0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Structures and Dynamics

Analysis of Multi-Axial Creep–Fatigue Damage on an Outer Cylinder of a 1000 MW Supercritical Steam Turbine

[+] Author and Article Information
Weizhe Wang

Key Laboratory of Education Ministry for
Power Machinery and Engineering,
Shanghai Jiao Tong University,
Shanghai 200240, China;
Gas Turbine Institute,
Shanghai Jiao Tong University,
Shanghai 200240, China
e-mail: wangwz0214@sjtu.edu.cn

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Structures and Dynamics Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received March 28, 2014; final manuscript received May 7, 2014; published online May 28, 2014. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 136(11), 112504 (May 28, 2014) (8 pages) Paper No: GTP-14-1171; doi: 10.1115/1.4027634 History: Received March 28, 2014; Revised May 07, 2014

A multi-axial continuum damage mechanics (CDM) model was proposed to calculate the multi-axial creep–fatigue damage of a high temperature component. A specific outer cylinder of a 1000 MW supercritical steam turbine was used in this study, and the interaction of the creep and fatigue behavior of the outer cylinder was numerically investigated under a startup–running–shutdown process. To this end, the multi-axial stress–strain behavior of the outer cylinder was numerically studied using Abaqus. The in-site measured temperatures were provided to validate the heat transfer coefficients, which were used to calculate the temperature field of the outer cylinder. The multi-axial mechanics behavior of the outer cylinder was investigated in detail, with regard to the temperature, Mises stress, hydrostatic stress, multi-axial toughness factor, multi-axial creep strain, and damage. The results demonstrated that multi-axial mechanics behavior reduced the total damage.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Fujio, A., 2008, “Precipitate Design for Creep Strengthening of 9% Cr Tempered Martensitic Steel for Ultra-Supercritical Power Plants,” Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater., 9(1), p. 013002. [CrossRef]
Viswanathan, R., and Bakker, W., 2001, “Materials for Ultrasupercritical Coal Power Plants-Turbine Materials,” J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 10(1), pp. 96–101. [CrossRef]
Viswanathan, R., Henry, J. F., Tanzosh, J., Stanko, G., Shingledecker, J., Vitalis, B., Purgert, and R., 2005, “U.S. Program on Materials Technology for Ultra-Supercritical Coal Power Plants,” J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 14(3), pp. 281–292. [CrossRef]
Hald, J., 2004, “Creep Strength and Ductility of 9 to 12% Chromium Steels,” Mater. High Temp., 21(1), pp. 41–46. [CrossRef]
Bendick, W., Gabrel, J., and Vandenberghe, B., 2007, “Assessment of Creep Rupture Strength for New Martensitic 9% Cr Steels,” Eighth International Conference on Creep and Fatigue at Elevated Temperatures, San Antonio, TX, July 22–26, Vol. 10, pp. 139–148.
Ernst, P., 1988, “Effect of Boron on the Mechanical Properties of Modified 12% Chromium Steels,” Ph.D. dissertation, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, Switzerland, pp. 50–61.
Rajek, H. J., 2005, “Computer Simulation of Precipitation Kinetics in Solid Metals and Application to the Complex Power Plant Steel CB8,” Ph.D. thesis, Technischen Wissenschaften at Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria, pp. 39–56.
Hernandez, S. G., and Conejo, A. N., 2005, “Creep Properties of 1.25Cr-1Mo-0.25V Steels for Turbine Casing,” Metal. Mater., 58(2), pp. 165–173. [CrossRef]
Wilshire, B., and Scharning, P. J., 2008, “A New Methodology for Analysis of Creep and Creep Fracture Data for 9–12% Chromium Steels,” Int. Mater. Rev., 53(2), pp. 91–104. [CrossRef]
Fujio, A., Torsten-Ulf, K., and Viswanathan, R., 2008, Creep-Resistant Steels, Woodhead Publishing Ltd., Cambridge, UK.
Cocks, A. C. F., and Ashby, M. F., 1980, “Inter-Granular Fracture During Power Law Creep Under Multiaxial Stress,” Met. Sci., 14(8-9), pp. 395–402. [CrossRef]
Lemaitre, J., 1985, “A Continuous Damage Mechanics Model for Ductile Fracture,” ASME J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 107(1), pp. 83–89. [CrossRef]
Fatemi, A., and Yang, L., 1998, “Cumulative Fatigue Damage and Life Prediction Theories: A Survey of the State of the Art for Homogeneous Materials,” Int. J. Fatigue, 20(1), pp. 9–34. [CrossRef]
Lemaitre, J., and Chaboche, J. L., 1990, Mechanics of Solid Materials, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Jing, J. P., Meng, G., Sun, Y., and Xia, S. B., 2003, “An Effective Continuum Damage Mechanics Model for Creep-Fatigue Life Assessment of a Steam Turbine Rotor,” Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping, 80(6), pp. 389–396. [CrossRef]
Yevgen, K., and Konstantin, N., 2007, “Power Plant Component Design Using Creep and Fatigue Damage Analysis,” 5th Australasian Congress on Applied Mechanics, Brisbane, Australia, December 10–12.
Marloff, R. H., Leven, M., and Sankey, G. O., 1981, “Creep of Rotors Under Triaxial Tension,” Joint BSSM-SESA International Conference on Measurements in Hostile Environments, Edinburg, UK, August 31-September 4.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

(a) Structure and (b) mesh of outer cylinder

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

(a) Normalized startup curve, (b) normalized shutdown curve, and (c) range of each zone

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Temperature distributions during startup process (I) and shutdown process (II)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Temperature differences during startup process (a) and shutdown process (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Schematic map of temperature measurement points on the outer cylinder

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Demonstration of the fluctuating temperature under a steady-state power load condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Mises stress distributions during startup process (I) and shutdown process (II)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Selected eight locations for the structural analysis

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Temperature evolution at eight locations during startup (a) and shutdown (b) processes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Mises stress evolution at eight locations during startup process (a), steady-station operation process (b), and shutdown process (c)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Hydrostatic stress evolution at eight locations during steady-state operating condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Multi-axiality evolution at eight locations during steady-state operating condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Evolution comparison between the multi-axial strain ɛmul and multi-axiality αmul at eight locations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Total damage at eight locations throughout the whole operation

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