API579腐蚀计算分析.pptVIP

COADE, Inc. () API RP 579 Flaw Coverage Brittle Fracture – Section 3 General Metal Loss – Section 4 Local Metal Loss – Section 5 Pitting Corrosion – Section 6 Blisters – Section 7 Weld Misalignment and Shell Distortions – Section 8 Crack-like Flaws – Section 9 Creep Damage – Section 10 Fire Damage – Section 11 General FFS Procedures Identify flaw type and damage mechanism Check applicability and limitations of the specific flaw type procedure. Review data requirement and gather the data. Apply the assessment techniques and compare the results to the acceptance criteria. Estimate remaining life for the inspection interval. Apply remediation as appropriate. Apply in-service monitoring as appropriate. Document the results Level of Assessment Level 1 – Simplified methods using charts and conservative assumptions. Level 2 – More detail evaluations with less-conservative results. Level 3 – Uses more sophisticated methods such as FEA. * Fitness for Service IN THE CASE OF A NEW VESSEL WE CAN DESIGN IT TO A CODE IN-SERVICE VESSEL THAT IS CORRODED – WHAT DO WE DO THIS IS A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE Corrosion Corrosion Corrosion Pitting Examples of In-Service Defects Images from STATED OBJECTIVES Quantitative engineering evaluations which are performed to demonstrate the structural integrity of an in-service component containing a flaw. Section 4, 5 6 are currently available in CodeCalc (and PVElite) API 579 – Example 4.11 Pressure Vessel Information: Design Conditions = 300 psig @ 350 OF Inside (new) Diameter = 48 inches D Nominal Thickness = 0.75 inches Uniform Metal Loss = 0 inches (no general corrosion) Future Corrosion Allowance = 0.10 inches FCA Material = SA 516 Grade 70 Joint Efficiency = 0.85 PERFORM THE IN