Advertisement

Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention

, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 680–689 | Cite as

Ultimate Bearing Capacity Analysis and Sizing Optimization of a Cracked Reactor Pressure Vessel in the Coupled Thermo-Mechanical Field

  • Xin Sun
  • Guozhong Chai
  • Yumei Bao
Technical Article---Peer-Reviewed
  • 85 Downloads

Abstract

Pressurized thermal shock (PTS) can subject a crack surface to a very high tensile stress. Also the material toughness is obviously decreased in the cooling process, so it is necessary to study the influence of PTS on the ultimate bearing capacity of a reactor pressure vessel with defects. A 3-D finite element model is established for the beltline region around an inner crack. The FEM is used to reveal the transient temperature field and stress field, and the XFEM is adopted to simulate the ductile crack propagation. To ensure that the strength requirement is satisfied, the ultimate internal pressures of vessels with different crack sizes and different wall thicknesses are obtained. The result shows that the ultimate bearing capacity of the base wall with shallow surface cracks at high temperature is mainly controlled by tensile strength, while it is also affected by the fracture toughness of the material under the severe PTS. The stress in the early stage of the PTS is mainly the thermal stress, and later is the thermo-mechanical coupling stress. The impact of the crack depth on the bearing capacity of the structure is much greater than that of the crack length.

Keywords

Pressurized thermal shock Reactor pressure vessel Ultimate bearing capacity XFEM 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China. Author Guozhong Chai has received research grants from National Science Foundation Committee (Grant Number 51275471). Author Yumei Bao has received research grants from National Science Foundation Committee (Grant Number 51105339). The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Furthermore, the authors are grateful for the technical support of the Key Laboratory of Special Purpose Equipment and Advanced Processing Technology of Ministry of Education.

References

  1. 1.
    R. Kempf, H. Troiani, A.M. Fortis, Effect of lead factors on the embrittlement of RPV SA-508 cl 3 steel. J. Nucl. Mater. 434, 411–416 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    B. Marini, X. Averty, P. Wident, Effect of the bainitic and martensitic microstructures on the hardening and embrittlement under neutron irradiation of a reactor pressure vessel steel. J. Nucl. Mater. 465, 20–27 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Chen, F. Lu, R. Wang et al., The deterministic structural integrity assessment of reactor pressure vessels under pressurized thermal shock loading. Nucl. Eng. Des. 288, 130–140 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    M.J. Jhung, Y.H. Choi, Critical crack depth diagram of reactor vessel for pressurized thermal shock. Nucl. Eng. Des. 239(3), 425–433 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    C.E. Pugh, B. Richard Bass, T.L. Dickson, Role of probabilistic analysis in integrity assessment of reactor pressure vessels exposed to pressurized thermal-shock conditions. Eng. Fail. Anal. 14, 501–517 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    G. Qian, M. Niffenegger, Procedure, method and computer codes for probabilistic assessment of reactor pressure vessels subjected to pressurized thermal shocks. Nucl. Eng. Des. 258, 35–50 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    ASME, ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, Appendix A 4000: Material Properties (New York, 2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    French Association for Design Construction and In-Service Inspection Rules for Nuclear Island Components. RCC-M Code 2000 Edition (Plus 2002 Addendum) (Paris, 2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    N. Moës, T. Belytschko, Extended finite element method for cohesive crack growth. Eng. Fract. Mech. 69(7), 813–833 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    N. Moës, J. Dolbow, T. BelytsChko, A finite element method for crack growth without remeshing. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Eng. 46(1), 131–150 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    M.L. Benzeggagh, M. Kenane, Measurement of mixed-mode delamination fracture toughness of unidirectional glass/epoxy composites with mixed-mode bending apparatus. Compos. Sci. Technol. 56(4), 439–449 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Abaqus Users Manual, 2013. Version 6.13-2. Dassault Systemes Simulia Corporation, Providence, Rhode Island, USAGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    I.P. Pasqualino, S.F. Estefen, A nonlinear analysis of the buckle propagation problem in deepwater pipelines. Int. J. Solids Struct. 38(46–47), 8481–8502 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    M.M. Kashani, L.N. Lowes, A.J. Crewe, Nonlinear fibre element modelling of RC bridge piers considering inelastic buckling of reinforcement. Eng. Struct. 116, 163–177 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    B. Tanguy, J. Besson, R. Piques et al., Ductile to brittle transition of an A508 steel characterized by Charpy impact test. Eng. Fract. Mech. 72(1), 49–72 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    W. Karlsen, G. Diego, B. Devrient, Localized deformation as a key precursor to initiation of intergranular stress corrosion cracking of austenitic stainless steels employed in nuclear power plants. J. Nucl. Mater. 406(1), 138–151 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    International Atomic Energy Agency, Pressurized Thermal Shock in Nuclear Power Plants: Good Practices for Assessments: TECDOC-1627 (IAEA, Austria, 2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Section 50.61: Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against Pressurized Thermal Shock Events (NRC, USA, 1984)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Radiation embrittlement of reactor vessel materials: Regulatory Guide, No. 1.99, Revision 2 (NRC, USA, 1988)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    D.R. Stephens, B.N. Leis, Development of an alternative criterion for residual strength of corrosion defects in moderate to high toughness pipe (American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Canada, 2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    T.L. Dickson, J.A. Keeney, J.W. Bryson, Validation of a linear-elastic fracture methodology for postulated flaws embedded in the wall of a nuclear reactor pressure vessel, in Proceedings of ASME Pressure Vessel and Pipings, PVP, vol. 403 (Seattle, 2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    B.R. Bass, C.E. Pugh, J. Sievers et al., Overview of the international comparative assessment study of pressurized thermal-shock in reactor pressure vessels (RPV PTS ICAS). Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip. 78(2–3), 197–211 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    G. Qian, M. Niffenegger, Integrity analysis of a reactor pressure vessel subjected to pressurized thermal shocks by considering constraint effect. Eng. Fract. Mech. 112–113, 14–25 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ASM International 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Special Purpose Equipment and Advanced Processing Technology of Ministry of EducationZhejiang University of TechnologyHangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations