Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

, Volume 44, Issue 2, pp 1033–1041 | Cite as

Experimental Study on the Fracture Toughness of Welded Joints of API X90 High-grade Pipeline Steels Using Single-Edge-Notched Tension Specimens

  • Lingzhen KongEmail author
  • Xiayi Zhou
  • Liqiong Chen
  • Kun Huang
  • Jie Chen
Research Article - Mechanical Engineering


The fracture toughness and R-curves of welded joints of API X90 pipeline steels were experimentally studied. Single-edge- notched tension (SENT) specimens and a normalization method were adopted. Joints welded by using three technologies (A, B, and C) were investigated. The results show that the SENT specimen could be used to test the fracture toughness and R-curves of the welded joint; the welded joint of welding method B presented the poorest fracture toughness; and the R-curves and fracture toughness of the heat-affected zone were seriously affected by the weld zone and base metal. A new idea to test the fracture toughness and R-curves of the heat-affected zone was also proposed.


X90 High-grade pipeline SENT Welded joint Fracture toughness 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



The authors gratefully acknowledge the sponsorship of this work by the Young Scholars Development Fund of SWPU (Grant No. 201699010002), the PetroChina Innovation Foundation (Grant No. 2016D-5007-0602), the Scientific Research Starting Project of SWPU (No. 2017QHZ003), and the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant No. 2016YFC0802100).


  1. 1.
    International Energy Agency: World Energy Outlook (2016). Accessed 1 May 2017
  2. 2.
    Zhao, W.; Wang, W.; Chen, S.; Qu, J.: Effect of simulated welding thermal cycle on microstructure and mechanical properties of X90 pipeline steel. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 528, 7417–7422 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    American Petroleum Institute: Specification for Line Pipe. ANSI/API specification 5L. 45th ed. American Petroleum Institute (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kong, L.Z.; Shuai, J.; Zhou, X.Y.; et al.: True stress-logarithmic strain curves test of pipeline steels using 3D digital image correlation. Optoelectron. Adv. Mater. Rapid Commun. 9(11–12), 1380–1388 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kong, L.; Shuai, J.; Zhou, X.; et al.: A universal method for acquiring the constitutive behaviors of API -5 L X90 welds. Exp. Mech. 56(2), 165–176 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kong, L.Z.; Zhou, X.Y.; Chen, L.Q.; et al.: CTOD-R curve tests of API 5L X90 by sent specimen using a modified normalization method. Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct. 2(40), 288–299 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tu, S.T.; Chen, X.; Lu, H.S.; et al.: Fracture toughness of different locations of spiral submerged arc welded joints in API X80 pipeline steels. Procedia Eng. 130, 828–834 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, X.; Lu, H.; Chen, G.; et al.: A comparison between fracture toughness at different locations of longitudinal submerged arc welded and spiral submerged arc welded joints of API X80 pipeline steels. Eng. Fract. Mech. 148, 110–121 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yang, Y.; Shi, L.; Xu, Z.; et al.: Fracture toughness of the materials in welded joint of X80 pipeline steel. Eng. Fract. Mech. 148, 337–349 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ávila, J.A.; Ruchert, C.O.F.T.; Mei, P.R.; et al.: Fracture toughness assessment at different temperatures and regions within a friction stirred API 5L X80 steel welded plates. Eng. Fract. Mech. 147(October), 176–186 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tribe, A.; Nelson, T.W.: Study on the fracture toughness of friction stir welded API X80. Eng. Fract. Mech. 150(1), 58–69 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Santos, T.F.A.; Hermenegildo, T.F.C.; Afonso, C.R.M.; et al.: Fracture toughness of ISO 3183 X80M (API 5L X80) steel friction stir welds. Eng. Fract. Mech. 77(15), 2937–2945 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Verstraete, M.A.; Waele, W.D.; Minnebruggen, K.V.; et al.: Comparison of girth weld tearing resistance obtained from curved wide plate and single edge notch tensile testing. Eng. Fract. Mech. 148, 406–420 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Angeles-Herrera, D.; Albiter-Hernández, A.; Cuamatzi-Meléndez, R.; et al.: Fracture toughness in the circumferential-longitudinal and circumferential-radial directions of longitudinal weld API 5L X52 pipeline using standard C(T) and nonstandard curved SE(B) specimens[J]. Int. J. Fract. 188(2), 251–256 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pavankumar, T.V.; Chattopadhyay, J.; Dutta, B.K.; Kushwaha, H.S.: Transferability of specimen JR-curve to straight pipes with throughwall circumferential flaws. Int. J. Press. Vessel Pip. 79(2), 127–134 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nyhus, B.; Østby, E.; Thaulow, C.; Zhang, Z.; Olden, V.: SENT Testing and the effect of geometry constraint in high strength steel. In: International Symposium High Strength Steel, 23–24, Verdal, Norway (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bayley, C.; Aucoin, N.: Fracture testing of welded single edge notch tensile specimens. Eng. Fract. Mech. 102(2), 257–270 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lucon, E.; Weeks, T.S.; Gianetto, J.A.; et al.: Fracture toughness characterization of high-pressure pipe girth welds using single-edge notched tension [SE(T)] specimens. MPC 4(2), 20130098 (2015)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Verstraete, M.A.; Waele, W.D.; Minnebruggen, K.V.; et al.: Single-specimen evaluation of tearing resistance in SENT testing. Eng. Fract. Mech. 148, 324–336 (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mathias, L.L.S.; Burgos, D.F.S.; Donato, G.H.B. et al.: Crack growth testing of an x80 pipeline girth weld using SE(T) and SE(B) fracture specimens. In: ASME 2012, International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, 43–53 (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mathias, L.L.S.; Donato, G.H.B.; Ruggieri, C.: Applicability of SE(T) and SE(B) fracture specimens in crack growth measurements of pipeline girth welds. In: ASME 2012 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference, 935–944 (2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ruggieri, C.: Further results in J, and CTOD estimation procedures for SE(T) fracture specimens—part I: homogeneous materials. Eng. Fract. Mech. 79, 245–265 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhu, X.K.; Lam, P.S.; Chao, Y.J.: Application of normalization method to fracture resistance testing for storage tank A285 carbon steel. Int. J. Press. Vessel Pip. 86, 669–76 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Astm, E.: Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fracture Toughness, p. 2017. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken (1820)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    DNV-RP-F108: Fracture control for pipeline installation methods introducing cyclic plastic strain. Det Norske Veritas. Høvik, Norway (2006)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fang, J.; Zhang, J.; Wang, L.: Evaluation of cracking behavior and critical CTOA values of pipeline steel from DWTT specimens. Eng. Fract. Mech. 124–125(2), 18–29 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Oil and Natural Gas EngineeringSouthwest Petroleum UniversitySichuanChina
  2. 2.State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and ExploitationSouthwest Petroleum UniversitySichuanChina

Personalised recommendations