0
Research Papers

Modeling the Deformation Response of High Strength Steel Pipelines—Part II: Effects of Material Characterization on the Deformation Response of Pipes

[+] Author and Article Information
Sunil Neupane, Samer Adeeb, Roger Cheng

Civil and Environmental Engineering,  University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2W2, Canada

James Ferguson, Michael Martens

TransCanada Pipelines Ltd., Calgary, Alberta T2P 5H1, Canada

J. Appl. Mech 79(5), 051003 (Jun 25, 2012) (7 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4006381 History: Received April 11, 2011; Revised January 17, 2012; Posted March 15, 2012; Published June 25, 2012; Online June 25, 2012

The material model proposed in Part I (Neupane , 2012, “Modeling the Deformation Response of High Strength Steel Pipelines—Part I: Material Characterization to Model the Plastic Anisotropy,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., 79 , p. 051002) is used to study the deformation response of high strength steel. The response of pipes subjected to frost upheaval at a particular point is studied using an assembly of pipe elements, while buckling of pipes is examined using shell elements. The deformation response is obtained using two different material models. The two different material models used were the isotropic hardening material model and the combined kinematic hardening material model. Two sets of material stress-strain data were used for the isotropic hardening material model; data obtained from the longitudinal direction tests and data obtained from the circumferential direction tests. The combined kinematic hardening material model was calibrated to provide an accurate prediction of the stress-strain behavior in both the longitudinal direction and the circumferential direction. The deformation response of a pipe model using the three different material data sets was studied. The sensitivity of the response of pipelines to the choice of a material model and the material data set is studied for the frost upheaval and local buckling.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Use of symmetry to model one quarter of the pipe segment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Load versus displacement of pipe “H,” without internal pressure (Pattern I material model)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Load versus displacement of pipe “B,” without internal pressure (Pattern II material model)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Load versus displacement of pipe “G,” without internal pressure (Pattern III material model)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Load versus displacement of pipe “H,” with internal pressure (Pattern I material model)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Load versus displacement of pipe “B,” with internal pressure (Pattern II material model)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Load versus displacement of Pipe “G,” with internal pressure (Pattern III material model)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Buckling mode of pipe segment with internal pressure

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Buckling mode of pipe segment without internal pressure

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Applied moment versus end rotation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Π-Plane showing the maximum longitudinal stress a pipe can withstand before plastifying. (a) Using the isotropic hardening material model with circumferential stress-strain data (the dotted circle shows the location of the intial yield surface using the longitudinal stress-strain data). (b) Using the isotropic hardening material model with longitudinal stress strain-data (the dotted circle shows the location of the intial yield surface with circumferential stress strain data). (c) Using the kinematic hardening material model with the analytical stress-strain curve. Point B represents the state of stress under the internal pressure. Lines BC and AD represent the maximum longitudinal stress that a pipe with and without (respectively) an internal pressure can withstand before plastifying.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Π-Plane showing the maximum longitudinal stress a pipe can withstand before plastifying. (a) Under an internal pressure and comparing the isotropic material model (circumferential material data) and the kinematic material model (the analytical stress-strain curve). (b) Without an internal pressure and comparing the isotropic material model (longitudinal material data) and the kinematic material model (the analytical stress-strain curve). (The initial yield surface using the isotropic material model with the longitudinal and circumferential material data are represented using the inner and outer dotted circles, respectively.)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In