See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/265935470

Elastic and Plastic Design of Mitred Bends

Article · January 2002

CITATIONS READS
5 338

1 author:

A.M. (Nol) Gresnigt

Delft University of Technology
62 PUBLICATIONS   658 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Local buckling of spiral-welded steel tubes View project

All content following this page was uploaded by A.M. (Nol) Gresnigt on 13 March 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Proceedings of The Twelfth (2002) International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference
Kitakyushu, Japan, May 26 –31, 2002
Copyright © 2002 by The International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers
ISBN 1-880653-58-3 (Set); ISSN 1098-6189 (Set)

Elastic and Plastic Design of Mitred Bends

A.M. (Nol) Gresnigt
Delft University of Technology
Delft, The Netherlands

ABSTRACT β Total bend angle in a multi - mitred bend

σx Stress in longitudinal direction
Mitred bends were and partly still are the standard pipe bends in large σy Stress in circumferential direction
diameter pipelines for water transport in The Netherlands. Other symbols are explained in the text where they first appear.
Especially in situations with imposed bending, the deformation
capacity is important. Failure modes in static loading are excessive INTRODUCTION
ovalisation, local buckling and cracking due to insufficient ductile
behaviour at the girth weld zone. Pipelines, offshore and onshore, are subjected to combinations of
In the paper, the results are presented of a theoretical and experimental various loads, such as internal or external pressure, surrounding soil,
research programme of mitred bends loaded by combinations of bending, normal force, shear force and sometimes torsion and local
bending moment and internal pressure. It is demonstrated that the loading, e.g. due to support reactions. In many cases, the deformation
analytical models that were developed for smooth bends can be used as capacity is of special importance. Examples are offshore pipelines
a basis for the analysis of mitred bends. Design rules for limit state during installation, pipelines on uneven seabed and onshore pipelines
design of mitred bends are presented as well. due to differences in the settlement of the soil along the pipeline. The
latter situation is very important in The Netherlands, where many rivers
KEY WORDS: Pipeline; bend; mitred bend; plastic design; deformation and canals have to be crossed by pipelines. The highest water level
capacity. occurring in such watercourses is often above the level of the adjacent
land. Dykes are needed to prevent flooding. Because excavation work
NOMENCLATURE in dykes is normally not allowed, most pipeline profiles correspond to
the existing cross section of the dyke. After laying, the pipelines were
Du External diameter given a covering of clay and top soil, see Fig. 1.
D Average diameter: D = Du-t In the last ten years usually directional drilling techniques are applied
∆Dv Change in the vertical diameter (in the plane of the bend) where the pipeline crosses the dyke and watercourse underneath.
EI Flexural stiffness of a straight pipe
EIbe Flexural stiffness of a bend
ix, iy Stress intensity factors for P = 0
ixp, iyp Stress intensity factors for P not = 0
k, kp Flexural stiffness factor for P = 0 and P = P respectively
k*, kp* Reduced value of k, kp respectively
Mpbe Maximum moment in the bend
Mp Plastic moment: Mp = 4r2tσe
P Difference in pressure between inside and outside of the
pipeline: P = Pi - Pu
R Radius of non-loaded bend Fig. 1: Pipeline crossing over a dyke.
r Average (or mean) radius r = D/2
S Distance between individual mitres Application of the theory of elasticity for the analysis of pipeline
t Pipe wall thickness crossings has proven to be inadequate for a good insight into the actual
We Elastic section modules strength and deformation properties and thus into the actual structural
2α Angle of the not loaded bend safety. When in the early 1970s the theory of elasticity was applied in a
2∆α Change of 2α re-analysis of some pipeline crossings already in existence, several of
them were found not to meet the requirements.

90
Therefore, research was carried out, resulting in a new method for the
design and analysis of buried pipelines, which is based on limit state
design. The theory of plasticity was introduced. By means of this new
method, it could be established that the majority of the pipeline
crossings was safe. This resulted in considerable savings, as there was
no necessity of replacement. The main results of the research on
straight pipes and smooth bends were presented in several publications
(e.g. Gresnigt, 1986, 1995). In the present paper, the results of the
research into the structural behaviour of mitred bends are presented.
Mitred bends are often used in water transportation pipelines where
diameters are relatively large and pressures relatively low (e.g. less than
10 bar). Many existing crossings of water pipelines with dykes and
watercourses contain such mitred bends. Compared to smooth bends,
they are less expensive. It should be noted, however, that the price
difference nowadays is smaller than some decades ago.
It appears that, to a great extent, the behaviour of mitred bends is
similar to the behaviour of smooth bends. Therefore, many of the
models for analysis and design developed for smooth bends can be used
as a basis for mitred bends. As in smooth bends, mitred bends are less
stiff than straight pipes of the same length and diameter and wall
thickness. Further, considerable ovalisation may occur, see Fig. 2.
In the next section, an overview is given of the existing design rules at
the start of the research programme. Much attention is paid to the
similarities with smooth bend behaviour. Prerequisites and parameters
for the application of the smooth bend design models for the analysis of
mitred bends are identified. Then the development of analytical models
for mitred bends is given, followed by a summary of the design rules
resulting from the research program. Also an overview of the main
results of the experimental testing programme is presented.
ANALYTICAL MODELS IN THE ELASTIC RANGE
Overview of existing design models
Much research has been carried out into the structural behaviour of
mitred bends. In WRC bulletin No. 208, Rodabough presented an
overview of the research carried out till 1975 (Rodabough, 1975). He
also gave background to the design rules in ANSI/ASME B31.8 (ANSI,
1979).
In ANSI/ASME B31.8, a distinction is made between "widely spaced"
and "closely spaced" mitred bends (Fig. 4). The distinction is that in
closely spaced bends the individual bends interact and therefore the
assembly of the bend, short straight pipe and bend should be considered
as one bend. In widely spaced bends no interaction is assumed. If
S < r (1 − tan α ) , then the bend is assumed to be closely spaced.

Fig. 2: Deformations in a mitred bend due to bending moment M.

The bending direction in this figure is called "positive bending".

In case of positive bending (Fig. 2) a flattening of the cross section

occurs. In case of bending leading to a decrease of the bend angle Fig. 4: Widely spaced and closely spaced mitred bends.
(called negative bending), the ovalisation gives an increase in the
For the bending stiffness the following rules apply (ANSI, 1979)
vertical cross section. The increase/decrease in curvature and the
EI
flattening or increase of the vertical diameter lead to different EI be = (1)
behaviour in positive and negative bending, see Fig. 3. k
1,52
k = 5/6 (2)
λ
t⋅R
λ= 2 (3)
r
For closely spaced bends:
S < r (1 + tan α ) (4)
S
R = cot α (5)
2
For widely spaced bends:
S ≥ r (1 + tgα ) (6)
r
R = (1 + cot α ) (7)
Fig. 3: Bending moment - Change of bend angle diagram of a mitred 2
bend in positive bending and in negative bending. The length where the reduced stiffness EIbe applies is 2ℓ1 (Fig. 4):
2l 1 = R ⋅ 2α (8)
In Fig. 3, line 'a' represents the behaviour of a straight pipe of the same
diameter, wall thickness and length as the mitred bend. The line 'b' is For the maximum stress in longitudinal direction:
the linear elastic solution as given in the next section. As in smooth M
σx = ⋅ ix (9)
bends, also in mitred bends the plastic moment capacity depends on the We
bending direction (Gresnigt, 1995). For in plane bending:
Another interesting phenomenon is that the deformation capacity in 0,9
bending is considerably greater than of a straight pipe. As indicated ix = 2 / 3 i x ≥ 1,0 (10)
before, this is an important issue in buried pipelines in settlement areas. λ

91
For out of plane bending: Kitching and Bond (1970) have compared their analysis with test
0,75 results and with ANSI rules. Table 1 gives the main data of their test
ix = 2 / 3 i x ≥ 1,0 (11) specimens.
λ
Apart from stresses in longitudinal direction also stresses in
Table 1: Test specimens as tested by Kitching and Bond (1970).
circumferential direction occur:
M
σy = ⋅iy (12) Bend t R1 r r R
We Specimen λ1 = = 1
angle β r2 R1 t r λ1
It is noted that the real elastic stresses are about twice those given by
ANSI. These maximum stresses are local (peak stresses). They will α = 15°
cause local yielding at relatively low bending moments. Owing to the 3 ⋅ 2α =
R1
ductility of the steel, redistribution of stresses will occur and the 90° 0,177 0,343 16,5
bending moment capacity is much greater than the moment at first β = 90°
yielding. On the basis of this and on the basis of experimental tests (e.g. a.
Markl, 1952) it was decided to adopt the present rules in ANSI. α = 22,5°
In case of internal pressure, the resistance to ovalisation increases and R1 2 ⋅ 2α =
therefore also the bending stiffness increases. In that case the factor k in 90° 0,1695 0,360 16,4
Eq. (2) should be replaced by kp: β = 90°
k b.
kp = 7/3 1/ 3
(13) α=11,25°
P r R 4 ⋅ 2α =
1+ 6     R1
E t r 90° 0,0483 0,446 46,4
And the stress intensity factor ixp and iyp become: β = 90°
c.
ix
i xp = 5/ 2 2/3
(14) α = 22,5°
P r R 4 ⋅ 2α =
1 + 3,25     0,1042 0,3075 31,2
E t r 180°
iy d. R1 β = 180°
i yp = 5/2 2/3
(15)
P r R
1 + 3,25     It is noted that the values for λ1 and R1 in Table 1 differ from those
E t r given by ANSI, Eq. (3) and (5), see Table 2.
In WRC bulletin No. 208, (Rodabough, 1975), Rodabough
demonstrates that the theoretical models of Jones, Kitching and Bond Table 2: Values for r/R, k and ℓ1/r according to Eq. (5), (2) and (8).
give the best fit of test results. Their analysis mainly follows the longer
existing analysis for smooth bends (e.g. Kitching and Bond, 1970, r 1,52 l1 R
Bond and Kitching, 1972), see Fig. 5. Specimen λ k= = α
R λ5 / 6 r r
a 0,431 0,141 7,80 0,61
b 0,604 0,101 10,3 0,65
c 0,446 0,0483 19,0 0,44
d 0,610 0,0525 17,9 0,64

In Fig. 6 experimental and theoretical stress distributions according to

Kitching and Bond (1970) are given for specimen 'a'.

Table 3 gives an overview of the main test results together with the
ANSI code values and the values according to Kitching and Bond. The
2 x code column refers to the above discussion on the peak stresses. It
confirms what was said before, namely that the peak stresses are about
twice those in the ANSI-code.

Table 3: Overview of the main test results together with the ANSI
code values and the values according to Kitching and Bond.

Flexibility factor Stress intensification factor

Specimen Present Experi- Present 2 * Experi-
Code
analysis ment analysis Code ment
a 8,70 7,80 7,95 7,10 6,60 5,10
b 7,80 10,30 8,70 8,40 8,40 8,60
c 34,8 19,0 37,8 16,30 13,50 -
d 12,7 17,9 14,4 12,60 12,80 10,50
Fig. 5: Mitred bend and similar smooth bend (Fig. 1 in Kitching and
Bond, 1970).

92
From Table 3 it appears that the flexibility factor according to ANSI
does not fit very well with the analysis of Kitching and Bond, nor with
the experiments. The stress intensity factors show better agreement if
for ANSI "2 x code" is taken.
From the comparison with the measured values in Table 3 it appears
that the "smooth bend theory" with the modification for the influence of
the tangent pipes on the stiffness factor in Eqs. (16) and (17) gives
better results than ANSI.
Also for single mitred bends as tested in the present research programme
the "smooth bend" theory (Gresnigt, 1995) gives good results. As an
example, one of the tests on mitred bends (Gresnigt, 1986c) is calculated
below, see also the section on experimental verification later in this paper.

Fig. 7: Single mitred bend.

Du = 152 mm
t = 1,65 mm
r = ( 152-1,65 )/ 2 = 75,2 mm
2α = 19 o
r
R = (1 + cot α ) = 262 mm
2
r
l 1 = (1 + tan α ) = 43,3 mm
2
tR 1,65 ⋅ 262
λ= 2 = = 0,0764
r 75,2 2
1,65
k= = 21,6
λ
t 1,65
γ = 1200 = 1200 = 125 o
Fig. 6: Experimental and theoretical stress distributions for test Du 152
specimen 'a' (Kitching and Bond, 1970). 2
 γ − 2α 
k * = 1 + (k − 1) 1 −   = 11,9 (18)
Application of the rules for smooth bends  γ 
As stated before, the behaviour of mitred bends shows great similarity According to ANSI:
to the behaviour of smooth bends. Below, results are given for the 1,52
flexibility factor calculation according to the models for smooth bends k = 5 / 6 = 12,9 (19)
λ
as proposed by Gresnigt (1986a, 1995).
With the "bend analysis" it is calculated:
t
γ = 1200 (16) k = 22,62 and k * = 12,94 (20)
Du
In this case with a single mitred bend, the ANSI result agrees well with
2 the "bend analysis" and with test results.
γ − β 
k * = 1 + ( k − 1) 1 −   (17)
 γ  Finally, some remarks about the definition of R are given. For the
In k* according to Eq. (17), the influence of the tangents of the bend on rotation angle 2∆α between points A and B in Fig. 7, it follows:
the bend stiffness is taken into account (Gresnigt, 1995). Ml 1 Ml 1
2 ∆α = (2 + 2k *) = ⋅ 25,8 (21)
EI EI
Table 4: Comparison of flexibility factors for test specimens a, b, c, d. If for the angle R = 2 ⋅ 262 = 524 mm was taken instead of R = 262
mm, it follows:
Speci Du k = 1,65 / λ Smooth Bend tR 1,65 ⋅ 524
γ λ1 λ= 2 = = 0,1528
men t r 75,2 2
k k* k k*
1,65
a 34 206 o 0,177 9,32 7,88 9,82 8,29 k= = 10,8
λ
b 34 206 o 0,1695 9,74 8,22 10,25 8,64
c 94 124 o 0,0483 34,16 32,90 35,86 34,53 t 1,65
γ = 1200 = 1200 = 125o
d 63 151 o 0,1042 15,84 15,84 16,61 16,61 Du 152

93
 2 2
 125 − 19   γ − 2α 
k * = 1 + (10,8 − 1) 1 −   = 6,2 k * = 1 + (k − 1) 1 −   (33)
 125   γ 
Ml 1 Ml 1 1,8
2 ∆α = (4k *) = ⋅ 24,8 (22) ix = i y = (34)
EI EI λ2 / 3
It appears that with the "smooth bend" theory, the rotation 2∆α is rather In case of internal pressure:
insensitive of the value of R. k*
This is also true for the ovalisation, because the ovalisation is almost kp * = 7/3 1/ 3
(35)
linear with ∆α / α . P r R
1+ 6    
For R = 262 mm it follows: E t  r
∆α Ml 1 k * Ml 1 11,9 i x (i x = i y )
= ⋅ = ⋅ (23) i xp = i yp = (36)
α EI α EI α 5/2 2/3
P r R
For R = 524 mm it follows: 1 + 3,25    
E t r
∆α M 2l 1 k * Ml 1 12, 4
= ⋅ = ⋅ (24)
α EI α EI α Multi-angle mitred bend with S>2ℓ1
For the stress intensification this is not true, because of the local nature
of the stress peaks. For the stress intensification factors it is
recommended to apply:
1,8
ix = i y = (25)
λ2 / 3
It is noted that the maximum stresses in longitudinal and
circumferential directions are about the same (Kitching and Bond,
1970). In smooth bends, however, the maximum stresses in longitudinal
direction are about half of those in circumferential direction. The
reason for this difference is, as mentioned before, the geometrical
situation at the intersection of the pipe segments in mitred bends.

Design rules for the elastic range

The following design rules were proposed and accepted for the NEN Fig. 9: Multi-angle mitred bend with S > 2ℓ1.
3650 pipeline standard (NEN 3650, 1992).
The scope for these rules is as follows: If there is no interaction between the individual mitres, then the rules
o
for single mitred bends of the previous section are to be followed.
2α ≤ 25 (26) Whether or not such interaction occurs, follows from the following two
R calculations.
≥ 2,5 (27)
r (a) Calculate the rotation angle between A and B, assuming individual
mitres.
Single mitred bends
a M
ϕ AB = ( 4k * l 1 + 2 S − 4l 1 ) (37)
EI
(b) Calculate the rotation angle between A and B(Fig.9), taking the
whole length as one bend:
S
R* = cot α (38)
2
tR *
λ= (39)
r2
1,65
k= (40)
Fig. 8: Single mitred bend. λ
t
r γ = 1200 (41)
R= (1 + cot α ) (28) Du
2
r 2
l 1 = (1 + tan α ) (29)  γ − 4α 
2 k * = 1 + (k − 1) 1 −   (42)
 γ 
t⋅R
λ= (30) M
r2 ϕ bAB = (k * ⋅ 2S ) (43)
EI
1,65
k= (31) a
If ϕ AB > ϕ bAB , then it is assumed that there is no interaction. The rules
λ
for single mitres (a) are to be followed. In the other case the above rules
t
γ = 1200 (32) for the bend considering it as one bend (b) must be followed. This holds
Du for the flexibility factor k* and for the ovalisation.

94
For the stress intensity factors, however, in all cases the rules for the Therefore, the limit state values for the ovalisation have been reduced,
single mitred bend are to be followed. compared to the smooth bend values:
- Positive bending:
Multi-angle mitred bend with S < 2ℓ1 ∆Dlimit = 0,075Du (50)
- Negative bending and out of plane bending:
∆Dlimit = 0,060 Du (51)
For smooth bends these limits were set on 0,15 Du.
The main reason for a somewhat smaller value for negative bending is
that at negative bending the local distortion is relatively much larger
than at positive bending.
For the calculation of the strains in circumferential direction (limit state
strain) the same procedures are to be followed as for smooth bends.
For the strains in longitudinal direction the same value as for the
Fig. 10: Multi-angle mitred bend with S < 2ℓi. circumferential strain should be taken (this is more than in smooth
bends).
The rules according to (b) above are to be followed. The limit values for the angular rotation follow from the relation
For ix and iy: between the ovalisation and the angular rotation, see also the test results
1,8 in the next section.
ix = i y = 2 / 3 (44)
λ
with EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION
tR Tests and test specimens
λ= (45)
r2 In order to reduce costs it was decided to carry out tests on reduced
Internal /external pressure: scale specimens (scale factor about 1:4 to 1:8). Because suitable
Hoop stress intrados: standard pipe in diameters of 150 – 200 mm was not available, it was
Pr R − r /3 decided to manufacture the pipes from thin steel plate 1,65 mm (hot
σ hoop = ⋅ (46) rolled). The pipes were rolled and welded (longitudinal seam) in a local
t R−r
Hoop stress extrados: manufacturing shop. The standard length was 1000 mm.
Two diameters were used:
Pr R + r /3
σ hoop = ⋅ (47) a. 152-1,65 mm, giving a Du/t ratio of 92.
t R+r b. 122-1,65 mm, giving a Du/t ratio of 74.
For R the smallest value of
r Provided that the laws of similarity and scaling down are duly taken into
R = (1 + cot α ) (48)
2 account, the conclusions drawn from tests on reduced scale specimens are
and validly applicable also to full-scale pipes.
R = S ⋅ cot α (49) Since the goal of the tests was the study of the bending moment -
should be taken. curvature relationship, the bending moment - ovalisation relationship and
in this case less important, the local buckling behaviour, the main
Soil pressure: The same Eqs. as for smooth bends can be applied attention was focussed on the geometry such as Du/t ratio, bend angle and
(Gresnigt, 1986, 1995). length. Also important are the stress-strain diagram and the initial
imperfections, such as out of roundness and "high - lows" at welds.
Influence of ovalisation and bending direction, out of plane bending:
Here also the same Eqs. can be applied as for smooth bends. The D/t ratios in the tests are at the top range of what is applied in
practice. This choice was made because of the fact that thin walled pipes
and bends are more sensitive to instability phenomena like local buckling.
DESIGN OF MITRED BENDS IN THE PLASTIC RANGE
As indicated in the previous section, mitred bends behave similarly to Measured values for the yield stress in the steel plate before rolling it
smooth bends. Therefore it was proposed to use the same models for into a pipe varied between 355 N/mm2 and 395 N/mm2. The average
the plastic range of mitred bends as for smooth bends, with some value was 375 N/mm2. For the tensile strength these values were 410
modifications. In this section attention is paid to the prerequisites under N/mm2 till 450 N/mm2 with an average of 435 N/mm2. Fig. 12 gives a
which the design rules for smooth bends as published before can be characteristic view of the measured stress strain relationship. All
applied. For the present paper it goes too far to go into detail in those specimens were taken from the longitudinal direction.
models. Reference is made to Gresnigt, 1986, 1995.
The geometrical imperfections were greater than what is normally
According to the Eqs. for the elastic range, the bend radius equals R. accepted in practice. This means that in practice the behaviour can be
expected to be better than in the tests, especially for the local
The special geometry of mitred bends requires a more severe limit on deformations at the welds, because of greater weld imperfections such as
the ovalisation than with smooth bends. In the tests that were carried "high - lows" in the test specimens than in practice.
out (next section) it appeared that at large ovalisation the ovalisation
concentrates on the centre of the mitre. In this respect also the weld It is noted that aspects such as deformation capacity of the pipe wall in
geometry and the possibly lesser ductility of the weld metal and heat- tension (limit state cracking) could not be studied with these tests. The
affected zones are important. Some "high - lows" and other shape weld geometry, the weld material properties and the possible weld
deviations may cause extra distortion and local strains. discontinuities were not representative for real pipes.

95
 Test set-up
Figs 13 to 16 show the test set-up together with the measuring
equipment for the change in the rotation between two cross sections at
400 mm from the centre of the mitred bend. Displacements were
measured with dial gauges. In the centre, the ovalisation was measured
as well as the vertical displacement of the centre cross section, see Fig.
14.

Fig. 11: Set-up of the test specimens: ℓ1 = ca 500 mm, ℓ2 = ca 1000

mm, ℓ = 1496 mm (Du = 152 mm), ℓ = 1504 mm (Du = 122 mm).

Fig. 11 shows the set-up of the test specimens. The length ℓ was
sufficient to avoid any influence of the end plates. An estimate for such
influence length is ℓ':
πDu Du π ⋅152 152
ℓ' = = = 572 mm (52)
8 t 8 1,65
This means that the chosen length was quite sufficient.

In Table 5 an overview is given of the tests that were carried out,

together with the principal dimensions (and characteristics) of the test
specimens. Apart from the two different diameters also two different
bend angles (2α = 13,5° and 19°), two different bending directions (positive
and negative bending) and two different pressures (P = 0 and P= 7 bar) were
chosen, giving a total of 16 tests.

Table 5: Test specimens (Pos. = positive; Neg. = negative bending). Fig. 13: Photograph of the test rig with test specimen 65 before
testing, positive bending.
Test Du 2α Bending P R λ k, kp iy, iyp
(mm) (degrees) (bar) (mm)

51 152 13,5 Pos. 0 355 0,1036 10,05 8,15

52 152 13,5 Pos. 7 355 0,1036 8,05 5,70
53 152 13,5 Neg. 0 355 0,1036 10,05 8,15
54 152 13,5 Neg. 7 355 0,1036 8,05 5,70
65 152 19,0 Pos. 0 262 0,0765 12,95 10,00
66 152 19,0 Pos. 7 262 0,0765 10,55 7,40
55 152 19,0 Neg. 0 262 0,0765 12,95 10,00
56 152 19,0 Neg. 7 262 0,0765 10,55 7,40
57 122 13,5 Pos. 0 284 0,1294 8,35 7,05
59 122 13,5 Pos. 7 284 0,1294 7,25 5,80
61 122 13,5 Neg. 0 284 0,1294 8,35 7,05
62 122 13,5 Neg. 7 284 0,1294 7,25 5,80
58 122 19,0 Pos. 0 210 0,0957 10,75 8,60
60 122 19,0 Pos. 7 210 0,0957 9,50 7,15
63 122 19,0 Neg. 0 210 0,0957 10,75 8,60
64 122 19,0 Neg. 0 210 0,0957 10,75 8,60

Fig. 14: Details of the measuring equipment. The applied measuring

equipment made it possible to measure the total diameter change and its
division in the change of the diameter of the upper half of the cross
section and of the lower half.
Fig. 12: Measured stress-strain relationship.

96
 Fig. 18: Detail of test specimen 64 after testing, negative bending.
Local deformations are much smaller than in positive bending.

Test results
Figs. 20, 21 and 22 give measured test results together with calculated
results with the present analytical models for test 51 (positive bending).
Figs. 23, 24 and 25 give measured test results together with calculated
results with the present analytical models for test 53 (negative
bending). Calculations were carried out with the computer programme
Fig. 15: Photograph of the test rig with test specimen 65 after testing,
"Bend" (Gresnigt, 1995).
positive bending. Note the change in the diameter in the mid-section
(ovalisation) and the change of the bend angle to be recognised by the
In the figures also the limit values for φ (Fie) and ∆D are indicated as
change in the angles of the thin bars welded to the side of the pipe, see
given in the previous section. It can be seen that the limit values are
also Figs. 13 and 14.
much smaller than the actual deformations at the end of the tests. The
limit values were chosen such that at those stages a local deformation
as indicated in Fig. 17 does not occur yet.

The bending moment capacity in test 51 (positive bending) was much

lower than in test 53 (negative bending), see also figure 3. The failure
mode for test 51 was excessive ovalisation in the mid-section. The
failure mode for test 53 was local buckling at one of the girth welds at
about 500 mm from the mid-section. The high bending moment in
combination with the high-lows in the welds caused this local buckling.
As stated before, these welds were not representative for girth welds in
practice.

400 400 M C G M
E
E
C G M 400 400
M

Fig. 19: Positive bending for test 51 (left) and negative bending for
test 53 (right). In both tests D= 152 mm, t=1,65 mm P=0, 2α= 13,5°.

10000

9000
Fig. 16: Photograph of the test rig with test specimen 64, negative 8000
Mesured values
bending. 7000
Calculated with "Bend"
M (Nm)

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0
0,00 0,01 0,02 0,03 0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10

Test 51 Fie between C - G (rad)

Fig. 20: Moment-angular rotation diagram for test 51, together with
the calculated diagram with the present analytical model. Also
Fig. 17: Detail of test specimen 66 after testing, positive bending. indicated with arrow, the limit value for the angular rotation ϕ-limit
Note the local deformation at the lower cross section. (Fie-limit).

97
 10000 10000

9000 9000
Mesured values
8000 8000
Calculated with "Bend"
7000 7000
M (Nm)

6000

M (Nm)
6000
5000 5000
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 Mesured values
1000
Calculated with "Bend"
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Test 51 Delta D in mid section (mm) Test 53 Delta D in mid section (mm)

Fig. 21: Moment-ovalisation diagram for test 51, measured and Fig. 24: Moment-ovalisation diagram for test 53, measured and
calculated results. Also indicated with arrow, the ∆D-limit (Delta D- calculated results. Also indicated with arrow, the ∆D-limit (Delta D-
limit). limit).
0,10 0,10

0,09 0,09

0,08 0,08

0,07 0,07

Fie (rad)
Fie (rad)

0,06 0,06

0,05 0,05

0,04 0,04

0,03 0,03

0,02 0,02
Mesured values Mesured values
0,01 0,01
Calculated with "Bend" Calculated with "Bend"
0,00 0,00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Test 51 Delta D in mid section (mm) Test 53 Delta D in mid section (mm)

Fig. 22: Relation between angular rotation and ovalisation for test 51, Fig. 25: Relation between angular rotation and ovalisation for test 53,
measured and calculated results. Also indicated with arrows the ∆D- measured and calculated results. Also indicated with arrows the ∆D-
limit (Delta D-limit) and ϕ-limit (Fie-limit). limit (Delta D-limit) and ϕ-limit (Fie-limit).

10000 Deformation capacity.

9000
The limits according to elastic design have been calculated and
8000 compared with those according to plastic design on the basis of the
7000 present analytical models, see Table 6.
M (Nm)

6000
Table 6: Elastic design versus plastic design
5000

4000 Du P 2α φeℓ-lim φpℓ-lim

Test iy, iyp φpℓ/φeℓ
3000 (mm) (bar) (degr) (rad) (rad)

2000 51 152 0 13,5 8,15 0,0045 0,026 5,8

Mesured values
1000 52 152 7 13,5 5,70 0,0055 0,026 4,7
Calculated with "Bend"
0
53 152 0 13,5 8,15 0,0045 0,026 5,8
0,00 0,01 0,02 0,03 0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,10 54 152 7 13,5 5,70 0,0055 0,026 4,7
Test 53 Fie between C - G (rad) 65 152 0 19,0 10,00 0,0045 0,031 6,9
66 152 7 19,0 7,40 0,0055 0,031 5,6
Fig. 23: Moment-angular rotation diagram for test 53, together with 55 152 0 19,0 10,00 0,0045 0,029 6,4
the calculated diagram with the present analytical model. Also 56 152 7 19,0 7,40 0,0055 0,029 5,3
indicated with arrow, the limit value for the angular rotation ϕ-limit 57 122 0 13,5 7,05 0,0050 0,030 6,0
(Fie-limit). The failure mode was local buckling at a girth weld at 500 59 122 7 13,5 5,80 0,0060 0,030 5,0
mm from the mid-section. 61 122 0 13,5 7,05 0,0050 0,033 6,6
62 122 7 13,5 5,80 0,0060 0,033 5,5
58 122 0 19,0 8,60 0,0050 0,033 6,6
60 122 7 19,0 7,15 0,0060 0,033 5,5
63 122 0 19,0 8,60 0,0050 0,034 6,8
64 122 0 19,0 8,60 0,0050 0,034 6,8

98
From Table 6 it becomes clear that the deformation capacity according to
plastic design is much greater than according to elastic design, see φpℓ/φeℓ
in the last column.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The present analytical models enable a good description of the load
deformation behaviour of statically loaded mitred bends in the elastic
range as well as in the plastic range. There is a good agreement
between test results and the analytical models.
2. The behaviour of mitred bends is similar to the behaviour of smooth
bends. Therefore, the analytical models that were developed for
smooth bends have been used as a basis for the present models for
mitred bends.
3. The strength and deformation capacity of mitred bends is much larger
than can be calculated with elastic theory. The present plastic analysis
models enable the calculation of the deformation behaviour until a
limit state occurs.
4. The behaviour of mitred bends depends very much on the bending
direction. In case of "negative bending", the bending moment can be
so large that yielding of the adjacent tangents will occur. Local
buckling in the vicinity of the mitred bend may be the governing
failure mode.
5. An obvious prerequisite for the utilisation of the present models is, of
course, that the pipe material is ductile, not only in the plate material,
but also in the welds. In view of the strain concentrations at the centre
of the mitres, it is important to ensure overmatching weld metal. This
will lead to less strain in the less ductile weld zones. It is noted that
this overmatching requirement is a general requirement for welds, but
in this case of extra importance.
6. The rules as presented in this paper were used in NEN 3650 by the
Dutch Standards Committee for pipelines.
7. For practical application, the "Bend" computer model can be used
(Diana Manual, 2001).
REFERENCES
ANSI/ASME B 31.8 (1979). "Liquid Petroleum Transportation Piping
Systems," The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New
York.
Bond, MP and Kitching, R (1971a). "Multi-mitred and single-mitred
bends subjected to internal pressure," Int. Journal of Mech. Sci.,
Vol. 13, pp. 471 – 488.
99
View publication stats
Bond, MP and Kitching, R (1971b). "Stress and flexibility factors for
multi-mitred bends subjected to out-of-plane bending," Journal of
Strain Analysis, Vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 213 – 225.
Bond, MP and Kitching, R (1972). "Stress and flexibility factors for
multi-mitred pipe bends subjected to internal pressure combined
with external loadings," Journal of Strain Analysis, Vol. 7, no. 2,
pp. 97 – 108.
Gresnigt, AM (1986a). "Plastic design of buried steel pipelines in
settlement areas," HERON, Vol 31, No. 4, Delft.
Gresnigt, AM (1986b). "Design rules for mitred bends in buried steel
pipelines," (in Dutch). IBBC-TNO report BI-86-114, Delft.
Gresnigt, AM (1986c). "Test results of tests on mitred bends and
comparison with the design rules," (in Dutch). IBBC-TNO report
BI-86-124, Delft.
Gresnigt, AM and Foeken, RJ van (1995). "Strength and deformation
capacity of bends in pipelines," International Journal of Offshore and
Polar Engineering. Vol. 5, Number 4, December 1995.
Jones, N and Kitching, R (1966). "A theoretical study of in-plane
bending of a single unreinforced mitred bend," Journal of Strain
Analysis, Vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 264 – 276.
Jones, N (1966). "On the design of pipe-bends," Nuclear Engineering
and Design 4 (1966), pp. 399 - 405. North-Holland Publishing
Comp., Amsterdam.
Kitching, R (1965). "Mitre bends subjected to in-plane bending
moments," Int. Journal of Mech. Sci., Vol. 7, pp. 551 – 575, 1965.
Kitching, R and Bond, MP (1970). "Flexibility and stress factors for
mitred bends under in-plane loading," Int. Journal of Mech. Sci.,
Vol. 12, pp. 267 – 285.
Markl, ARC (1952). "Fatigue tests of piping components,"
Transactions of the ASME. April 1952, pp. 287 - 303.
NEN 3650, (1992). "Requirements for steel pipeline transportation
systems," Nederlands Normalisatie Instituut (Dutch Standards
Institute), Delft.
Rodabaugh, EC, and George HH (1957). "Effect of internal pressure on
flexibility and stress intensification factors of curved pipe or welding
elbows," Transactions of the ASME, Vol 79.
Rodabaugh, EC (1975). "Review of data on mitre joints in piping to
establish maximum angularity for fabrication of girth butt welds,"
Welding Research Council Bulletin, no. 208, August 1975.
Sobieszczanski, Jaroslaw. (1970). "Strength of a pipe mitred bend,"
Journal of Engineering for Industry. November 1970, pp. 767- 73.
Diana Manual. (2001). TNO - Building and Construction Research, Delft.