| 张鹏,南立团,胡明,彭星煜.压力管道爆裂压力模型比较研究和改进的剩余强度评价方法[J].计算力学学报,2009,26(6):785~791 |
|
| 
码上扫一扫！ |
| 压力管道爆裂压力模型比较研究和改进的剩余强度评价方法 |
| Comparative study on pipeline burst pressure model and developed residual strength evaluation methods |
| 投稿时间：2007-01-08 |
| DOI：10.7511/jslx20096005 |
| 中文关键词: 剩余强度 爆裂压力 评价方法 管道 |
| 英文关键词:residual strength burst pressure evaluation methods pipeline |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金(50678154,50974105);高等学校博士学科点专项科研基金(20060615003);教育部优秀青年教师资助计划;中国石油科技风险创新基金((050511-5-2));油气藏地质及开发国家重点实验室开放基金(PLN0113)资助项目. |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 1706 |
| 全文下载次数: 1339 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 在役管道剩余强度评价使用传统评价方法B31G和API RP-579时,由于存在一些不确定因素使评价结果偏保守,但它能确保管道安全运行。同时,现在国内外研究机构又制定了一些新的管道爆裂压力预测模型。一些科研机构通过预测管道爆裂压力来对比这些评价方法。但在他们的对比中,使用B31G时并没有对安全因子修正,不能准确的预测管道的爆裂压力,所以在可靠性评价和剩余强度评价中使用B31G不能达到好的效果。本文使用安全因子对这些模型进行修正,预测管道的爆破压力极限,并与常用极限情况模型评价公式进行对比。结果表明,在极限情况时,双剪条件模型是一个较为准确的爆破压力极限预测模型,同时,它适合于结构可靠性评价。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| The use of traditional evaluation methods B31G and API RP-579 in the pipeline easement residual strength evaluation can ensure pipeline safe operation, but the method appears to be some conservative. Now research institutions in china and abroad under these methods framed a new pipeline burst pressure of the forecasting model. The traditional B31G, which is used in the original formula, the safety factor without amendment, is not an accurate prediction of pressure pipeline burst, Therefore, in evaluating the reliability and residual strength evaluation of the use of B31G, which do not achieve good results. In this article, these models predict the blasting limit and the limit of the commonly used model to evaluate the comparative formula. Comparison shows that the limit of the twin Shear model is more accurate one blasting pressure limits prediction model, and it is suitable for the evaluation of structural reliability. |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
|
|
|
