Load History Effects on Crack Driving Force for Cracks in Residual Stress Fields

Abstract

Fracture mechanics assessments of engineering components and structures containing defects are made by comparing an estimate of the crack driving force KJ with an effective fracture toughness KJc. The assessments must account for the combined effect of primary loads, such as internal pressure in pressurised components, and secondary stresses arising from welding and/or thermal loading. Elastic-plastic finite element analysis, or simplified methods set out in standard assessment procedures, can be used to estimate the crack driving force KJ as a function of the applied primary load on the component. The effective fracture toughness KJc should take account of the material fracture toughness and the crack tip constraint. For the assessment of defects in weld residual stress fields, it is usually assumed that the defect is inserted into the as-welded stress distribution in such a way that traction free crack surfaces are created simultaneously at all positions on the crack faces. However, it may be beneficial to take account of any relaxation in the residual stress field that might arise during proof-testing or in-service cyclic loading, and to consider a more gradual, progressive introduction of the defects. These benefits could, in principle, result in a reduction in the crack driving force. This paper describes work that has been undertaken to provide estimates of the crack driving force KJ for a fully-circumferential defect in a circumferential repair weld in a cylindrical pipe. Calculations have been carried out to establish KJ for a number of cases where different pressure overloads are applied to the uncracked pipe and different methods of crack insertion are applied. Estimates of the margin of safety on fracture toughness and pressure loading were calculated. At the outset, it was assumed that the fracture toughness of relevance for the defects is the material fracture toughness KJc* derived from strain free, high constraint fracture toughness specimens. No allowance was made for constraint effects associated with the finite geometry or initial strains in the pipe. The values of KJ were derived from values of J calculated using the JEDI post-processing code; this allows for initial inelastic strains present in the model prior to the start of the crack insertion process.