0
Research Papers: Design and Analysis

Verifying Structural Integrity of Repaired Cylindrical Pressure Vessels by Partitioning Method

[+] Author and Article Information
Husain J. Al-Gahtani

Civil and Environmental Engineering Department,
King Fahd University of
Petroleum and Minerals,
Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia
e-mail: hqahtani@kfupm.edu.sa

Mahmoud Naffa'a

Saudi Aramco,
Dhahran 31311, Saudi Arabia
e-mail: mahmoud.naffaa@yahoo.com

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received December 14, 2014; final manuscript received July 25, 2016; published online September 29, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Allen C. Smith.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 139(2), 021208 (Sep 29, 2016) (10 pages) Paper No: PVT-14-1203; doi: 10.1115/1.4034349 History: Received December 14, 2014; Revised July 25, 2016

Pressure vessels that undergo repairs are normally pressure tested to verify their structural integrity before returning into service. Conventionally, the entire vessel is pressure tested, according to the relevant construction code. In this paper, partitioning the pressure vessel is suggested as an equivalent alternative test arrangement, where pressure testing is limited to the zone where a repair has been performed. Use of such an arrangement would alleviate potential concerns associated with the conventional testing method. Procedures are provided to specify the position of the partition relative to the repair location, in order to maintain the state-of-stress to that achieved in a conventional pressure test. Validity of this approach has been demonstrated for a repaired full-circumferential welded joint in the wall of a cylindrical pressure vessel.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

A cylindrical vessel with partition plates

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematic for discontinuity analysis at the plate-to-shell juncture

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Decay of axial stress versus distance away from the partition for γ = 50

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Decay of axial stress versus distance away from the partition for γ = 200

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Decay of hoop stress versus distance away from the partition for γ = 50

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Decay of hoop stress versus distance away from the partition for γ = 200

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Common decay distance (Lmin)  of hoop and axial stresses away from the plate-cylinder junction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Effect of the geometric parameters on Lmin/a

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Finite-element quarter model and boundary conditions

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