|
| Comparative study on pipeline burst pressure model and developed residual strength evaluation methods |
| Received:January 08, 2007 |
| View Full Text View/Add Comment Download reader |
| DOI：10.7511/jslx20096005 |
| KeyWord:residual strength burst pressure evaluation methods pipeline |
| Author | Institution |
| 张鹏 |
西南石油大学 建筑工程学院,成都 |
| 南立团 |
西南石油大学 建筑工程学院,成都 |
| 胡明 |
西南石油大学 建筑工程学院,成都 |
| 彭星煜 |
西南石油大学 建筑工程学院,成都 |
|
| Hits: 1589 |
| Download times: 1204 |
| Abstract: |
| 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. |
|
|
|