Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
5/11/15
Presentation Overview
Introduction to Fitness
for Service(FFS)
5/11/15
Quantitative
engineering
the
structural
integrity
of
an
in-service
component that may contain a flaw
or damage.[2]
5/11/15
5/11/15
5/11/15
5/11/15
5/11/15
Benefits of FFS
10
5/11/15
FFS Standards
11
Standard Name
API 579-1/
ASME FFS-1
BS-7910
PD 6493(Withdrawn)
NUCLEAR
ELECTRIC R5
NUCLEAR
ELECTRIC R6
FITNET
5/11/15
Publisher
API & ASME
BSI
BSI
BRITISH
ENERGY
BRITISH
ENERGY
Date of First
Release
2000
(Joint 2007)
1999
1980
1990
1976
European Fitness2006
For-Service
Network
Petroleum
University of Technology, Abadan Institute
of Technology
FFS Softwares
12
Software Name
Publisher
Date of First
Release
Signal FitnessForService
Quest
Integrity
Group
1997
Crackwise
TWI
2005
ENGFIT
TWI
2007
R-Code
British Energy
1990
R-STRENG
PRCI
1989
FFS MASTER
PUT
2010
5/11/15
13
5/11/15
Background to API
579
14
Part 1,2:
Introduction
Part 3: Brittle
Fracture
Part 4: General Metal
Loss
Part 5: Local Metal
Loss
Part 6: Pitting
Corrosion
Part 7: Hydrogen Blisters and
Hydrogen
Damage
Part 8: Misalignment
and Shell
Distortions
Part 9: Crack-Like
Flaws
Part 10:
Creep
Part 11: Fire
Damage
Part 12: Dents,
Gouges, and
DentGouge
Combinations
Part 13:
Lamination
Annexes: A-K
5/11/15
5.
6.
7.
8.
5/11/15
Assessment Levels
17
Level 1
Assessm
ent
Levels
Level 2
Level 3
5/11/15
Screening
Low complexity
High
conservatism
Medium detail
Medium
complexity
Medium
conservatism
Detailed
Most complex
Least
conservative
Evaluation Techniques
Start
Assessme
nt
18
Level1
Perform
Assessment
Level 2 or
3
Fit for
Servic
e?
Ye
s
Increase
Assessm
ent
Level?
Docume
nt
Results
Ye
s
No
No
Rerat
e?
Ye
s
Return
Equipment
to Service
Determine
Reduced Pressure
and/or
Temperature
No
Repair,
Replace
Or Retire
Equipment
5/11/15
Documen
t Results
Petroleum University of Technology, Abadan Institute
of Technology
19
Part 9- Assessment of
Crack-Like Flaws
5/11/15
20
5/11/15
2
a
Surface Breaking
Embedded
Through-wall
5/11/15
5/11/15
23
Limitations of Level 1
Assessment
Creep Range
5/11/15
Limitations of Level 2
Assessment
Petroleumon
University
of Technology,
Abadan Institute
3) Limitations
Material
Properties
of Technology
9.3.1 General
9.3.2 Original Equipment Design Data
9.3.3 Maintenance and Operating History
9.3.4 Loads and Stresses
9.3.5 Material Properties
9.3.6 Flaw Characterization
5/11/15
25
9.3.6.1 Overview
9.3.6.2 Characterization of Flaw Length
9.3.6.3 Characterization of Flaw Depth
9.3.6.4 Characterization of Branched Cracks
9.3.6.5 Characterization of Multiple Flaws
9.3.6.6 Recategorization of Flaws
5/11/15
9.3.6-Flaw Characterization
9.3.6.2 Overview
26
5/11/15
9.3.6-Flaw Characterization
28
Use Default
Value
2c =2cm
( or c =cm )
use 2c =2cm
Irrespective
of
Orientation
Mode 1 Flaw
(Figure 9.2)
9.3.6-Flaw Characterization
9.3.6.3 Characterization of Flaw
Depth
30
Flaw
Flaw Depth
Depth by
by
Default
Default Values
Values
a= min [t,
c]
Characteriza
Characteriza
tion
tion
of
of Flaw
Flaw
Depth
Depth
Flaw
Flaw Depth
Depth
from
from Actual
Actual
Measurements
Measurements
5/11/15
a = t for a
Surface
Flaw
flaw is
normal to
the surface:
a= am
flaw is not
normal to
the surface:
See Figure
9.4
9.3.6-Flaw Characterization
31
a=Wam, W is determined
using Equation 9.7 or
Figure9.5
32
9.3.6-Flaw Characterization
9.3.6.4 Characterization of
Branched Cracks
33
5/11/15
9.3.6-Flaw Characterization
9.3.6.4 Characterization of
Branched Cracks
34
5/11/15
9.3.6-Flaw Characterization
9.3.6.5 Characterization of
Multiple Cracks
35
5/11/15
9.3.6-Flaw Characterization
9.3.6.5 Characterization of
Multiple Cracks
36
5/11/15
9.3.6-Flaw Characterization
9.3.6.6 Flaw Recategorization
Guidelines
37
5/11/15
38
Level 1
Assessment
5/11/15
Level 1 Assessment
39
Joint Type
Crack-Like
Flaw to Joint
Orientation
Reference
Figure
----
Parallel
Figure 9.12
Cylinder
Longitudinal
Parallel
Figure 9.13
Cylinder
Longitudinal
Cylinder
Circumferentia
l
Parallel
Figure 9.15
Cylinder
Circumferentia
l
Perpendicular
Figure 9.16
Sphere
Circumferentia
l
Sphere
Circumferentia
l
Equipment
Type
Flat Plate
Perpendicular
Parallel
Perpendicular
Figure 9.14
Figure 9.17
Figure 9.18
A: Allowable
flaw size in
base metal.
B: Allowable
flaw size in
weld metal
with PWHT
C: Allowable
flaw size in
weld metal
without
PWHT
Obtain From
Inspection
Data
Max crack
length:
2c=8in(200m
m)
Dash
line: 1tflaw
Solid line:
1/4t-flaw
T: Assessment
Temperature
Tref: Reference
Temperature
Flaw Dimensions
42
Stress Intensity
Factor Solutions, KPI
& KSRI
Stress Analysis
Material
Toughness
Kmat
Kr
Unacceptable
Region
Assessment Point
Acceptable
Region
Lr
Reference Stress
Solutions, Pref
Flaw
Dimensions
Stress Analysis
Material Yield
Strength, ys
43
Study Goals
5/11/15
Study Goals
44
45
References
5/11/15
References
46
[ 1]
1388
[2] Fitness-For-Service, API 579-1/ASME FFS-1,Second Edition,
American Petroleum Institute and The American Society of
Mechanical Engineers, Washington, D.C., JUNE 5, 2007.
[3] introduction to Fitness-For-Service (FFS) Assessment Using
API/ASME Standard API 579-1 / ASME FFS-1,Webinar Series,
Lloyds Register Group, April 22, 2010
[4] API 579: a comprehensive fitness-for-service guide, Ted L.
Anderson, David A. Osage, Structural Reliability Technology,
1898 S Flatiron Court, Suite 235, Boulder, CO 80301, USA
[5] http://www.fitness4service.com/
[6] http://www.questintegrity.com/
5/11/15
Question?
To look is one thing,
To see what you are looking at is something else,
To understand what you see is another,
To learn from what you understand is another,
But,
To act on what you learn is all that really matter!
Winston Churchill
5/11/15
THANK YOU
5/11/15