming
Corrosion
Abnormal events
Thermal expansion

Inspection/
NDT Technique
UT thickness
Internal video
Alloy analysis
Internal video
UT thickness
MT examination
Internal video
Replication
Visual inspection
Magnetic particle
examination
MT examination
Internal video
UT shear waves

Feedwater piping

Wall thinning

Economizer inlet header

Ligament cracking
Tube stub thinning
Tube weld cracking

Economizer outlet piping

Internal cracking

Downcomer piping

Damaged supports and

attachments

Lower water wall headers

Tee cracking
Tube stub cracking

Thermal expansion fatigue

Thermal/corrosion fatigue

Attemporator assemblies

Spray nozzle and liner

assembly cracking

Thermal/corrosion fatigue

Dye penetrant testing

Internal video

Cold reheat piping

Corrosion/pitting
Internal cracking

Water induction
Thermal fatigue

Visual inspection
Internal video

Reheat inlet header

Sagging

Overtemperature exposure
External piping loads

Replication
Hardness testing
Inspect cold reheat pipe
supports

Superheater crossover
piping

Internal component
cracking

Thermal fatigue (attemperation)

Internal video
UT shear wave of welds

Secondary superheater
inlet header

Internal ligament
cracking

Thermal fatigue (attemperation)

Main steam piping

Hot reheat piping

Secondary
superheater/reheater
outlet headers

Sagging
External weld cracking

Water induction
Creep
Thermal fatigue

Girth weld and ligament

cracking

Thermal fatigue and creep

Tub e stub weld cracking

Thermal expansion fatigue and

creep

13

Internal video
Visual inspection
Internal video
Boat samples
Replication
UT shear wave
MT examination
Visual inspection
Internal video
Boat samples
Replication
UT shear wave
MT examination

Remedial Actions
Monitoring
Feedwater control
Replacement
Monitoring
Eventual replacement
Weld repair
Monitoring of components
and temperatures
Monitor
Repair
Repair
Replacement
Replacement
Repair
Add dual spray feature
Monitoring
Relocate components
Replacement
Review boiler operations
Add support steel
Test pipe supports
Monitoring
Relocate components
Replacement
Monitoring
Replacement
Monitoring
Replacement
Repair
Monitoring
Analytical study
Operational change
Replacement
Analytical study
Repair

from such pieces, and used for future testing and monitoring activities for similar components of that particular unit.
The case study results from the sagged reheat inlet header has highlighted the need for
paying close attention to the adjoining piping and supports and the support structure for evidence of overload conditions on the header, and possibly abnormal internal effects from the
upstream attemperators.
Table 1 provides a summary of major boiler header and piping components, which
includes the types and causes of damage experienced by each, together with the recommended inspection and testing tasks and remedial actions required.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The pattern of performing condition assessment programs for boiler and piping components should be continued during each scheduled outage for a unit. The programs can be
altered based on previous history and results. Many of the items can be incorporated into a
maintenance planning program. Monitoring of the major boiler and piping pressure components should be a part of every scheduled outage plan, especially now with the increased
time between shutdowns.
As part of the monitoring program, the piping supports should be inspected for evidence
of component deterioration in the form of physical damage, corrosion and functionality. If
needed, the supports can be load tested in place, to ensure they are capable of carrying their
original design loads.
For a header found to have circumferential weld, bore hole, or ligament cracking, the recommended actions include documenting the visual inspections with internal and external
video tape recording. This can prove valuable for later review using video-analyzing equipment. The next on-site task would be to perform ultrasonic shear wave testing to obtain an
estimate of crack depths, especially in the tube ligament fields. This information, together
with material property data and operating parameters, can then be input to stress analysis
and fracture mechanics evaluations in order to confirm the suitability for continued operation and to provide a definitive remaining life value for the component. The taking of and
analyzing metal boat samples from the outside surface of the header will provide much
information on the current microstructural condition, and of the crack morphology. These
results are also factored into the remaining life derivation. When the component is ultimately replaced, pieces of the header can then be evaluated to provide additional data on the
root cause of the cracking.

The data contained herein is solely for your information and is not offered,
or to be construed, as a warranty or contractual responsibility.

14

REFERENCES
1.

DB Riley Field Report No. 97708, Inspection and Assessment of Cracking in a Weld
on High Temperature Superheater Outlet Header, dated April 21, 1998.

2.

DB Riley Field Report No. 200225, Inspection and Assessment of Ligament Cracking
in High Temperature Superheater Outlet Header, dated November 16, 1998.

3.

Power Magazine, May 1993 article entitled, P91 Solves Superheater-Outlet-Header

Cracking Problem.

4.

DB Riley Technical Report No. 96523, Condition Assessment of Reheat Inlet Header
and Cold Reheat Inlet Piping, dated February 14,1997.

5.

S.R. Paterson, T.A. Kuntz, R.S. Moser and H. Vaillancourt, Boiler Tube Failure
Metallurgical Guide, Research Project 1890-09, Final Report TR-102433, Electric
Power Research Institute, Palo Alto California, October, 1993.

6.

L.H. Toft and RA. Marsden, The Structure and Properties of 1%Cr- 0.5%Mo Steel
After Service in CEGB Power Stations, in Conference on Structural Processes in
Creep, JISI/JIM, London, 1963, p. 275.

7.

DB Riley Technical Report No. 61933, Evaluation of Hot Reheat Steam Piping Test
Spool Piece, dated March 21,1997.

8.

C.W. Marschall, C.E. Jaske and B.S. Majumdar, Assessment of Seam-Welded Piping
in Fossil Power Plants, Final Report EPRI TR-101835, Electric Power Research
Institute, Palo Alto, California, December, 1992.

9.

J.R. Foulds, R. Viswanathan, J.L. Landrum, and SM. Walker, Guidelines for the
Evaluation of Seam Welded High Energy Piping, EPRI TR-104631, January, 1995.

10.

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,
Weld Tech 88 - International Conference On Weld Failures, London, England.

15