Analysis of simple creep stress calculation methods for creep life assessment

Jun Min Seo, Han Sang Lee, Yun-Jae Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Creep analysis takes much more time than elastic or elastic-plastic analysis. In this study, we conducted elastic and elastic-plastic analysis and compared the results with creep analysis results. In the elastic analysis, we used primary stress, which can be classified by the Mα-Tangent method and stress intensities recommended in the ASME code. In the elastic-plastic analysis, we calculated the parameters recommended in the R5 code. For the FE models, a bending load, uniaxial load, and biaxial load were applied to the cross shaped welded plate, and a bending load and internal pressure were applied to the elbow pipe. To investigate the element size sensitivity, we conducted FE analysis for various element sizes for the cases where bending load was applied to the cross shaped welded plate. There was no significant difference between the creep stress and the alternative methods; however, in the Mα-Tangent method, the results were affected by the element size.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)703-709
Number of pages7
JournalTransactions of the Korean Society of Mechanical Engineers, A
Volume41
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017 Aug 1

Fingerprint

Creep
Plastics
Pipe

Keywords

  • Asme code
  • Creep stress
  • Ma-Tangent method
  • R5

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Mechanical Engineering

Cite this

Analysis of simple creep stress calculation methods for creep life assessment. / Seo, Jun Min; Lee, Han Sang; Kim, Yun-Jae.

In: Transactions of the Korean Society of Mechanical Engineers, A, Vol. 41, No. 8, 01.08.2017, p. 703-709.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{de5398578fda4f73999e839242dba16b,
title = "Analysis of simple creep stress calculation methods for creep life assessment",
abstract = "Creep analysis takes much more time than elastic or elastic-plastic analysis. In this study, we conducted elastic and elastic-plastic analysis and compared the results with creep analysis results. In the elastic analysis, we used primary stress, which can be classified by the Mα-Tangent method and stress intensities recommended in the ASME code. In the elastic-plastic analysis, we calculated the parameters recommended in the R5 code. For the FE models, a bending load, uniaxial load, and biaxial load were applied to the cross shaped welded plate, and a bending load and internal pressure were applied to the elbow pipe. To investigate the element size sensitivity, we conducted FE analysis for various element sizes for the cases where bending load was applied to the cross shaped welded plate. There was no significant difference between the creep stress and the alternative methods; however, in the Mα-Tangent method, the results were affected by the element size.",
keywords = "Asme code, Creep stress, Ma-Tangent method, R5",
author = "Seo, {Jun Min} and Lee, {Han Sang} and Yun-Jae Kim",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3795/KSME-A.2017.41.8.703",
language = "English",
volume = "41",
pages = "703--709",
journal = "Transactions of the Korean Society of Mechanical Engineers, A",
issn = "1226-4873",
publisher = "Korean Society of Mechanical Engineers",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Analysis of simple creep stress calculation methods for creep life assessment

AU - Seo, Jun Min

AU - Lee, Han Sang

AU - Kim, Yun-Jae

PY - 2017/8/1

Y1 - 2017/8/1

N2 - Creep analysis takes much more time than elastic or elastic-plastic analysis. In this study, we conducted elastic and elastic-plastic analysis and compared the results with creep analysis results. In the elastic analysis, we used primary stress, which can be classified by the Mα-Tangent method and stress intensities recommended in the ASME code. In the elastic-plastic analysis, we calculated the parameters recommended in the R5 code. For the FE models, a bending load, uniaxial load, and biaxial load were applied to the cross shaped welded plate, and a bending load and internal pressure were applied to the elbow pipe. To investigate the element size sensitivity, we conducted FE analysis for various element sizes for the cases where bending load was applied to the cross shaped welded plate. There was no significant difference between the creep stress and the alternative methods; however, in the Mα-Tangent method, the results were affected by the element size.

AB - Creep analysis takes much more time than elastic or elastic-plastic analysis. In this study, we conducted elastic and elastic-plastic analysis and compared the results with creep analysis results. In the elastic analysis, we used primary stress, which can be classified by the Mα-Tangent method and stress intensities recommended in the ASME code. In the elastic-plastic analysis, we calculated the parameters recommended in the R5 code. For the FE models, a bending load, uniaxial load, and biaxial load were applied to the cross shaped welded plate, and a bending load and internal pressure were applied to the elbow pipe. To investigate the element size sensitivity, we conducted FE analysis for various element sizes for the cases where bending load was applied to the cross shaped welded plate. There was no significant difference between the creep stress and the alternative methods; however, in the Mα-Tangent method, the results were affected by the element size.

KW - Asme code

KW - Creep stress

KW - Ma-Tangent method

KW - R5

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85029230564&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85029230564&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3795/KSME-A.2017.41.8.703

DO - 10.3795/KSME-A.2017.41.8.703

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85029230564

VL - 41

SP - 703

EP - 709

JO - Transactions of the Korean Society of Mechanical Engineers, A

JF - Transactions of the Korean Society of Mechanical Engineers, A

SN - 1226-4873

IS - 8

ER -