0
research-article

Evaluation method for seismic fatigue damage of plant pipeline

[+] Author and Article Information
Fumio Inada

Central Research Inst. of Electric Power Industry, 2-6-1, Nagasaka, Yokosuka-shi, Kanagawa, Japan
inada@criepi.denken.or.jp

Michiya Sakai

Central Research Inst. of Electric Power Industry, 1646, Abiko, Abiko-shi, Chiba, Japan
m-sakai@criepi.denken.or.jp

Ryo Morita

Central Research Inst. of Electric Power Industry, 2-6-1, Nagasaka, Yokosuka-shi, Kanagawa, Japan
ryo@criepi.denken.or.jp

Ichiro Tamura

The Chugoku Electric Power Co., 4-33 Komachi,Naka-ku, Hiroshima-shi, Japan
350593@pnet.energia.co.jp

Shinichi Matsuura

Central Research Inst. of Electric Power Industry, 1646, Abiko, Abiko-shi, Chiba, Japan
matsuura@criepi.denken.or.jp

Kiyoshi Saito

Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, 1646, Abiko, Abiko-shi, Chiba, Japan
saitokys@criepi.denken.or.jp

Yasuki Ohtori

Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, 1-6-1 Otemachi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan
ootori@criepi.denken.or.jp

1Corresponding author.

ASME doi:10.1115/1.4042220 History: Received April 24, 2018; Revised December 06, 2018

Abstract

Although acceleration and cumulative absolute velocity (CAV) are used as seismic indexes, their relationship with the damage mechanism is not yet understood. In this paper, a simplified evaluation method for seismic fatigue damage, which can be used as a seismic index for screening, is derived from the stress amplitude obtained from CAV for one cycle in accordance with the velocity criterion in ASME Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants 2012, and the linear cumulative damage due to fatigue can be obtained from the linear cumulative damage rule. To verify the performance of the method, the vibration response of a cantilever pipe is calculated for four earthquake waves, and the cumulative fatigue damage is evaluated using the rain flow method. The result is in good agreement with the value obtained by the method based on the relative response. When the response spectrum obtained by the evaluation method is considered, the value obtained by the evaluation method has a peak at the peak frequency of the ground motion, and the value decreases with increasing natural frequency above the peak frequency. A higher peak frequency of the base leads to a higher value obtained by the evaluation method.

Copyright (c) 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Tables

Errata

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