利用反复在线检测的爆破压力比较来评估腐蚀增长预测方法

Chance Wright, T. Dessein, Yanping Li, S. Ward
{"title":"利用反复在线检测的爆破压力比较来评估腐蚀增长预测方法","authors":"Chance Wright, T. Dessein, Yanping Li, S. Ward","doi":"10.1115/IPC2018-78294","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"At the forefront of the effort to understand and mitigate pipeline corrosion is the prediction of corrosion growth rates. It is important to understand the effect of corrosion growth estimates on integrity management decisions. An overly conservative approach results in unnecessary digs, while removing conservatism increases the potential for a missed feature to grow to a threatening size. While approaches to feature depth growth have been well-established, there has been less investigation into the growth of feature lengths. A literature review was performed on the methodologies applicable to length growth, and their performance was compared to those that only account for depth growth using a sample analysis.\n For pipelines with multiple in-line inspection (ILI) runs, feature or signal matching can be used to estimate the change in feature size. These rates can be used directly on individual features, averaged across pipe joints, or compiled into a statistical distribution. Alternatively, only one ILI measurement can be used and an assumption made on the age of the defect. These approaches are more commonly applied to depth growth but could be used to predict length growth as well.\n To compare the growth methodologies, the study used historical ILI measurements of a liquid pipeline to predict feature sizes and estimated burst pressures determined at the time of the latest ILI. The number of defects correctly predicted to have an insufficient burst pressure safety factor for safe operation was compared to the number of defects that were erroneously predicted to not meet this criterion, and those that were predicted to be safe but later found to not meet the safety factor requirement. The number of erroneously flagged defects was found to vary the most between methodologies. For the assessed data set, using the joint average rate based on feature box-matching was non-conservative on average. It was also found that incorporating length growth did not significantly affect the accuracy of the burst pressure predictions.","PeriodicalId":273758,"journal":{"name":"Volume 1: Pipeline and Facilities Integrity","volume":"265 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Corrosion Growth Prediction Methodologies Using Burst Pressure Comparisons From Repeated In-Line Inspections\",\"authors\":\"Chance Wright, T. Dessein, Yanping Li, S. Ward\",\"doi\":\"10.1115/IPC2018-78294\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"At the forefront of the effort to understand and mitigate pipeline corrosion is the prediction of corrosion growth rates. It is important to understand the effect of corrosion growth estimates on integrity management decisions. An overly conservative approach results in unnecessary digs, while removing conservatism increases the potential for a missed feature to grow to a threatening size. While approaches to feature depth growth have been well-established, there has been less investigation into the growth of feature lengths. A literature review was performed on the methodologies applicable to length growth, and their performance was compared to those that only account for depth growth using a sample analysis.\\n For pipelines with multiple in-line inspection (ILI) runs, feature or signal matching can be used to estimate the change in feature size. These rates can be used directly on individual features, averaged across pipe joints, or compiled into a statistical distribution. Alternatively, only one ILI measurement can be used and an assumption made on the age of the defect. These approaches are more commonly applied to depth growth but could be used to predict length growth as well.\\n To compare the growth methodologies, the study used historical ILI measurements of a liquid pipeline to predict feature sizes and estimated burst pressures determined at the time of the latest ILI. The number of defects correctly predicted to have an insufficient burst pressure safety factor for safe operation was compared to the number of defects that were erroneously predicted to not meet this criterion, and those that were predicted to be safe but later found to not meet the safety factor requirement. The number of erroneously flagged defects was found to vary the most between methodologies. For the assessed data set, using the joint average rate based on feature box-matching was non-conservative on average. It was also found that incorporating length growth did not significantly affect the accuracy of the burst pressure predictions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":273758,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Volume 1: Pipeline and Facilities Integrity\",\"volume\":\"265 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Volume 1: Pipeline and Facilities Integrity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78294\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 1: Pipeline and Facilities Integrity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78294","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在了解和减轻管道腐蚀的努力中,最重要的是对腐蚀增长率的预测。了解腐蚀增长估计对完整性管理决策的影响是很重要的。过于保守的方法会导致不必要的挖掘,而去除保守性则会增加遗漏特征的可能性,使其发展到具有威胁性的规模。虽然特征深度增长的方法已经建立,但对特征长度增长的研究较少。对适用于长度增长的方法进行了文献回顾,并使用样本分析将其性能与仅考虑深度增长的方法进行了比较。对于具有多次在线检测(ILI)运行的管道,可以使用特征或信号匹配来估计特征尺寸的变化。这些速率可以直接用于单个特征,在管道接头上平均,或汇编成统计分布。或者,只能使用一次ILI测量,并对缺陷的年龄做出假设。这些方法更常用于深度增长,但也可用于预测长度增长。为了比较增长方法,该研究使用了液体管道的历史ILI测量值来预测特征尺寸,并估计了最近一次ILI时确定的破裂压力。将正确预测的缺陷数量与错误预测的不符合该标准的缺陷数量,以及预测安全但后来发现不符合安全系数要求的缺陷数量进行比较。错误标记缺陷的数量在不同的方法中变化最大。对于评估的数据集,使用基于特征盒匹配的联合平均率平均是非保守性的。研究还发现,纳入长度增长对爆破压力预测的准确性没有显著影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of Corrosion Growth Prediction Methodologies Using Burst Pressure Comparisons From Repeated In-Line Inspections
At the forefront of the effort to understand and mitigate pipeline corrosion is the prediction of corrosion growth rates. It is important to understand the effect of corrosion growth estimates on integrity management decisions. An overly conservative approach results in unnecessary digs, while removing conservatism increases the potential for a missed feature to grow to a threatening size. While approaches to feature depth growth have been well-established, there has been less investigation into the growth of feature lengths. A literature review was performed on the methodologies applicable to length growth, and their performance was compared to those that only account for depth growth using a sample analysis. For pipelines with multiple in-line inspection (ILI) runs, feature or signal matching can be used to estimate the change in feature size. These rates can be used directly on individual features, averaged across pipe joints, or compiled into a statistical distribution. Alternatively, only one ILI measurement can be used and an assumption made on the age of the defect. These approaches are more commonly applied to depth growth but could be used to predict length growth as well. To compare the growth methodologies, the study used historical ILI measurements of a liquid pipeline to predict feature sizes and estimated burst pressures determined at the time of the latest ILI. The number of defects correctly predicted to have an insufficient burst pressure safety factor for safe operation was compared to the number of defects that were erroneously predicted to not meet this criterion, and those that were predicted to be safe but later found to not meet the safety factor requirement. The number of erroneously flagged defects was found to vary the most between methodologies. For the assessed data set, using the joint average rate based on feature box-matching was non-conservative on average. It was also found that incorporating length growth did not significantly affect the accuracy of the burst pressure predictions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信