Abstract
The paper inspect, in the first part, some points of view on the burst pressure standards calculation on pipeline with external corrosion defect, a real test will be present. A comparison on the two methods to repair a pipeline will be the focus on the second part. FEM simulation is a good tool to estimate the safety factor on both parts. In the second part of this study, a control of the made reinforcement calculation (thickness of the monchon to be installed) will be given in detail according to the characteristics of the pipe, the composite material and the dimensions of the defect to be repaired. The method of calculation is known and is set out in the two standards which are available. The real question is explaining the hypotheses which are the basis of the equations developed, and to identify the possible limits of the method. On the other hand, to confirm for a judiciously chosen case, this analytical calculation by a finite element calculation and to identify and compare the different composite materials currently available in the industry.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
ASME B31G. 2012. Manual for Determining the Remaining Strength of Corroded pipelines. Supplement to the ASME B31 Code for Pressure Piping.
Canadian Standard Association. 2015. Oil and gas pipeline systems. CSA standard Z662-15, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada.
DNV-RP-F101. 2015. Corroded Pipelines. Det Norske Veritas, Norway.
Bipul Chandra, B.C. Mondal. ‘Burst Pressure Assessment for Pipelines With Multiple Corrosion Defects’, Resilient Infrastructure, June 1–4, 2016.
Kiefner, J.F. and Vieth, P.H., “Evaluating pipe Conclusion: PC program speeds new criterion for evaluating corroded pipe”, Oil & Gas Journal, Vol. 88, No. 34, pp. 91–93, August 20 (1990).
Pipeline Operator Forum Document: “Specifications and requirements for intelligent pig inspection of pipelines”, Version 3.2, January (2005).
ANSYS, Inc.; 2017.
Andrade, E.Q. d., Benjamin, A.C., Machado Jr., P.R.S., Pereira, L.C., Jacob, B.P., Carneiro, E.G., Guerreiro, J.N.C., Silva, R.C.C. and Noronha Jr., D.B. 2006. Finite element modeling of the failure behavior of pipelines containing interacting corrosion defects. Proceedings of OMAE2006 25th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Hamburg, Germany.
SINTAP: Structural Integrity Assessment Procedure, Final Report E-U project BE95-1462 Brite Euram Programme Brussels, (1999).
Harrisson R.P, Milne I and Loosmore K “assessment of the integrity of structures containing defects”. Central Electricity Generating Board Report R/H R6 Revision 1, Leatherhead, Surrey, UK, (1977).
RCC-MRx 2015 - EN Design and Construction Rules for mechanical components of nuclear installations: high-temperature, research and fusion reactors, AFCEN, Paris (2015).
Pluvinage G. “Fracture and Fatigue emanating from stress concentrators” Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands, (2003).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hadj Meliani, M., Bouledroua, O., Azari, Z., Sorour, A., Merah, N., Pluvinage, G. (2018). The Inspections, Standards and Repairing Methods for Pipeline with Composite: A Review and Case Study. In: Ambriz, R., Jaramillo, D., Plascencia, G., Nait Abdelaziz, M. (eds) Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on New Trends in Fatigue and Fracture. NT2F 2017. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70365-7_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70365-7_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-70364-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-70365-7
eBook Packages: Chemistry and Materials ScienceChemistry and Material Science (R0)