1 / 25

Integrity Assessment of Dissimilar Metal Weld s

BAY-LOGI. 1st Hungarian-Ukrainian Joint Conference on SAFETY-RELIABILITY AND RISK OF ENGINEERING PLANTS AND COMPONENTS”. Integrity Assessment of Dissimilar Metal Weld s. Szabolcs Szávai Dr. Gyöngyvér B. Lenkey. EU5 ADIMEW proje c t ’s objectives.

fadhila
Download Presentation

Integrity Assessment of Dissimilar Metal Weld s

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. BAY-LOGI 1st Hungarian-Ukrainian Joint Conference on SAFETY-RELIABILITY AND RISK OF ENGINEERING PLANTS AND COMPONENTS” Integrity Assessment of Dissimilar Metal Welds SzabolcsSzávai Dr. Gyöngyvér B. Lenkey

  2. EU5 ADIMEW project’s objectives • Evaluation of conservatism and accuracy of structural integrity assessment methods applied in the European nuclear industry • Study of the behaviour of circumferential surface defect in a dissimilar metal weld • Perform a unique four point bending test of a real size welded structure with crack like defect with normal operation condition

  3. BAY-LOGI acitivities in the project • Analysis of the effect of notch radius and its position in the buttering on the structural behaviors • Study the effect of the notch radius on fracture toughness • Study the effect of the defect distance from the fusion line on fracture toughness • Post test modelling of a real size mock-up with crack like defect in the dissimilar weld

  4. Dissimilar metal weld with crack like deffect

  5. Fracture toughness determination CT25 T=300 °C

  6. Experimental results

  7. Conclusions from the test results • The lower toughness value was obtained when the defect was closer to the fusion line (appr. 130 kN/m) • When the defect was farther from the fusion line, the toughness increased significantly(appr. 290 kN/m) • For sharper defect the toughness was lower (appr. 240 kN/m)

  8. FE analysis on CT specimen with DMW • To study: • the effect of defect tip radius • the effect of the distance of the defect from the fusion line • the effect of material properties • comparison of notched and pre-cracked specimens

  9. 19 s mm Æ 10 25 62,5 50 308 L; WM pre-craced nothed 60 A 508 R mm FEM analysis of CT specimen StressCheck 6.1

  10. True strain-stress cures, 300°C (VTT)

  11. Stress and strain distribution in the specimen (F=60kN)

  12. Effect of the notch geometry on the CMOD and the strain at the tip pre-cracked Load Load pre-cracked Load

  13. Conclusions after the FE analysis of CT specimens • the effect of defect tip radius and defect distance on the CMOD values is small • the effect of material properties (i.e. yield stress) on CMOD values is stronger • the effect of defect tip radius on the stress-strain field at the notch tip is significant  the effect on the failure load can be significant

  14. Real size specimen for four point bending test 1 - Austenitic base metal 316 L, 2 - Ferritic base metal A 508, 3 - Dissimilar metal weld 308 L WM, 4 - Prolongation arms (E=206 Gpa, =0.3), 5 - Weld connecting austenitic base metal to prolongation arm, 6 - Weld connecting ferritic base metal to prolongation arm (E=206 Gpa, =0.3)

  15. Specimen and the project team

  16. Test installation at EDF

  17. Loads and constrains

  18. Temperature distribution along the pipe arms Mock-up 300°C

  19. Post test analysis of the real size four point bending test • the muck-up is 300 °C • the extension arms are approximately at environmental temperature • The crack like defect was shifted from the symmetry plane with D=285 mm offset (due to the ram displacement control instead of the force control) • The supports were modelled as rigid constrains • The elongations of the pulling parts were take into consideration by application of spring elements in the Fem model

  20. FEM model and the calculated stress distribution

  21. Glue of the different size meshes

  22. Measured and calculated displacement-load-moment-CMOD curves

  23. Round-robin results

  24. Summary and conclusions – post test • Due to the complex geometry huge number of elements and nodes were generated • Results have been compared with the test at some selected points • Ram-force - CMOD values were in good agreement with the calculation

  25. General Conclusions • The structure modeling gives appropriate results for further evaluations • For operational safety assessments the fracture mechanical tests are essential • For the validations of the calculation methodsstructural tests needed

More Related