ML022770461
| ML022770461 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 09/27/2002 |
| From: | Mayfield M Division of Engineering Technology |
| To: | Zwolinski J NRC/NRR/DLPM |
| References | |
| Job Code W6775, nrc-04-97-052 | |
| Download: ML022770461 (54) | |
Text
Fig. 21. Welding process Preheat simulated on hot leg.
I Weld to 0.7 inch from inside I Build a weld bridge l
~- Ground oult the wel-Weld Inside to the bridge Weld outside from the bridge Weld outside from the bridge Weld inside to the bridge
(c)
Welding to 0.7 inch 20" Bridge (b)
I 0.
6o8.
276.
Welding bridge and grounding out rejected weld (d)
Figure 22. Cladding (Butter) and Rejected Weld Model.
COI
I
£
=
l Buttering:
- 1. Preheat to 15OF l2. Butter
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -I Output stress Buttering IThermal anal sisI Buttering Stress analysis I
[ feve plastic straing plastic strain component
- PWHT
- 1. Heat to 11 OF I Creep analysis
- 2. Hold for 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> I
- 3. Cool --
cooling Outputstress
[plastic strain com po Combine plastic strain k
I l Welding:
t - -
- Loading I.
Map results to 2D coarse model Revolve 2D coarse model to 3D model with results transfe Output stres K calculatio Fig. 23 Finite element analysis process flow.
Welding thermal analysis Apply
- 1. Operation temperature
- 2. inside pressure
- 3. Axial force
- 4. Moment Welding stress analysis r-_^_
II I
b-
Steam Generator Fix Displacements Reactor Pressure Vessel IFix Displacements S
I@I I
I I
I I
I i
- -LL) +/-$RIF Figure 24. Full Finite Element Model.
50.
I I
A508 class 2 (a) After Buffering 0e
.10
- 40.
-50.
_0.
5 Axial stress Ha A508 class 2 (b) After buffering post heat treatment Figure 25. Cladding Simulafion Stresses (after cooling to room temperature).
I30
-5.
Co?,
0.05
,00 0.025 0.01 0.01 (a) End of Cladding (b) End of Post c heat treatmel Figure 26. Cladding Simulation - Effective Plastic Strains.
ladding it co3
Axial Creep Strain Equivalent Creep Strain 0.002
[N 0.001 0.001 0.0008 0.
Hoop Creep Strain Figure 27. Post Cladding Heat Treatment Simulation - Creep Strains.
co#.
SS304 A508 class 2
- 5.
10
-l.
-3
-53.
ix Princil Stress Min Princi i
Stress (a) Welding to 0.7 inch - Bridge
~~~~~(d)
(b) Welding bridge and grounding out rejected weld Figure 28. Rejected Weld and Bridge Simulation.
C05
_M~~a (c) 50.
10 t0.
-3a SS304 A508 class 2
Before Repair A4 Iner SS304 A508 class 2
- 50.
- 10.
-30.
-5 After Repair Hoo xial stres Figure 29. CompaIson of Rejecte Weld and Bridg to.
Figure 2. Comparison of Reected Weld and Bridge Simulation.
p stress
_IQ
-M.
0.
sS304 COG
Inside Weld First, Then Outside Weld 4
20 0
.0
-L Outside weld completed Outside Weld First, Then Inside Weld Outside weld compoted M.
10
-IU 30, "0
-10.
-30
-5 Inside weld completed Figure 30. Axial Stress Comparison Between Two Sequences.
col 00.
mmmg::
mommE
Welding inside, then outside Ins!de weld completed Welding outside, then inside Outsid weld completed
__pS
- 0.
-LO.
-30.
-W.
- 50.
to.
-lO.
-30.
- 6SO, so u-~
Outside weld completed Inside weld completed Figure 31. Hoop Stress Comparison Between Two Sequences.
cO%o
Welding inside, then outside Welding outside, then inside 0.1 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.
Figure 32. Effective Plastic Strain Comparison Between Iwo Sequences.
co9
Welding inside, then outside 001 0002
-0.002
.0006 0.01 Welding outside, then inside Figure 33. Axial Plasdc Strain Comparison Between Two Sequences.
CIO
Welding inside, then outside 0.02 0.01 0.005
- 0.
AM Welding outside, then inside Figure 34. Hoop Plastic Strain Comparison Between Two Sequences.
CIT I
Welding inside, then outside 0.03 0.006 0.018 0.03 Welding outside, then inside Figure 35. Shear Plastic Strain Comparison Between Two Sequences.
C2-
As-Welded Welding inside, then outside As-Welded Welding outside, then inside M.
l la M0.
IC.
-JO.
-30,.5 After Hydro-test and Pressure Release After Hydro-test and Pressure Release Figure 36. Effect of Hydro-test - Axial Stresses (Pressure = 3.125 ksi, then unload).
C13
As-Welded Welding inside, then outside As-Welded Welding outside, then inside M.
- 10.
-A
.30
-0.
Hydro-test Hydro-test Figure 37. Effect of Hydro-Test - Hoop Stresses.
(Pressure = 3.125 ksl, then unload at Room Temperature) c4L
5 Hydro-test Complete Room Temperature Hydro-test Complete Room Temperature
- 0.
- 10.
-0
-30
-5.
(615F)
(615 F).6 4 I-I
-C M0.
- 6.
- 6.
-IS.
Welding inside, Welding outside, then outside Then inside Figure 38. Axial Residual Stresses at Operating Temperature (after all welding and hydrotest). Top: Room Temperature Before Heat Up to 615 F; Bottom: After Heat Up.
C15
Hydro-test Compete Room Temperature I0.
-'0.
Hydro-test Compete Room Temperature 50.
Welding insiae, Welding outside, then outside Then inside Figure 39. Hoop Residual Stresses at Operating Temperature (after all welding and hydro-test). Top: Room Temperature Before Heat Up to 615 F; Bottom: After Heat Up.
50.mmmg::
m
Axial stress (a)
Welding inside, then outside Hoop stress Figure 40. Operation Residual Stresses (615 F - No Loading) for Inside First Weld (a) and (b). (c) and (d)
Mapped Residual Stresses at Operatng Temperature from Fine to Coarse Mesh. These Stresses Are Then Mapped to a Three Dimensional Mesh (inside weld first, then outside weld).
CA-1 (c)
Axial stress Welding outside, Then inside Hoop stress Figure 41. Operation Residual Stresses (615 P - No Loading) for Outside Pirst Weld (a) and (b). (c) and (d)
Mapped Residual Stresses at Operating Temperature from Pine to Coarse Mesh. These Stresses Are Then Mapped to a Three Dimensional Mesh (Outside weld irst, then inside weld).
CIp
-I
Welding inside, then outside VI 50.
40.
20.
10.
0.
-10.
-20.
-30.
yX
-40.
-50.
Figure 42. Mapped Hoop Residual Stresses at Operating Temperature fromn Coarse Axis-ymmetric Mesh to 3D Mesh (inside weld first, then outside weld). (This 3D model is then used to obtain stress intensity factors via the finite element alternating method).
Cl)
Welding inside, then outside Vi
-50.
Hoop stress 2D Figure 43. Comparison of Mapped Hoop Residual Stresses at Operating Temperature from Coarse Axis-symmetric Mesh to 3D Mesh (inside weld first, then outside weld).
c U 50.
10.
-10.
-30.
Welding outside, then inside M.
10.
-10.
Hoop stress 2D Figure 44. Comparison of Mapped Hoop Residual Stresses at Operating Temperature from Coarse Axis-symmetric Mesh to 3D Mesh (Outside weld first, then inside weld).
CtI
0.06 0.04 0.02
- 0. Welding inside first, then outside Equivalent Plastic Strain 2D Figure 45. Comparison of Mapped Equivalent Plastic Strains at Operating Temperature from Coarse Axis-symmetric Mesh to 3D Mesh (inside weld first, then outside weld).
c%2
P-pressure: 2.25 (ksi)
F-force: 1476 kips (including the force due to the pressure)
M-bending moment: 22052 in-kips Figure 46. Normal Operating Loads Applied on Hot Leg.
F I N. ~
, N
\\
'I a
, A'
\\~
N 1.6 I
XI %
S tII I
E I
aI s
ha 2
, s h
X t'YI
,\\
v v
A-A F
==>
p
Residual Stress Only:
615F Residual Stress Plus:
615F Normal Operating Loads Figure 47. Axial Stresses - Used for FEAM Analyses:
Inside Weld First then Outside Weld.
c-23
Residual Stress Only:
61SF Xl to.
-In,
-30 Residual Stress Plus:
615F Normal Operating Loads Figure 48. Hoop Stresses - Used for FEAM Analyses:
Inside Weld First then Outside Weld.
C2%t I
AI
Residual Stress Only:
615F Residual Stress Plus:
615F Normal Operating Loads Figure 49. Axial Stresses - Used for FEAM Analyses:
Outside Weld First then Inside Weld.
50.10.-1.
-0.
50 Residual Stress Only:
615F
-~~~~~~~-
Residual Stress Plus:
615F Normal Operating Loads Figure 50. Hoop Stresses - Used for FEAM An Outside Weld First then Inside Weld.
I0,
-Ia-
-30.
-50.
CtZ(
5G 10
-10.
.30.
-50.
In0 n30 n50
K, (ksl/in'")
80 70 60 -
501 40 30 -:
20 10
-10 I4--0.3 AXIAL 0-1 LOAD -0.4 AXIAL 0-N LOAD 0.5 AXIAL 0-LAO Crack Angle, e Figure 51. Stress Intensity Factors; a = 0.3, 0.4, 0.5; c/a = 1.5. 'NO LOAD' =
'Residual Stress Only', 'LOAD' = 'Residual Stress Plus Normal Operating Load'.
C21
3D crack Surface for Axial cracks with Residual stresses under Load And the weld Process from the nside-out 0.Q I DSIWAL 10 -
0 ftEIA X-O
=1 0 DDI._L l.
RFSIou 1-0 l.h-
- 0. LA -
.CLA -
t ODIC i
Oh'0
/ 2.
LOA 1
-1. OCtOC -. DDI-DI -C.O0-0j 4.Wt0-0: -
.D-OI
- 0. 00E00 I.OE-oi 4.-0I D.0OE-0x I.0DD-D I.
fltOD.
Crack LEngth Figure 52a. Axial Crack Growth for the Inside-Out Weld Process.
cZ2
3D crack surface for Axial cracks with Residual stresses under Load And the weld Process from the nside-out I LlO I 30 LOAD I 0 LO 1-0
-17.8 111 1 0
-1
.-. 11 1 w
- ONL 3
iro e loa ONLY iŽ.o i loa ONLY
- i'.s ii. l ONLY
- 23.
1 la ONLY
- 0. WI00
- 1.OOEtOOI
-8.005.01
-S.0E01
-4.005-01 21.COE-01 OOEIC 2.005-01 4.0OE-01
'.00501
- .OM-O1 1.00E40 c.k Lt"th Figure 52b. Approximation for the Impact of the Residual Stress Field on the Crack Size and Shape C'Z9
3D crack surface for Axial cracks with Residual stresses under Load comparison of the Impact of the weld Process
- +.C LOAD 1<
4.3.O lOADt-C 6.0 lOA 1-0 1
-0 O O-l 0
0.25 N
.1 I.
a I.
I.,
I 0
I -
-t.OEO1.
1.S0E-Ci
-1OW-Cl 5.W.-O2 o.ooE,oa crck. L.g,h Figure 52c. Three and Six Month Crack Growth Shapes.
.O1
.S O
._.CE-O.i c'30
3D crack Surface for Axial cracks Stresses under Load comparison of the weld Process with Residual the mpact of LO 1 I3.0 LOAD 0-I 46.O LOA Is
_CO I._
01 l
0.3I
. Ž1 I
.2 a
a I.
I 0.
- L.SO E-O t
- 41. 00- a1
- 5. 0 -2 0.005 00 Crak Lgh S.00 5- 02
- 1.
0 t
+/-.505-01
- 2. 0 t
Figure 53. Approximation for the Impact of the Residual Stress Field on the Crack Size and Shape.
The 'red' shape represents the crack shape for the case of loading and residual stresses (for the 1-0 case) and the 'white' shape is the crack shape for the residual stress only case after 6 months of PWSCC growth.
The 'red' curve (1-0 case) can be compared to the 'gray' (0-1 case) curve for a comparison of the weld sequence effect C-;3
-2.
"-E,
3D crack surface for circumferential cracks with Residual stresses under Load And the weld Process from the nside-out
.0.2 Wll t-0-3.0 O
12.0 LD1,1A7O IO7 LOAO 1-0-25.5 LOAD 1G.0
- 36.
LOAD 1-0-S.O LOAD 1-0l io0 i-0 V
OmN 1 '
-4.00EtOO
-5.507tO0
.OOltOO
-2.S5OEtOO
-2. OOLf OO
-1. 502tO0
- 1. OOFtOO
.002-01
- 0. 0 EOO L0Qth Clnch)
Figure 54a. Crcu mfe rntlial PWS CC growth - Inside Weld First Case.
a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C3
3D crack surface for circumferential cracks with Residual stresses under Load And the weld Process from the outside-in l0.2 LOA 01-0.5 LOAD 0-1-3.O LOAn 0-132.0 AO 0-1-17.
WA 0-1 23.S LOO 0-3S.0 LO 0-1 r\\
F-'.
I I
I
~~~
~
~~~~I I/
/ -'.
-4.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.OE_O.
)EiOO 4
- OOEtOO
.S0 Figure 54b. Circumferential PWSCC growth - Outside Weld First Case.
IOOKI I
gm t 30K '
10t 30N IOK0' OK
-X.O VUF.UW
-3.OUEt..
-4.00EifO
The Impact of conservative stress-Corrosion cracking Models on 3D surface crack Predictions for Axial Cracks with Residual stresses under Load for the Inside-out weld Process I U.0 Z Regression Fit
. - 23.5 ne egressilo Fit - 4.0 w Regressin Fit e-30.0 Regression Ft 32.0 LOAD 0-1 23.5 L0 0-3 8.0 LOAD 0-1 30.0 LOAD e-l l
Figure 55a. The impact of Using a Conservative PWSCC Law on Crack Growth - Axial Crack.
0-
_I.OEO 1.ooE.Vo C7'!
The Impact of Conservative Stress-corrosion cracking odels on 3D surface crack Predictions for circumferential cracks with Residual Stresses under Load for the Inside-out weld Process 12.0 Ftl Fegre,sIon Ft.
23.5 nm Rgre5iOM Ft F4.O 111 Regression Fit
-- 30.
Rr12sion F1t-1.
LOF0 -O
-U.S LOAD 1-0
-1.00E100
-2.
OOEOO
-2. SOEtO 90*
7OS 60 4WM 30%
2 O 10%
-3.OOEIO Figure 55b. The Impact of Using a Conservative PWSCC Law on Crack Growth - Circumferential Crack.
c3:5 r O.OEt0 NN,
I N\\""x
.00,11X I -
I I
I L
A508 Class 2 A508 Cli INCO182 (c) lump-weld pass S304 A508 Class 2 Figure 56. Hot Leg 3D Analysis Geometry.
(b) Half C03(
S30'
A--A Repair weld depth di and de d
t(
d 2~~~~~~0)
Figure 57. Two-length and two-depth Repair Analyses.
Figure 57. Two-length and two-depth Repair Analyses.
C-'7
B Ir weld 12 (dl or d2) elding direction 1)
L -Repair weld length 1 (A-C)
L2-Repair weld length 2 (A-B)
Dl -Repair weld depth 1 (A-B or A-C)
D2-Repalr weld depth 2 (A-B)
Figure 58. Weld directions.
C36
Ground out Repair length L2-D2 After repair Figure 59. An Example of the Grinding and Weld Repair Model During Analysis.
c39
50.
- 40.
" 'lIUI
-1 0.
StartVStop Location
-20 130.
-50.
180-Degrees Start Location Figure 60. Baseline Weld - Axial Stresses cl-c
C f 10.
0.
-10.
-20.
-50.
Start/Stop Location Figure 61. Baseline Weld - Axial Stresses Ctfl
180 Degrees From Start Location Welding inside, ft*ft~~
then outside Start/Stop LocatbnT Figure 62. Baseline Weld - Z-Component Stresses (These Represent Hoop Stresses on the Cut Planes)
Cl+-
5 0.
4e 10.
0.
-10.
-20.
-30.
50 z
Axis-symmetric Axis-symmetric IA 10,
-10
-jO.
-50 3D 3D Figure 63. Comparison of Axial and Hoop Stresses Between the axis-symmetric and 3D Solutions.
Figure. Repair Ll Depth dl - Axial Stresses 50.
2 Weld Direction 10.
0.
-10.
Baseline Weld
-20.
Start/Stop Location
-30.o -30.g i
Repair L,
End Repa.
Figure 64. Comparison of Axial Stresses for Repair Case Number 1.
C40F
Plane at End of Weld Repair
/
Plane at Start of Weld Repair Figure 65. Comparison of Axial Stresses for Repair Case Number 1.
Cq-5
50.
40.
2(.
R e p a 2
1 0.
Begin Repair L2 0.
-10.
-20.
- ,/
Wd~~~~~~~~~~d Direction 30
-40.
-50.
ud Repair L2 Figure 66. Repair L2 Depth dl - Axial Stresses C i-4
Begin Repair L.
50.
4().
20.
10.
0.
-10.
-20.
-30.
-40.
-50.
End Repair L, Figure 67. Repair L2 Depth dl - Mean Stress (a&kk/3) c.-i
50.
40.
nBegi Repair L;O.
10.
0.
-10.
-20.
-30.
A40.
nd Repair L2
-50.
Figure 68. Repair L2 Depth dl - Axial Stresses c+4
Begin Repair L2 nd Repair L2 Figure 69. Repair L2 Depth d2 - Mean Stress (Okk/3) 50.
40.
20.
10.
0.
-10.
-20.
-30.
-40.
-50.
Weld Directon KWt End Repair L2 Figure 70. Repair L2 Depth d2 - Equivalent Plasdc Strain 0.0899
(. (8(9) 0.0629 0.0539 0.0449 0.0359 0.027 0.018 0.00899 0.