何东升, 张鹏, 张丽萍. API 579与B31G剩余强度评价的保守性分析[J]. 油气储运, 2008, 27(1): 36-40. DOI: 10.6047/j.issn.1000-8241.2008.01.011
引用本文: 何东升, 张鹏, 张丽萍. API 579与B31G剩余强度评价的保守性分析[J]. 油气储运, 2008, 27(1): 36-40. DOI: 10.6047/j.issn.1000-8241.2008.01.011
HE Dongsheng, ZHANG Peng, . Conservative Analysis on the Remaining Strength Assessment of Corroded Pipeline for ASME B31G and API 579[J]. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2008, 27(1): 36-40. DOI: 10.6047/j.issn.1000-8241.2008.01.011
Citation: HE Dongsheng, ZHANG Peng, . Conservative Analysis on the Remaining Strength Assessment of Corroded Pipeline for ASME B31G and API 579[J]. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2008, 27(1): 36-40. DOI: 10.6047/j.issn.1000-8241.2008.01.011

API 579与B31G剩余强度评价的保守性分析

Conservative Analysis on the Remaining Strength Assessment of Corroded Pipeline for ASME B31G and API 579

  • 摘要: 腐蚀导致在役管道强度降低, 运营者必须确定当前腐蚀缺陷下管道是否可以继续服役, 目前可采用的评价方法主要有B31G和API 579系列。介绍了两种评价方法的理论基础, 根据各自的基本假设导出了相应的评价方法的评价公式, 并对此进行了深入的对比分析, 得出通常认为过于保守的B31G的保守性比API 579低的重要结论。建议在单一荷载和简单缺陷形状下, 按B31G进行管道的剩余强度评价。

     

    Abstract: Operators should conform whether a pipeline in corroded flaw situation could maintain its service, for corrosion may leads to lower pipeline strength. Current assessment methodologies are ASME B31G and API 579 series. Theory foundation for remaining strength assessment methodology is presented and assessing formula for relative assessment methodology is educed based on individual basic assumption. Thus deep comparison is made for this purpose. Significant conclusion obtained is that API 579 is more conservative than ASME B31G. Authors suggest that under single load and simple flaw situations, remaining strength assessment should be carried out according to ASME B31G criterion.

     

/

返回文章
返回