0
Research Papers: Design and Analysis

Sensitivity Analysis of Fitness-for-Service Assessment Based on Reliability for Cylindrical Pressure Vessels With Local Metal Loss

[+] Author and Article Information
Takuyo Kaida

Sumitomo Chemical Co., Ltd.,
5-l, Sobiraki-cho,
Niihama City,
Ehime 792-8521, Japan
e-mail: kaidat@sc.sumitomo-chem.co.jp

Satoshi Izumi

e-mail: izumi@fml.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp

Shinsuke Sakai

e-mail: sakai@fml.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp
The University of Tokyo,
7-3-1, Hongo,
Bunkyo-ku,
Tokyo 113-8656, Japan

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received January 7, 2013; final manuscript received March 19, 2013; published online September 18, 2013. Assoc. Editor: David L. Rudland.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 135(6), 061202 (Sep 18, 2013) (8 pages) Paper No: PVT-13-1008; doi: 10.1115/1.4024455 History: Received January 07, 2013; Revised March 19, 2013

Concern about fitness-for-service (FFS) assessments using stochastic analyses for aged pressure equipment with local metal loss has been growing. When a decision must be made regarding whether to run or repair equipment with local metal loss, a structural integrity assessment based on reliability helps. In analyses of failure probability, it is important to identify which variables strongly affect the structural integrity. The stochastic properties of influential parameters must be clarified, but few data have been published regarding the quantitative analysis of the sensitivity of the parameters in FFS assessments of components with local metal loss. Here, we investigated the effects of parameters on the plastic collapse of a damaged cylindrical pressure vessel with local metal loss, in an evaluation of parameter sensitivity. We also analyzed sensitivity indices for the component with several shapes of local metal loss. We found that the corrosion rate has a major influence on the probability of failure. We propose a practical stochastic analysis procedure for components with local metal loss. In this procedure, the parameter that has consistently low sensitivity to the limit state is used as a constant value.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Janelle, J., Osage, D. A., and Burkhart, S. J., 2005, “WRC Bulletin 505 an Overview and Validation of the Fitness-for-Service assessment Procedures for Local Thin Areas in API 579,” Welding Research Council.
Bjornoy, O. H., Sigurdsson, G., and Marley, M. J., 2001, “Background and Development of DNV-RP-F101 “Corroded Pipelines”,” Proceedings of the Eleventh (2001) International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference.
ASME, 2007, API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 Recommended Practice for Fitness-For-Service, 2nd ed., American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Washington, D.C. June 5, 2007. Available at: http://cstools.asme.org/csconnect/PDF/R081221.pdf
ANSI/ASME, 1984, Manual for Determining the Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipelines, 1st ed., The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Washington, D.C.
Det Norske Veritas, 2004, Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F101 Corroded Pipelines, 2nd ed., Hovic, Norway.
Rana, M. D., Smith, J. H., and Holroyd, H., 2010, “Technical Basis for Acceptance/Rejection Criteria for Flaws in High Pressure Gas Cylinder,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 132(6), p. 061102. [CrossRef]
Ohno, A., and Kaida, T., 2011, “Comparison Between the Burst Pressure Inside a Cylindrical Shell With Local Metal Loss and the Acceptable Pressure Calculated by the Finite Element Method Based on the API/ASME FFS Code Part 1 Plastic Collapse,” J. High Press. Inst. Jpn., 49(2), pp. 53–61. [CrossRef]
Ohno, A., and Tahara, T., 2008, “Earthquake Resistant Design Code and Validation of Local Metal Loss Procedure Based on the Experimental Data Collected in Japan,” PVP2008-61845.
Ahammed, M., 1998, “Probabilistic Estimation of Remaining Life of a Pipeline in the Presence of Active Corrosion Defects,” Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping, 75(4), pp. 321–329. [CrossRef]
Caleyo, F., Gonzalez, J., and Hallen, J., 2002, “A Study on the Reliability Assessment Methodology for Pipelines With Active Corrosion Defects,” Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping, 79(1), pp. 77–86. [CrossRef]
Maes, M., Dann, M., and Salama, M., 2008, “Influence of Grade on the Reliability of Corroding Pipelines,” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 93(3), pp. 447–455. [CrossRef]
Osage, D. A., and Janelle, J. L., 2007, “API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 2007 a Joint API/ASME Fitness for Service Standard for Pressurized Equipment,” PVP2008-61796.
Hasofer, A. M., and Lind, N. C., 1974, “Exact and Invariant Second-Moment Code Format,” J. Eng. Mech., 100(1), pp. 111–121.
Rackwitz, R., and Fiessler, B., “Structural Reliability Under Combined Random Load Sequences,” Comput. Struct., 9, pp. 489–494.
Shinozuka, M., and (U.S.), A. F. F. D. L., 1976, Development of Reliability-Based Aircraft Safety Criteria: An Impact Analysis. Modern Analysis, Incorporated, Vol. 1, Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory, Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory, Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories, Air Force Systems Command, United States Air Force.
Haldar, A., and Mahadevan, S., 2000, Probability, Reliability, and Statistical Methods in Engineering Design, Wiley, New York.
Kiureghian, A. D., and Ke, J.-B., 1988, “The Stochastic Finite Element Method in Structural Reliability,” Probab. Eng. Mech., 3(2), pp. 83–91. [CrossRef]
Svensson, N. L., 1958, “Burst Pressure of Cylindrical and Spherical Vessels,” Trans. ASME, 80, pp. 89–96.
Kurihara, T., Miyake, R., Oshima, N., and Nakahara, M., 2010, “Investigation of the Actual Inspection Data for Corrosion Under Insulation (CUI) in Chemical Plant and Examination About Estimation Method for Likelihood of CUI,” Zairyo-Kankyo, 59(8), pp. 291–297 (in Japanese). [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Flow chart for development of practical limit state model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Sensitivity indices in standard normal space

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Longitudinal section at the region of metal loss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Probability of failure assessment curve in case in which all variables are treated as random variables

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Calculation results of sensitivity indices: Pf = 1 × 10−4

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Calculation results of sensitivity indices: Pf = 1 × 10−5

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Calculation results of sensitivity indices: Pf = 1 × 10−6

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Assessment curve of probability of failure in case that CV and tmm are treated as random variables

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Probability of failure assessment curve utilizing the modified limit state model, Xm = 1.2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Cumulative density function of Type I and Weibull distribution for CV

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Exceedance probabilities of Type I and Weibull distributions for CV

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In