Pipeline Technology Conference, Ostend, 12-14 October 2009

Paper no: Ostend2009-007

Integrity assessment for

corrosion defects in hot-bent
pipe for natural gas pipelines
by Woosik Kim1, Youngpyo Kim1, Jonghyun Baek1, and Yunjae Kim2

1 R&D Center, KOGAS, Ansan, Korea

2 Mechanical Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, Korea

R ESIDUAL STRAIN AND STRESS could arise for damaged bend pipe, because of which tensile, fatigue
and fracture properties of material could change. To assess integrity of such damaged bend pipe in
gas pipeline, the effect of pre-strain on material properties should be quantified. Detailed finite element
analyses for hot bending are performed, from which the magnitude of pre-strain and deformation in pipe
bend is quantified. And engineering assessment methods for hot bend with corrosion defect are
provided. Proposed burst pressure solution for hot bend with corrosion defect is usefully applied to
structural integrity assessment.

I N CASE OF ROUTE CHANGE of small angle in construction of natural gas pipeline, cold bend pipe made in
field is used, and hot bend pipe made in shop is used in pipeline route change more than 16o angle. The
manufacturing process of hot bend pipe is the method to give the high temperature heat, about 950℃, using high-
frequency heating devices on the local part of pipe, reduce the material strength and deform to the desired angle.
When the pipe pushed in the back with constant speed, the pipe deformed in rotation with the radius of curvature
of moment arm.

A study on hot bend pipe is still a little. The thickness of hot bend pipe is not uniform, and the bending process
changes the material properties. The integrity assessment for hot bend pipe has not been presented yet, and
whether the evaluation method of straight pipe can be applied is unclear. Zhong Hu performed the hot bending
research by finite element analysis, and theoretically predicted the strain rate and the thickness changes in hot
bending process.[1-2] The integrity assessment of 90o bend pipe manufactured by hot bending should consider
exactly the effect of the bending process. In this paper, the integrity assessment method for corrosion defect in hot
bend pipe of natural gas transmission pipeline is proposed.

Finite element analysis on hot bending

0B

The material properties of each part in hot bend pipe with API 5L X65 grade are evaluated by experiment.[3] The
tensile properties of compression parts in bend pipe are very similar to that of straight pipe except the yield
strength is lower in some specimens. The yield strength of tensile parts is similar to that of straight pipe, and the
tensile strength is a little higher and the plastic hardening aspects is very different. The fracture toughness of tensile
parts is lower than that of non deformed parts, but that of compression parts is similar to that of non deformed
parts.

In order to perform the correct finite element analysis and heat transfer analysis the material properties related to
heat transfer in addition to tensile properties is required. Figure 1 represents the material properties of API X65
pipe with temperature change. The plastic hardening exponent with temperature is almost no difference, but the
yield strength and the elastic modulus is greatly reduced as the temperature increases.

This paper is © copyright of the organizers of the Pipeline Technology Conference held in Ostend, Belgium, on 12-14 October, 2009, and of
the author(s). No copying (either electronic or otherwise), transmission electronically, or reproduction in any way is permitted without the
specific permission of the copyright holders.
2 Pipeline Technology Conference, Ostend, 12-14 October 2009

Figure 1 Material properties of pipe with temperature:

(a - left) Young's modulus, yield strength, hardening exponent and Poisson's ratio, (b- right) Specific heat coefficient and thermal conductivity.

The temperature distribution is obtained in steady state heat transfer analysis, and the three dimensional stress
analyses are performed. Figure 2 shows a hot bending process. Considering symmetric condition, 1/2 model is
used, and the analysis is done by using the method that the forced displacement load at the back of pipe. The
diameter of pipe is 762mm, the initial thickness is 20.6mm, and the bend angles are 22.5o, 45o, 90o.

Figure 2 Schematic illustration of hot bend process.

Figure 3 shows the result of finite element analysis for 90o hot bending process of pipe with 762mm diameter.
Figure 3(a) is strain distribution in the radial direction, and Figure 3(b) is that in the axial direction. The strain
distribution of radial and axial direction appears the opposite form in the intrados and extrados. The plastic strain
distribution is almost independent of bending angle, and the strain in radial direction is relatively very low. The
strain in axial direction shows positive values in the tensile areas and negative values in the compressive area, but
the strain distribution of the radial direction appears the opposite aspects. The plastic strain of axial direction show
approximately 15% both tensile and compressive areas. The pipe thickness and the strain are independent of
bending angle.
Pipeline Technology Conference, Ostend, 12-14 October 2009 3

Figure 3 Strain contour of hot bend pipe, Do=762mm, 90o bend: (a - left) radial, (b - right) axial plastic strain

Finite element analysis for hot-bent pipe

1B

with or without corrosion defect

Finite element analysis for 90o hot bend pipe of thickness 18.0mm~24.5mm by location, straight pipe of thickness
20.6mm and 90o bend pipe of uniform thickness 20.6mm is performed to know the stress concentration and
distribution with deform shape. In all cases, the pipe condition without defect is applied.

Figure 4 shows the stress analysis with circumferential direction for pipe without defect under internal pressure. As
X-axis is the distance to circumferential direction, 0 means the compressive part and 1 means the tensile part. In
straight pipe the constant stress applies to circumferential direction. However, in the bend pipe of uniform
thickness, the stress concentration occurs in compressive part. Considering pipe thickness change by hot bending,
the stress concentration occurs on the tensile part of the lowest thickness. Figure 4 a) and b) at 8, 16 MPa pressure
respectively show in a similar trend, and the effect of pipe thickness is larger than that of pipe bending.

Figure 4 Equivalent stress distribution of pipes without defect under pressure: (a) pressure=8 MPa and (b) pressure=16 MPa
4 Pipeline Technology Conference, Ostend, 12-14 October 2009

The thickness of hot bend pipe is not uniform and bending process changes the material properties of pipe. The
limit load of hot bend pipe is different from that of straight pipe. The integrity assessment for bend pipe is not
clear yet. Also whether the evaluation method for straight pipe is applicable is not clear. In this research on the
integrity assessment of hot bend pipe, first of all, corrosion, the most common defect that occurs in gas pipeline, is
considered.

The size variables for defect assessment are the depth, the length and the width of corrosion. The corrosion defect
locations are classified as the symmetric and the asymmetric position, and also the cases of intrados, crown, and
extrados. Figure 5 shows the equivalent stress contour of 90o bend pipe with corrosion defect. The prediction of
burst pressure of hot bend pipe is performed by ductile fracture model based on fracture strain rate. The burst of
hot bend pipe with corrosion defect in all cases occurs by local cross-section reduction of defective part.

Figure 5 Equivalent stress contour of 90o bend with corrosion defect: (a - left) symmetrical and (b - right) asymmetrical position

The validity of the following PCORRC equation to be applied a straight pipe as assessment method for hot bend
pipe is considered.

(1)

Where, t= pipe thickness, Di= internal diameter, d= corrosion depth, l= corrosion length, = nominal tensile
strength of pipe, R= curvature radius of bend pipe

Goodall predicted the limit load of bend pipe without defect under internal pressure by adding the following bend
coefficient. [4]

(2)

The bend shape applies to equation (2), so the bend coefficient is 0.9. The validity analysis on applying this
coefficient to hot bend pipe is performed.

To predict the burst pressure of hot bend pipe by using the PCORRC equation, pipe thickness to be applied must
be decided. The thickness of hot bend pipe is 18.0mm in the tensile area, 24.5mm in the compressive area. In this
case, the pipe thickness can be considered as the two. First, the pipe thickness in each position can be applied to
the equation. If corrosion defects are in extrados and intrados, the pipe thickness can be applied to 24.5mm and
the 18.0mm respectively. Another method is to apply the average thickness. It is necessary to decide which is
appropriate to. When there is a defect in the symmetric or asymmetric position of 90o bend pipe, the finite
element analysis results show a slightly conservative prediction in extrados and some non conservative prediction
in intrados. In the case of 45o bend pipe, the tendency is the same.
Pipeline Technology Conference, Ostend, 12-14 October 2009 5

Figure 6 shows the prediction result of burst pressure for defect in the symmetric position of 90o bend pipe. Figure
6 (a), (b), (c) is the result in extrados, crown, and intrados respectively. Solid line in Figure 6 represents the results
to be predicted by applying the individual thickness of each pipe location in equation (1). Figure 6 (a) shows some
conservative prediction by applying the thickness of 18.0mm in extrados. Figure 6 (c) shows some non-conservative
prediction in the case of a 24.5mm thickness in intrados.

Figure 7 shows the finite element analysis result using individual thickness for burst pressure estimation of 90o
bend pipe with corrosion defect at asymmetrical position. As like Figure 6, Figure 7 represents some conservative
prediction in extrados and some non-conservative prediction in intrados. In case of defect at symmetric position in
45o bend pipe, the prediction result of rupture pressure with location shows similar trends as previously.

(a) (b)

(c)

Figure 6 Comparison of estimation using individual thickness with FE results for burst pressure of 90o bend pipe with corrosion defect at
symmetrical position: (a) extrados, (b) crown and (c) intrados
6 Pipeline Technology Conference, Ostend, 12-14 October 2009

(a) (b)

(c)

Figure 7 Comparison of estimation using individual thickness with FE results for burst pressure of 90o bend pipe with corrosion defect at
unsymmetrical position: (a) extrados, (b) crown and (c) intrados

Figure 8 represents the prediction result for burst pressure with corrosion defect in symmetric position of 90o bend
pipe by applying the bend coefficient of equation (2) in PCORRC equation (1) and the average thickness as pipe
thickness to equation (1). The average thickness of hot bend pipe in this study is 21.25mm. The modified
PCORRC equation by this method for corrosion defect in hot bend pipe follows.

(3)

Where, tavg= average thickness, Rc= outer diameter, r= radius of pipe.

The burst pressure is reasonably predictable to corrosion defect in any location by applying Equation (3) as Figure
8. The analysis results by applying the equation (3) for the same 90o bend pipe of Figure 6. is shown in the Figure
9. The burst pressure is reasonably predictable by applying the equation (3) to a corrosion defect in whole pipe
location. In case of 45o bend pipe, the application of the revised prediction equation has validity. So, by modifying
some expression on the PCORRC equation for straight pipe, the burst pressures of hot bend pipe could be
predicted. The modified factors are the introduction of bend coefficient and the application of average thickness.
Pipeline Technology Conference, Ostend, 12-14 October 2009 7

(a) (b)

(c)

Figure 8 Comparison of estimation using average thickness with FE results for burst pressure of 90o bend pipe with corrosion defect at
symmetrical position: (a) extrados, (b) crown and (c) intrados.
8 Pipeline Technology Conference, Ostend, 12-14 October 2009

(a) (b)

(c)

Figure 9 Comparison of estimation using average thickness with FE results for burst pressure of 90o bend pipe with corrosion defect at
unsymmetrical position: (a) extrados, (b) crown and (c) intrados

Summary
3B

Detailed finite element analyses for hot bending are performed, from which the magnitude of pre-strain and
deformation in pipe bend is quantified. The burst pressure of hot bend pipe with corrosion defect is predicted
reasonably by applying the bend coefficients and the average thickness to the PCORRC expression of straight pipe

References
2B

1. Hu, Z., 2000, "Computer simulation of pipe-bending process with small bending radius using local induction heating,"
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 91, pp. 75-79.
2. Zutang, W. and Hu, Z., 1990, "Theory of pipe-bending to a small bend radius using heating," Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, Vol. 21, pp. 275-284.
3. Kim. W, et al, 2007, “Development of integrity assessment method for bend pipe,” KOGAS Research report
4. Goodall, I. W., 1978, "Lower bound limit analysis of curved tubes loaded by combined internal pressure and in-plane
bending moment”, CEGB report RD/B/N4360, Central Electricity Generating Board.