Utmattingsberegninger for stlkonstruksjoner

iht gjeldende regelverk og Eurokode 3, del 1-9

Grunnleggende utmattingsberegninger
Innledning: Historikk, eksempler p
utmattingsbrudd.
Tirsdag 20 oktober 2009
kl. 9.00 - 10.00
Professor P J Haagensen
Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet
Fakultet for ingenirvitenskap og teknologi
Institutt for konstruksjonsteknikk
Trondheim
per.haagensen@ntnu.no
1

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Utmatting - grunnlag

Temaer
Skade- og havarityper
Utmattingsproblemet i praksis
Utmatting - definisjoner
Eksempel 1: Utmatting av
maskinkomponenter NSB hjulaksler
Eksempel 2: Utmatting av sveiste
konstruksjoner Alexander L. Kielland
ulykken

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Failure modes - How things go wrong

Depending on the operating conditions and the type of environment
a component or structure may fail in many different modes:

Unstable fracture (brittle or ductile)

Plastic collapse
Elastic instability (buckling)
Stress corrosion cracking
Hydrogen induced fracture
SSSchenectady, 1943
Corrosion

Erika Dec. 99

Fatigue and corrosion fatigue

Time dependent
failures

Wear

Alexander L. Kielland,
Mar. 1980

Aloha Airlines,
Flight 243, 1988

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Fatigue how big is the problem?

Generally: 80-90% of all fractures are fatigue failures
North Sea offshore structures:
30
24.7

25

1/4 of all structural

damage requiring repair
is caused by fatigue

20

Damage
15

10

Utmatting - grunnlag

r
he
Ot

gf
ti n
Op

er a

si g

nf

au

au

lt

lt

n
s io
De

nu
si g
De

r ro

r ad
pg

nf
ti o

Fa

br i

ca

la t

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

Co

au

lt

lt
fa u
io n

b je
In s

t al

do
Dr

op

Ve

pe

ss

el

Fa

im

t ig

pa

ct s

ct

ue

P J Haagensen

Fatigue problems - aircraft structures

Causes of major damage in aircraft
structures
(Royal Aerospace Establishment, UK)

Almost 60 % of total damage is caused by fatigue and corrosion

fatigue

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Causes of failures in
components and structures
Fabrication

Design

- Wrong materials
- Poor fabrication quality
- Inadequate inspection

- Wrong

material properties
- Wrong design life
- Wrong design method
- Missed failure modes

Failure

Operation
- Unknown environment

- Unknown fatigue loads

- Improper use
- Poor inspection

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Fatigue problems pressure equipment

UK 1998 - 2000: 3500 failures, about 25% caused by fatigue
Types of equipment for which fatigue
damage or failure was found
Unknown
Piping
Heat exchanger
Pressure
vessel

Data from:
Pressure Equipment Directive (PED)

Water tube
Shell
boiler
0

Utmatting - grunnlag

10

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

20

30
Percent

40

50

60

P J Haagensen

Why is fatigue assessment difficult to perform?

European Pressure Equipment Research Council survey in 2000

Number of replies

Main difficulties encountered in

applying fatigue assessment

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Fatigue what is it?

Fatigue - the process of progressive and localized
permanent structural change occurring in a material
subjected to conditions that produce fluctuating
stresses and strains at some point or points and
that may culminate in cracks or complete fracture
after a sufficient number of fluctuations.
(Am. Soc. for Testing and Materials (ASTM) definition)
Damage
(crack
length)

Stress

Fracture

Cycles, N
Time

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Fatigue fracture surfaces

Three characteristic features of fatigue fractures:
1. Initiation point or points
2. Crack growth area
Beach
marks

Beach marks are lines visible to the naked

eye, indicating changes in loading or
corrosion conditions.

Striations indicate start-stop positions of

the crack tip.
T he presence of beach marks and striations
proves that fatigue caused the fracture.

Crack
initiation
10

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

Striations

Crack growth direction

3. Final fracture

10 mm

10 m

P J Haagensen

Three stages in fatigue process

1. Initiation of fatigue crack
2. Crack propagation
3. Final fracture
Total life:
N = Ni + Np
No. of cycles to
crack initiation

11

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

Cycles of crack
propagation to failure

P J Haagensen

Primary
factors
influencing
fatigue
strength
Primary
factors
affecting
fatigue
Material
Type of loading
tension, bending, shear,
combinations
Mean stress
Geometry, notches, defects
Size
Surface condition
roughness, material condition
Residual stresses
Environment
temperature, corrosion
Note: There are significant differences between
welded and unwelded components regarding what
factors have the strongest influence on fatigue life.
12

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Fatigue

Load history

Influential Factors
Load History
Nature of loading (frequency,
Spectrum)

Geometry of Detail

Geometry

Local geometry
Influence of Stress
Concentration

Presence of Defects

Defects at
weld toe

Weld defects
Surface Flaws

13

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Fatigue failures
Failures occur when:
1. Service loads are higher than assumed in design
2. Fatigue resistance is lower than assumed in design
3. Combinations of 1 & 2
Load

Applied load
too high
Applied load OK

Reduction due
to e.g. corrosion
S-N curve
too low

Infinite life when S-N curve and loads are OK

Life N, cycles
14

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Example 1: Failure in mechnical components

NSB train axle failures

Final
fracture

Beach
marks

Crack
initiation

NSB Signature Train

axle fractures
Summer 2002

15

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

NSB train axle failures

Main contributing factors DNV failure investigation
Load history: High loads in short radius turns
Presence of defects: Corrosion pits
Geometry of detail: Cracking in areas of high stress concentrations
Material: High strength, notch sensitive material, UTS = 1000 MPa

Corrosion and cracks in axle fillet

16

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

Rubber band prevented moisture

from drying out in fillet

P J Haagensen

Fatigue design of axles

The endurance limit is used as a design criterion
for axles that endure a large number of cycles, e.g.
N = 2x108 during 500 000 km, i.e. the maximum
load cycle in the load spectrum must be lower than
the fatigue limit:

max E

max
106

17

Utmatting - grunnlag

107

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

108

N, cycles to failure

P J Haagensen

Effect of corrosion on the fatigue limit

MPa

Fatigue limit

The drop in fatigue

strength due to corrosion
is higher for a high
strength steel than for a
mild steel

Corroding specimens

Ultimate tensile strength, ksi

18

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

NSB train axle failures

Conclusions:
Corrosion damage caused early crack
initiation
High strength material resulted in large
loss of fatigue strength
High local stresses caused short crack
growth stage

19

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Example 2 Failure of a welded structure

The Alexander L. Kielland accident

Place: Ekofisk field
Time: 27 March, 1980,
18.30 hrs
Persons killed: 123
Survivors:
89
10 similar platforms built
ALK platform delivered in
1976
Time from first failure in
brace D6 to capsize: 20 min

20

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

10

The accident

21

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

ALK structural arrangement

Pentagone design

1st fracture
D

22

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

11

Brace D6 and hydrophone support tube

Column
D

Brace D6

Hydrophone
support

23

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Fracture in Brace D6

Area of final
fracture

Lamellar tear crack

24

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

12

Crack initiation in D6 at support pipe

When the weld around the
support pipe is uncracked, the
stress concentration factor at the
weld is 1.6

When the weld around the

support pipe is cracked, the
stress concentration factor at the
weld is 3.0, i.e. stress is almost
doubled
Fatigue crack

Fatigue crack

Weld intact: SCF= 1.6

25

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

Weld fractured: SCF = 3.0

P J Haagensen

Lamellar tear cracking

D6

Support pipe

Small penetration

Lamellar tear crack

26

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

13

Crack initiation in D6 at support pipe

Crack
initiation

Beach marks are lines visible to

Crack growth
direction

Beach
marks

10 mm

the naked eye, indicating changes

in loading or corrosion conditions.

Striations indicate start-stop

10 m

positions of the crack tip.

The presence of beach marks and
striations proves that fatigue
caused the fracture.
27

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

Striations

P J Haagensen

Materials
Structural steel used in platform:
Standard C-Mn steel with C = 0.18% max,
YS = 350 MPa, UTS = 512 MPa, ductility 30%

Steel in support pipe:

Standard C-Mn steel with C = 0.18% max,

YS = 355 MPa, UTS = 500 MPa, ductility 4.8 % in thickness
direction

Microstructure of support pipe:

Fine grain banded ferrite and pearlite, indicating low strength in thickness
direction

28

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

14

Stresses in brace D6
Max nominal stresses in brace D6 at accident:
141 to 173 MPa or 40 to 50% of yield stress, giving very high local
stresses at the hydrophone support pipe

Fatigue life predictions, brace D6

Miner-Palmgren summation:
- Using the F2 design curve a life of 0.7 to 5 years was
calculated, assuming various uncertainties in load
spectrum

29

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Conclusions, ALK accident

Main causes
1. Design fault 1: Lack of redundancy, i.e. all braces attached to
column D failed by overloading when brace D6 fractured
2. Design fault 2: Too high operating stresses in D6;
platform not designed against fatigue
3. Poor materials: Low strength in thickness direction in
hydrophone tube gave lamellar tearing, which in turn increased
local stresses in brace D6 at weld
5. Poor fabrication: Too small penetration in weld joining support
pipe to brace D6

30

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

15

Summary
Fatigue of unwelded components
Fatigue strength is closely related to base
materials strength for parts with smooth
surfaces, but corrosion and surface damage
gives large reduction in fatigue strength
Fatigue strength depends on mean stress

31

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

Summary
Fatigue of welded components
Fatigue strength is independent of base
material strength
Fatigue strength is independent of applied
mean stress
Fatigue strength is strongly reduced by
corrosion

32

Utmatting - grunnlag

Oslo, 20 oktober 2009

P J Haagensen

16