0
Research Papers: Operations, Applications and Components

Risk-Based Maintenance Planning for Deteriorating Pressure Vessels With Multiple Defects

[+] Author and Article Information
Shane Haladuick

Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Calgary,
2500 University Drive NW,
Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada
e-mail: smhaladu@ucalgary.ca

Markus R. Dann

Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Calgary,
2500 University Drive NW,
Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada
e-mail: mrdann@ucalgary.ca

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received December 8, 2016; final manuscript received March 29, 2017; published online April 21, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Steve J. Hensel.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 139(4), 041602 (Apr 21, 2017) (8 pages) Paper No: PVT-16-1233; doi: 10.1115/1.4036428 History: Received December 08, 2016; Revised March 29, 2017

Pressure vessels are subject to deterioration processes, such as corrosion and fatigue, which can lead to failure. Inspections and repairs are performed to mitigate this risk. Large industrial facilities (e.g., oil and gas refineries) often have regularly scheduled shutdown periods during which many components, including the pressure vessels, are disassembled, inspected, and repaired if necessary. This paper presents a decision analysis framework for the risk-based maintenance (RBM) planning of corroding pressure vessels. After a vessel has been inspected, this framework determines the optimal maintenance time of each defect, where the optimal time is the one that minimizes the total expected cost over the lifecycle of the vessel. The framework allows for multiple defects and two failure modes (leak and burst), and accounts for the dependent failure events. A stochastic gamma process is used to model the future deterioration growth to determine the probability of vessel failure. The novel growth model presents a simple method to predict both the depth and length of each corrosion defect to enable burst analysis. The decision analysis framework can aid decision makers in deciding when a repair or replacement should be performed. This method can be used to immediately inform the decision maker of the optimal decision postinspection. A numerical example of a corroding pressure vessel illustrates the method.

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

Hierarchical graphical model of the corrosion growth process

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Probability of failure using three analysis methods

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Expected lifecycle cost comparison of the three analysis methods to assess the impact of system reliability

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Expected lifecycle cost of the top four ranked repair plans for the system reliability method; NR is “no repair”

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