【24h】

FRACTURE ASSESSMENT OF THROUGH-WALL AND SURFACE CRACKED PIPES BY BS 7910 AND API 579 ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES-A COMPARATIVE STUDY

机译:BS 7910和API 579评估程序对穿墙和表面裂纹管道的断裂评估-对比研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Fracture assessment procedures such as BS 7910 and API 579 are formulated based on the Fracture Mechanics concept for assessing integrity of structures such as pipelines, pressure vessels, etc. In the current study those procedures are applied to through-wall and surface cracked pipe geometry under four-point bending. The predicted maximum tolerable applied loads are then compared with pipe full-scale fracture testing results published by Miura et al (2002). Other assessment schemes namely, GE/EPRI, Net-section plastic collapse, LBB.NRC and finally LBB.ENG2, as reported in the same publication are also included in the current paper for sake of comparison. The comparative study showed that BS 7910 and API 579 predict similar maximum tolerable load for through-wall pipes but different value for surface-cracked pipes. Difference in predictions for the latter geometry is owing to the use of different stress intensity factor/reference stress solution by BS 7910 than API 579. However, both procedures provided conservative results compared with the experimental data as well as other engineering routes mentioned in Miura et al (2002).
机译:断裂评估程序(例如BS 7910和API 579)是基于断裂力学概念制定的,用于评估管道,压力容器等结构的完整性。在当前研究中,这些程序适用于在四点弯曲。然后将预测的最大可承受外加载荷与Miura等人(2002)发布的管道满量程断裂测试结果进行比较。为了便于比较,本白皮书中还包括了其他评估方案,即GE / EPRI,净截面塑性破坏,LBB.NRC和最后的LBB.ENG2。对比研究表明,BS 7910和API 579预测穿墙管的最大可容许载荷相似,而表面开裂的管则具有不同的值。后一种几何形状的预测存在差异是由于BS 7910使用了与API 579不同的应力强度因子/参考应力解决方案。但是,与实验数据以及Miura等人提到的其他工程路线相比,这两种方法都提供了保守的结果等(2002)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号