Proceedings of the ASME 2014 Pressure Vessels & Piping Conference

PVP2014
July 20-24, 2014, Anaheim, California, USA

PVP2014-28774

PREDICTIONS OF RESIDUAL STRESSES AND DEFORMATIONS IN PIPE BENDS

PRODUCED USING COLD, WARM AND INDUCTION BENDING PROCESSES

Y. Ding M. Yetisir S. Khajehpour

Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Candu Energy Inc.
Chalk River Laboratories Chalk River Laboratories 2285 Speakman Drive
Chalk River, ON, Canada Chalk River, ON, Canada Mississauga, ON, Canada
dingy@aecl.ca yetisirm@aecl.ca Siavash.Khajehpour@candu.com

ABSTRACT
Cold bending, warm bending (bending with local heating)
and induction bending are three manufacturing processes
widely used to produce pipe bends. The cold and warm
bending processes have been used for the fabrication of carbon
steel feeder bends for CANDU®1 reactors, and the induction
bending process was considered for the fabrication of stainless
steel feeder pipes for an advanced CANDU reactor. Bending
processes result in plastic deformation, and inevitably,
introduce residual stresses in the deformed pipes. Residual
stresses in feeder bends are believed to be a very important
contributing factor in feeder cracking. Different bending
processes result in widely different residual stress patterns and
magnitudes in pipe bends. Hence, it is important to understand
the effect of bending processes and the process parameters used
on the residual stress distribution in the bent pipes. Numerical
models have been successfully developed to predict the residual
stresses and the deformed shapes induced by cold, warm and
induction bending processes. This paper provides a
comprehensive review of the predicted residual stress
distributions, ovality and wall-thickness variations of the cold,
warm and induction bends. The predicted results were
compared to earlier measurements of spare CANDU feeder
bends and test bends. Advantages and disadvantages of the
three bending processes are summarized. Numerical
approaches for the modeling of residual stresses could be of
benefit to engineering estimates of residual stresses in feeder
pipes for safety evaluation of nuclear reactors.
1
CANDU (CANada Deuterium Uranium) is a registered trademark of Atomic
Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL) used under exclusive license by Candu Energy
Inc.
INTRODUCTION
Feeder pipes in CANDU reactors are an integral part of the
heat transport system carrying pressurized heavy water (D2O)
from the reactor fuel channel to and from the steam generators.
A typical CANDU feeder has several bends and welds. Between
1997 and 2007, thirteen confirmed cases of outlet feeder cracking
were discovered at one CANDU 6 nuclear station [1]. All
detected cracks were in the tight-radius bends with an r/D ratio2
of 1.5. Root cause investigation of this cracking indicated that
the residual stresses in the feeder bends induced by the bending
process are a very important contributing factor in these crack
initiations [2]. Since 1997, residual stress measurements have
been performed on a number of CANDU feeder pipes that were
fabricated with various bending techniques. These
measurements have been used to provide guidance in the
management of feeder cracking in CANDU stations.
Residual stress measurements are very expensive and time
consuming; therefore, numerical simulations have been
performed to supplement the limited measurement data.
Numerical models have been successfully developed for
a cold-bent large-radius feeder pipe [3] and a warm-bent
tight-radius feeder pipe [4] to predict the deformed shape and
residual stresses induced by the bending processes. The
warm-bending simulation approaches were later used for the
modeling of an induction bending process, which was considered
for the fabrication of stainless steel feeders [5]. The predicted
results from the numerical models were compared to earlier
measurements of spare CANDU feeder bends and test bends.
Numerical approaches for the modeling of residual stresses
could be of benefit to engineering estimates of residual stresses
in feeder pipes for safety evaluation of nuclear reactors. The
2
The r/D ratio is the ratio of the bend radius to the nominal pipe diameter.

1 Copyright © 2014 by ASME and

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 measured and predicted residual stress data could provide TABLE 1
guidelines for identifying the most susceptible locations for GEOMETRY OF FEEDER BENDS MODELLED
targeted crack inspections. 3.5” 2.5”
This paper briefly discusses the cold, warm and induction 66-mm
Cold-Bent Warm-Bent
processes used or considered for the fabrication of CANDU Dimension Induction-Bent
Large-Radius Tight-Radius
feeder bends, and reviews the predicted and measured residual Test Bend
Bend Bend
stress distributions, ovality and wall-thickness variations of Outer Diameter (OD) 101.6 mm 73 mm 66 mm
feeder bends produced using the three bending processes. Wall Thickness 8.08 mm 7.01 mm 6.5 mm
Bend Angle 108° 73° 90°
CANDU FEEDER BENDS
Bend Radius 381 mm 95.25 mm 228.6 mm
In CANDU stations, feeder pipes range from 1.5 to 3.5 r/D Ratio 4.3 1.5 3.8
inches3 in the nominal pipe diameter, and are made out of
SA-106 Grade B material Schedule 80. Each feeder pipe FABRICATION PROCESSES
contains up to seven bends, either large-radius bends with an
r/D ratio larger than 4.0, or tight-radius bends with an r/D ratio A variety of bending processes, including cold, warm and
of 1.5. induction bending, have been used or considered for the
For the feasibility study of the fabrication of SA 312 fabrication of CANDU feeder bends, including the large-radius
Type 316N stainless steel feeder bends, test bends were and tight-radius bends.
fabricated with two types of pipes, the 66-mm non-standard3 Cold Bending
pipes with a wall thickness of 6.5 mm and the 3.5” pipes [5]. Large-radius CANDU bends (r/D > 4.0) were
The 66-mm test bends have an r/D ratio of 3.8 or 3.5, and the manufactured using the cold bending at room temperature. The
3.5” bends have an r/D ratio of 4.3. cold bending process is fast and low in cost compared to the
High residual stresses, extreme cross-sectional ovality and warm bending or hot forming process. The cold bending
wall thinning could compromise the structural integrity of the process possesses fairly good control of ovality and wall
pipe bend under pressure and operating loads. CANDU feeder thinning, and results in little or no contamination of the material
bends are manufactured to specifications given by ASME during the bending process.
Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC) Section III Articles The most common cold bending technique is draw
NB-4223.2 and NB-3642.1 for the ovality (maximum 8%) and bending [6]. FIG. 1 presents a typical configuration for the draw
minimum wall thickness (87.5% of the nominal wall thickness), bending process modelled for the 3.5” cold-bent large-radius
respectively [2]. Residual stresses, ovality and wall thinning of feeder pipe. As seen in this figure, the pipe is clamped to a
the deformed bends were studied based on the measurement rotating bending die and drawn by the rotary action of the die
data and simulation results in this research. while the tail end of the pipe is supported by a pressure die. The
Table 1 presents the dimensions of pipe bends used in the pressure die moves together with the tail end of the pipe while
baseline models for the simulation of cold, warm and induction supporting it laterally during bending, and hence can also be
bending processes [3, 4, 5]. As seen in this table, the selected called ‘follow bar’, which is the term used in warm bending. The
3.5” bend has the largest bend angle of 108° and r/D ratio of 4.3 rotary die consists of a straight portion for grabbing the feeder
among all large-radius bends, and hence is considered to be the pipe for bending. The cross section of the rotary die (both
limiting large-radius feeder bend from a residual stress straight and circular parts) is a semicircle (180°) with a radius
point-of-view. The selected 2.5” tight-radius bend has a bend slightly less than the outside radius of the pipe. The clamp is a
angle of 73° and an r/D ratio of 1.5. The 66-mm induction straight piece and has a cross section that comprises a circular arc
bend with an r/D ratio of 3.8 was modelled. with a radius that is identical to that of the rotary die. To reduce
In the previous studies [3, 4, 5], sensitivity analyses were uncertainties in the analyses, the dimensional information of the
also carried out with cases modified from the baseline cases to dies and the clamp was obtained from the manufacturer of the
the study the effect of the bend angle, r/D ratio, material large-radius feeder bend [3].
properties and/or other process parameters on the predicted The manufacturing of good-quality tight-radius
residual stresses and the deformed shape of the bent pipe. bends (r/D = 1.5) might not be possible using standard cold
bending techniques. A modified version of cold bending, the
compression-boost technique, has been used for the fabrication of
tight-radius feeders in the more recent CANDU reactors. The
compression-boost bending is performed with an additional axial
compressive boost force applied at the feeding end of the bend to
facilitate the flow of material during bending, and thereby, to
meet the ASME ovality and wall thinning requirements.
3
All feeder sizes except the 66-mm non-standard pipe size provided in this
paper are given in Nominal Pipe Size (NPS).

2 Copyright © 2014 by ASME and

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 FIG. 1 CONFIGURATION OF COLD BENDING [3]
Warm Bending
Another modified version of cold bending with local torch
heating of the bend intrados prior to bending was used in many
of the early CANDU reactors. This intrados-heated bending
process is commonly called the warm bending technique in the
CANDU community. Warm bending can significantly reduce
the force required to perform the operation compared to the
cold bending process.
FIG. 2 presents a typical configuration for the warm
bending process modelled for the 2.5” tight-radius feeder bend.
As shown in this figure, the bending mechanism includes a
bending die, a clamp, and a follow bar. The insert in the figure
shows the three-dimensional (3D) sketch of the actual bending
die used in the warm bending process. The two clamp parts are
mounted in the bending die. The clamp tightly holds the feeder
pipe in place with the aid of the follow bar. During bending,
the clamp rotates with the bending die and releases the pipe
upon bending. The bending die consists of a straight portion to
grab the feeder pipe with the clamp inserts, and a round portion
to form the bend. The circular part of the bending die has a
double-radius design.
3 Copyright © 2014 by ASME and
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
FIG. 2 CONFIGURATION OF WARM BENDING [4]
Induction Bending
The induction bending process was used for the fabrication
of stainless steel bends. Induction bending using local induction
heating is an advanced process widely used to produce
large-diameter pipes with relatively small bend radii at low
tooling cost. The induction heating method uses time varying
magnetic fields to induce current in a material for the purpose of
heating the material. The induced electrical current directly
generates the heat within the material. Therefore, induction
heating is a method of providing fast, consistent heat for
manufacturing applications, and eliminates the inconsistencies
and quality issues associated with open flame, torch heating and
other methods. Furthermore, induction bending does not need
bend dies or mandrels. However, induction bending is a slow
process compared to the cold and warm bending processes, and
the induction bending took around 12 minutes to manufacture a
66-mm test bend, and 20 minutes for a 3.5” bend, at one of the
bend suppliers. However, less than one minute is usually
required to bend a pipe using the cold or warm bending
technique. The fabricated cost and time could be reduced using
the cold or warm bending technique.
FIG. 3 presents a typical configuration for the induction
bending process. As seen in this figure, the typical induction
bending equipment consists of the guiding system (i.e., the bed
and guide rollers), the clamping system (a radial arm and the
clamp), the induction heating system and the cooling system.
The induction bending process is continuous. The pipe to be
bent is inserted in the machine, and the start of the bend is
positioned under the induction coil. The portion of the pipe
upstream of the coil is clamped to a rotating arm fixed to the
required bend radius. The downstream portion of the pipe is
pushed through the coil. The induction coil heats a narrow
circumferential zone around the pipe to the appropriate bending
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada
 temperature. Bending starts before the pipe reaches the full
bending temperature. After bending, the heated section is
forced or naturally cooled, as required by the applicable
qualified bending procedure.
GUIDE ROLLERS
FIG. 3 BASIC COMPONENTS FOR INDUCTION
BENDING [7]
FIG. 4 shows the finite element (FE) model for the 66-mm
induction bend. As seen in this figure, the induction coil and
cooling ring were not directly modelled in the simulation of
induction bending.
Free End of the Pipe
FIG. 4 FE MODEL FOR INDUCTION PIPE BENDING
SIMULATION APPROACHES
The cold bending process was modelled using an in-house
FE program H3DMAP [3], but the warm and induction bending
processes were modelled using a commercial FE program
LS-DYNA [4, 8]. The main characteristics of the numerical
models developed for the cold, warm and induction bending
processes are summarized. Modeling details were presented
in [3, 4, 5].
4 Copyright © 2014 by ASME and
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
Simulation of Cold Bending Using H3DMAP
The H3DMAP hybrid explicit solution [9] module was used
for the simulation of cold bending since this solution module
provides features for automatic springback once the clamp and
die are released [3]. The bending process (including clamping,
bending and releasing the pipe) was explicitly modelled.
Since the clamping force is displacement driven, a series of
beam elements was used to connect the clamp to the rotary die.
The clamping process was simulated by applying an artificial
thermal strain (cooling) to the beam elements such that the
desired distance between the rotary die and clamp is achieved.
Conversely, the unclamping process was simulated by applying
an artificial thermal strain (heating) to release the clamp, and
the restart capability in H3DMAP was used to allow the pipe to
spring back and arrive at the final stage of the bending process.
The pipe was modelled with 3D nonlinear hexahedron
elements. The clamp, rotary die and pressure die were
modelled using rigid 3D shell elements. An elastic-plastic
isotropic hardening model was used for the feeder pipe.
Simulation of Warm and Induction Bending Using
LS-DYNA
A coupled structural/thermal analysis was conducted using
LS-DYNA to simulate the warm bending and induction bending
processes. A dynamic explicit method was used for the
simulation of heating and bending, but a static implicit method
for the simulation of springback.
The whole simulation of warm bending was divided into
three steps: 1) heating, 2) clamping and bending, and
3) springback and air cooling. The induction bending process
was divided into two steps: 1) clamping and bending
(including heating and cooling), and 2) springback and cooling.
Those steps were simulated sequentially by generating an
ASCII output file from each step containing all the necessary
information related to the deformed model including the
deformed mesh, and stress/strain components. The ASCII
output file was later used for the subsequent analysis. To
implement the simulation of springback, only the pipe was
included in the output file and all the contacts were eliminated.
The clamping process in warm and induction bending was
simulated by applying prescribed displacements to the rigid
bodies of the clamp and/or bending dies.
In warm bending, the bend intrados is torch-heated to a
cherry-red temperature (estimated to be about 750 ºC) prior to
bending [3]. The torch heating was modelled by setting the
temperature of the nodes in the heating zone to a desired value
and providing a long enough period of time for heat conduction
in the pipe to enable the extrados temperature to reach a desired
value. Only the heat conduction within the pipe was considered
in the simulation of the heating process since the warm bending
is relatively a fast process and the loss of heat from the pipe to
the environment is low. Heat transfer between the pipe and the
environment was ignored during the bending process to
simplify the simulation. After forming, the temperature of the
pipe drops to room temperature by heat radiation and
convection to the environment.
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada
 Induction heating was modelled by applying volumetric
heat generation rates to elements in the heating zone. A
user-defined load curve was created for the heat generation rate
as a function of time for each solid element that was induction
heated during the bending process. The bending temperature
for the baseline case in simulation of induction bending was
selected to be between 1000 ºC and 1054 ºC, and the bending
started at 900 ºC. The modeling of the cooling process by
water spray was simulated by applying boundary conditions to
each element face that lies on the outside surface of the pipe
and is cooled by water spray during the bending process. A
user-defined load curve was created for the convective heat
transfer coefficient as a function of time for each segment that
is cooled by water spray during the bending process. Radiation
and convection to the air were modelled.
In both simulations, thermal contacts were defined for all
the interfaces. A one-way contact algorithm in LS-DYNA was
applied to the thermal contact model to ignore the change in the
temperature of the bending tools (i.e., clamp, guide rollers, and
push pad in induction bending). Bending tools were modelled
as rigid bodies with a constant temperature of 20 ºC, and acted
as heat sinks. The feeder pipe was modelled with fully
integrated selective reduced solid elements (Type 2 in the
LS-DYNA finite element library) and an elastic-viscoplastic
material model with a thermal effect. An isotropic hardening
model was defined for the feeder pipe.
The numerical model for the 2.5” warm-bent tight-radius
feeder bend has also been used to study the effect of bend angle,
heated zone and wall thinning on residual stress distribution [2].
The numerical model for the induction-bent pipe has been used
to study the effect of key process parameters and material
properties on the residual stress distribution to provide
guidance in improving the bending process [5].
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Residual Stresses Measurements
The predicted residual stresses in the 3.5” cold-bent
large-radius and 2.5” warm-bent tight-radius feeder pipes were
compared to the neutron diffraction measurement data. The
neutron diffraction measurements were taken at the neutron
diffraction facility of the National Research Council of Canada at
Chalk River [10]. The neutron diffraction technique takes
advantage of the ability of neutrons to penetrate deep into the
material to non-destructively measure through-wall residual
stresses. With the neutron diffraction measurement technique,
three orthogonal strain components were measured at a given
location based on Bragg’s Law and the corresponding stresses
can be calculated using a Generalized Hooke’s Law. The
measurements are obtained volumetrically and provide an
average value of the measured volume. For the 3.5” large-radius
bend, the instrumental gauge volume was chosen to be
1 mm × 1 mm × 10 mm for measurements of the hoop and radial
strain components and 1 mm × 1 mm × 5 mm for axial strain
components. The instrumental gauge volume was chosen to be
1 mm × 1 mm × 5 mm for all measurements for the 2.5”
5 Copyright © 2014 by ASME and
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
tight-radius bend. The measurement uncertainty bounds for the
3.5” large-radius bend and 2.5” tight-radius bends were reported
as around ±20~30 MPa. Both the circumferential and
through-thickness residual stress distributions were measured at
certain locations of the test bends. Residual stresses on the
surface of test bends are not available from the neutron
diffraction measurements. Further details of the principles of the
neutron diffraction measurement and a typical measurement
setup were provided in [10].
There is no neutron diffraction measurement data available
for induction-bent test pipes. X-ray diffraction measurements
were carried out at an external company to determine the residual
stresses at the inner diameter (ID) surface of a 3.5” induction
bend. The 66-mm induction bend modelled was not measured
due to the lack of suitable probes for the X-ray diffraction
measurement. The X-ray diffraction measurement is limited for
the measurement of residual stresses on the surface of materials.
Both the neutron and X-ray diffraction measurements
require detailed calibrations on reference specimens. It is
recommended that the residual stresses measured by a certain
method be confirmed or supported by other method.
Residual Stress Distribution at Axial Locations
3.5” Cold-Bent Large-Radius Pipe. For the 3.5”
large-radius bend, measurements were taken at the apex section
(Location A) and Location B as shown in FIG. 5. In a previous
study [11], axial and hoop plastic strains of the bent pipe on the
outside surface were also measured. The circumferential
measurements for both bends were taken at the depth of 1 mm
from the ID and OD surfaces.
FIG. 5 MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS FOR THE 3.5”
COLD-BENT LARGE-RADIUS BEND
FIG. 6 presents the measured and predicted hoop residual
stresses at the bend apex (Location A) and Location B. Only
hoop stresses are plotted because all the observed cracks in the
tight-radius bends were axially oriented and the tensile hoop
stresses are of major concerns. Relatively low residual stresses
were measured and predicted at both locations. Good
agreement was obtained between the predicted and measured
residual stresses. The measured and predicted peak tensile
hoop stresses are close at those two locations at both ID and
OD surfaces as expected. With a large r/D ratio of 4.3, the bent
pipe has a relatively uniform trend in the deformation and
induced residual stresses at the bend region.
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada
 FIG. 8 MEASURED ID HOOP STRESSES AT AXIAL
LOCATIONS FOR A 2” TIGHT-RADIUS BEND
The 2.5” and 2” tight-radius bends are geometrically
similar. Although minor differences in residual stresses are
expected between 2” and 2.5” bends, the residual stress patterns
should be similar. FIG. 9 compares the measured hoop residual
stresses at 60º from the intrados of the 2” tight-radius bend with
the simulation results for the 2.5” tight-radius bend. Good
agreement was observed in the measured and predicted results.

FIG. 6 MEASURED AND PREDICTED HOOP STRESSES AT

LOCATIONS A AND B FOR A 3.5” LARGE-RADIUS BEND
2.5” and 2” Warm-Bent Tight-Radius Pipes. For the
2.5” tight-radius bend, measurements were taken only at the
apex section. The circumferential measurements were also
taken at the depth of 1 mm from the ID and OD surfaces. To
study the residual stress distribution within and beyond the
bend region, residual stress measurements were performed on
a 2” tight-radius bend at six axial locations (Apex, B, C, D, E,
and F), as shown in FIG. 7. FIG. 9 HOOP RESIDUAL STRESSES AT 60° FROM
INTRADOS AT AXIAL LOCATIONS
66-mm Induction-Bent Pipe. Simulation results of the
66-mm induction bend demonstrated that the predicted residual
stresses at the bending stop and start locations might be much
higher than those at the bend apex section [5]. FIG. 10 presents
the predicted effective stress along the bent pipe. As seen in
this figure, the maximum von Mises effective stress occurs
around Section B at the stop location of the bend. This finding
is consistent with the information from one of the bend
FIG. 7 MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS FOR A 2” WARM-BENT suppliers that the normal bending termination practice
TIGHT-RADIUS BEND (i.e., shutting off the induction heating, ceasing the pipe
FIG. 8 shows the ID hoop residual stresses measured at advance and pulling back the coil while maintaining water
those six locations of the 2” bend. As shown in this figure, the flow) could result in high residual stress at the stop location.
highest tensile ID hoop stress was predicted at the apex section
at around 60º from the intrados of the bend and there is a sharp
drop in the peak tensile ID hoop stress in the straight section
adjacent to the bend (from Location C to Location F).

6 Copyright © 2014 by ASME and

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms


FIG. 10 PREDICTED DISTRIBUTION OF EFFECTIVE
STRESSES IN THE 66-MM INDUCTION BEND
FIG. 11 shows the predicted residual stresses in elements,
which are at the ID surface, near the intrados and extrados, and
along the bent pipe. The axial distances presented in this figure
were calculated from the centre of elements to the free end of
the pipe, as shown in FIG. 4, based on the geometry of the
undeformed pipe. As seen in FIG. 11, high residual stresses
occur at the stop location of the bend. There are also obvious
stress variations around the start location of the bend. The
transition of residual stress distribution from the bend start
location to the stop location is relatively smooth.
FIG. 11 PREDICTED RESIDUAL STRESSES AT AXIAL
LOCATIONS ALONG THE INDUCTION BEND
7 Copyright © 2014 by ASME and
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
Residual Stresses at the Bend Apex or Stop Location
FIG. 12 presents the predicted and/or measured hoop and
axial residual stresses at the apex sections of the 3.5” cold-bent
large-radius and 2.5” warm-bent tight-radius pipes, and at the
bend stop location, i.e., Section B, of the 66-mm induction-bent
pipe. Table 2 summarizes the predicted and/or measured peak
tensile stresses, wall thinning at the extrados, and ovality of the
cross-section of the bend apex in those three types of bends.
Good agreement can be observed in the trends of the predicted
and measured residual stresses in the 3.5” and 2.5” feeder
bends. The residual stress distribution at the stop location of
the 66-mm induction bend is different from that at the apex
section of the 3.5” or 2.5” bends; therefore, the possible
cracking locations and crack growth orientations of bends
produced using different techniques might be quite different,
and should be evaluated based on the fabrication processes, as
well as the applied loads on the bends.
3.5” Cold-Bent Large-Radius Pipe. As observed in
FIG. 12 and Table 2, the predicted and measured ID tensile
hoop and axial residual stresses in the 3.5” large-radius bend
are much lower than those in the 2.5” tight-radius bend and the
66-mm induction bend. The predicted peak tensile residual
stress is 180 MPa at 90° from the intrados of the OD surface,
and is much lower than the yield strength, 320 MPa, of the base
feeder material. The measured peak tensile residual stress is
156 MPa at 15° from the intrados of the OD surface. The
differences between the predicted and measured peak tensile
residual stresses are 43 MPa and 24 MPa in the hoop and axial
directions, respectively, and are within 15% of the yield
strength, 320 MPa, of the feeder material.
2.5” Warm-Bent Tight-Radius Pipe. As seen in
FIG. 12 and Table 2, the predicted and measured peak tensile
hoop residual stresses in the 2.5” tight-radius bend are 385 MPa
and 465 MPa, respectively. Both values occur at around 60°
from the intrados of the ID surface, and are higher than the
yield strength, 320 MPa, of the base feeder material. The
difference between the predicted and measured peak tensile
hoop residual stresses, 80 MPa, is within 25% of the yield
strength. The predicted and measured peak tensile axial
residual stresses, 362 MPa and 358 MPa, are very close, and
both occur at the intrados of the ID surface.
Residual stress measurements of a tight-radius
compression-boost bend were discussed in [2]. The distribution
of residual stresses in the tight-radius compression-boost bend
was found to be quite different from that in the tight-radius
warm-bent feeder bend. The measured peak tensile hoop and
axial residual stresses in the compression-boost spare bend are
180 MPa and 380 MPa, respectively, and occur at the OD
surface of bend intrados [2]. The measurement data
demonstrate that the compression-boost technique may lead to
much lower tensile hoop and about the same level of tensile
axial residual stresses in the tight-radius bends compared to the
warm bending technique. As a cold bending process,
compression-boost bending also has the advantage in the
fabrication cost and time over the warm bending process.
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada
 66-mm Induction-Bent Pipe. X-ray diffraction strength of feeder material could significantly affect the
measurements were performed on a 3.5” induction predicted residual stresses [5].
bend (r/D = 4.3) and the measured peak ID hoop and axial
Ovality and Wall-Thickness Change
residual stresses are 430 MPa and 390 MPa, respectively. As
It was concluded that the predicted cross-sectional shape
seen in FIG. 12 and Table 2, the predicted peak ID hoop and
agrees well with the measurements for the 3.5” cold bend and
axial residual stresses in the 66-mm induction bend are
the 2.5” warm bend [3, 4]. Wall-thickness data as a function of
490 MPa and 518 MPa, respectively, and occur at the intrados
circumferential angle at the apex section were generated by the
around the stop location. The result is consistent with the fact
neutron diffraction measurements for the 3.5” and 2.5” bends.
that the 66-mm induction bend has a lower r/D ratio of 3.8
As seen in Table 2, the predicted ovality and percentage of wall
compared to the 3.5” induction bend with an r/D ratio of 4.3,
thinning at the extrados of the 3.5” cold bend are 4.6% and
and hence has higher residual stresses under similar forming
7.5%, respectively, and are close to the measured values, 3.6%
conditions. However, the predicted locations of peak values do
and 7.2%. For the 2.5” warm bend, the predicted ovality of
not match the measured results. From the measurement data
4.0%, and wall thinning of 8.3% are lower than the measured
for the 3.5” induction bend, the peak tensile ID hoop residual
data, 5.9% and 11.6%, of a test bend that was noted to have a
stress occurs at the 270º cheek and the peak axial residual stress
flatter extrados than what is typically seen in the field [4].
is near the intrados. The discrepancy might be caused by the
assumptions made on the bending process in the simulation.
The bending temperature, cooling condition and the yield

FIG. 12 HOOP AND AXIAL RESIDUAL STRESSES AT APEX SECTION OF COLD AND WARM BENDS, AND AT THE BENDING
STOP LOCATION (SECTION B) OF THE INDUCTION BEND

8 Copyright © 2014 by ASME and

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 TABLE 2
COMPARISON OF RESIDUAL STRESSES IN COLD, WARM AND INDUCTION BENDS
Yield Strength Maximum Tensile Hoop Maximum Tensile Axial
at Room Stress (MPa) Stress (MPa)
Test Pipe Bend Temperature
(MPa) Simulated Measured Simulated Measured
3.5” Cold Bend
320 150 107 180
(r/D = 4.3)
2.5” Warm Bend
320 385 465 362
(r/D = 1.5)
66-mm Induction
433 490 N/A 518
Bend (r/D = 3.8)
The predicted percentage of wall thinning of the 66-mm
induction bend was found to be close to the measured data. At
one of the induction bend suppliers, wall-thickness
measurements were performed, before and after bending, on
two 66-mm induction bends using an ultrasonic testing (UT)
technique. The measured percentages of wall thinning are
9.1% and 7.7%, respectively. The predicted percentage of wall
thinning of the 66-mm induction bend is 9.5%, and is close to
the measured data.
The feeder bends produced with cold, warm and induction
bending techniques meet the ASME code requirements on the
maximum ovality and minimum wall thinning. The predicted
and measured values of ovality for the three types of bends are
lower than 8%, and therefore meet the ASME code
requirement. The induction bend has the lowest ovality value,
1.3%, based on the simulation results. The predicted and
measured percentages of wall thinning for all the three types of
bends are lower or slightly higher than 10%. The 3.5” cold
large-radius bend has the lowest wall thinning. The predicted
and measured data demonstrates that the cold bending process
has a fairly good control of ovality and wall thinning.
It can be concluded that good agreement was found
between the predicted and measured values of wall thinning
and/or ovality of the deformed bends. The numerical models
developed can be used to optimize fabrication processes.
SUMMARY
Numerical models have been developed for the simulation
of cold bending, intrados-warm bending and induction bending
processes used or considered for the fabrication of CANDU
feeder bends. Assumptions and simplifications made for the
modeling of each bending process are discussed. A identifying the most susceptible locations for targeted crack
comprehensive review of the predicted and/or measured residual
stress distributions, ovality and wall-thickness variations of
feeder bends manufactured using the cold, warm and induction
bending processes is provided. It is concluded that:
 Numerical models can reasonably predict the trend of
residual stress distribution in cold and warm bends. The
differences between the predicted and measured peak tensile
residual stresses in cold and warm bends are within 15%
and 25% of the yield strength of the base feeder material,
9 Copyright © 2014 by ASME and
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
Wall Thinning at Ovality (%)
Extrados (%)
Simulated Measured Simulated Measured
156 7.5 7.2 4.6 3.6
358 8.3 11.6 4.0 5.9
N/A 9.5 7.7 & 9.1 1.3 N/A
respectively. No measured data was available for the
induction bend modelled for comparison.
 The cold-bent large-radius pipe has the lowest peak tensile
residual stresses that are lower than the yield strength of the
base feeder material. The warm-bent tight-radius pipe and
the induction-bent pipe have residual stresses higher than
the yield strengths of the base feeder materials. The
measurement data demonstrate that the compression-boost
technique may lead to much lower tensile hoop and about
the same level of tensile axial residual stresses in the
tight-radius bends compared to the warm bending technique.
 The three bending processes investigated in this study
resulted in different residual stress distributions and peak
magnitudes. The induction bending process may cause high
residual stresses at the stop location of the bend. Therefore,
the possible cracking location and crack growth orientation
of a bend should be evaluated based on the fabrication
process, as well as the applied loads on the bend.
 Good agreement was found in the predicted and measured
values of wall thinning and ovality of the deformed bends.
Hence, numerical models can potentially be used to
optimize fabrication processes and minimize the undesired
dimensional changes in the bent pipes.
 The cold-bent large-radius bend has the lowest wall
thinning, and the induction bending process may provide the
lowest ovality.
The findings of this work could be used for the selection of
suitable pipe bending techniques based on the characteristics of
the bending processes, the possible residual stress distributions,
and the deformed shapes of the bent pipes. The measured and
predicted residual stress data could provide guidelines for
inspections.
The modeling approaches presented in this study could be
used for the modeling of other bending processes, for example,
the compression-boost bending process. The numerical models
developed here could be used to optimize the fabrication
processes to reduce residual stresses and minimize the
undesired dimensional changes in the deformed pipes.
Isotropic material properties were assumed for the feeder
pipe in the simulation for all the three bending processes.
Material testing using actual feeder material indicates some
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada
 variation of the stress/strain curves for axial and hoop
directions. The anisotropic material model could improve the
prediction of the residual stresses and should be considered for
the future work.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to express their thanks to Victor Murphy,
Zane Walker, Hayes McDonald, and Xinjian Duan of CANDU
Energy Incorporated, and Brian Leitch and Michael Wright of
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited for their support and
valuable comments on the modeling work.

REFERENCES
1. Jin, J.C., Awad, R., and Viglasky, T., 2007 August, “Fitness
for Service Assessment of Degraded CANDU Feeder
Piping - Canadian Regulatory Expectations”, Paper
#D02/3, Transactions of the 19th International Conference
on Structural Mechanics Reactor Technology (SMiRT 19),
Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
2. Yetisir, M., and Walker, Z., 2012 July, “Residual Stress
Distributions and Guidelines for Crack Inspection in Pipe
Bends”, PVP2012-78507, 2012 ASME Pressure Vessel &
Piping Conference, Toronto, Canada.
3. Yetisir, M., Khajehpour, S., and Ding, Y., 2007 July,
“Residual Stresses in CANDU Feeder Bends - Comparison
of Measurements and Predictions”, PVP2007-26699,
2007 ASME-PVP Conference, San Antonio, Texas, USA.
4. Ding, Y. and Yetisir, M., 2008, “Residual Stress Modeling
of Warm-Bent Tight-Radius CANDU Feeder Bends”,
ASME 2008 Pressure Vessels and Piping, Chicago, Illinois.
5. Ding, Y., Yetisir, M., and McDonald, H., 2012 July,
“Residual Stress Modeling of Induction Bent Pipes”,
2012 ASME Pressure Vessel & Piping Conference,
Toronto, Canada.
6. Nayyar, M.L., 1992, Piping Handbook, Sixth Edition,
McGraw-Hill, Inc.
7. “Weldless” Pipe Spool Fabrication,
http://www.bilko-automation.com/English/products/Fabric
om/Weldless.pdf. Accessed on January 24, 2012.
8. LSTC, 2006, LS-DYNA Keyword User’s Manual,
Version 971, Livermore Software Technology Corporation.
9. Sauvé, R.G., and Metzger, D.R., 1996, “A Hybrid Explicit
Solution Technique for Quasi-Static Transients”,
PVP-Vol. 326, Computer Technology: Applications and
Methodology.
10. Yetisir, M., Rogge, R., and Donaberger, R., 2005 July, “The
Effect of Manufacturing Process on Residual Stresses of
Pipe Bends”, Proceedings from the 2005 ASME-PVP
Conference, Denver, Colorado, USA.
11. Yetisir, M., Rogge, R., and Donaberger, R., 2006 July,
“Residual Stresses of CANDU Feeder Bends - Effect of
Bend Radius”, PVP2006-ICPVT 11-93407, Proceedings
from the 2006 ASME-PVP Conference, Vancouver, BC,
Canada.

10 Copyright © 2014 by ASME and

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms