A Level 3 Fitness for Service Assessment of Shell Plate Deformation in a Storage Tank

A Level 3 Fitness for Service Assessment of Shell Plate Deformation in a Storage Tank

A LEVEL 3 FITNESS FOR SERVICE ASSESSMENT OF SHELL PLATE DEFORMATION IN A STORAGE TANK Arash Zamani , Yong Wang Saunders International Limited November 2016 Introduction • Storage tanks are one of the most massive steel structures used in industries. Varying from <10m to >100m in diameter and up to 30m in height. • Widely used in petrochemical and power plants, oil refineries and water facilities for decades. • Store liquids for different purposes such as transportation, storage, process and etc. Background • Steel storage tanks are composed of a flat floor, a cylindrical shell and either fixed or floating roof. • Shell thickness reduces as tank height increases. • Construction material: carbon steel, stainless steel and aluminium. Typical tank configuration (Cone roof / Floating roof) Shell Buckling • As thin wall structures, storage tanks are very sensitive to buckling due to small thickness to radius ratio. • Causes of shell buckling: Vacuum and wind pressure External forces Uneven settlement Inappropriate welding process • Shell buckling could result in tank collapse. Maintenance and Repair • Tanks shell should be inspected regularly for possible buckling, damages and deformation. • Deformed area should be repaired or replaced by new plates. • Repair can be done by adding stiffeners to the tank shell and reshape the damaged area. • Replace can be done by accessing the damaged area, supporting the shell, cut and replace the damaged plates. • Tanks need to be out of service during repair. • Profit loss and repair costs are expected. Can Equipment Operate Without Repair? Fitness For Service (FFS) • Fitness for service assessment (FFS) is an engineering method to evaluate equipment condition. • FFS assessments are quantitative engineering evaluations, which are performed to demonstrate the structural integrity of an in- service component containing a flaw or damage. • Such an engineering assessment should be able to evaluate the equipment circumstances and recommend whether remedial work is needed. • Using an appropriate FFS approach can save time and money. • API 579: provides rules and procedures for FFS assessment. • API 579: discusses assessment procedure for different damage scenarios. • API 579: appoints guidelines to determine whether tank shell deformation is acceptable and if the tank is safe to continue API 579 Fitness-For-Service operation without any repair for a certain period of time. FFS Levels Of Assessments • API 579 prescribes three levels of structural integrity evaluations for equipment. Level 1 Assessment • Level 1 assessment is the most conservative and simplified criterion that generally includes the use of charts and tables. Fitness for Service Level 2 Assessment • Level 2 assessment involves detailed calculations Assessment using relatively simple formulas with some (API 579) assumptions. • Level 3 assessment requires a comprehensive Level 3 Assessment analysis where advanced computational procedures such as nonlinear FEA are engaged. Problem Definition • Tank under study is a 45.72 x 16.9 m Cone roof. • Tank was built in late 1960s. • Tank was under periodic repair schedule. • After replacing a strake plate a deformation appeared between 6th and 7th strake. • Pre existing deformation as well as thermal stresses imposed by welding suspected to be the reason for shell deformation. • Shell deformation was assessed to check whether the tank is Fit For Service. Deformation Contour • The first step in the FFS assessment is to determine the pattern and amount of shell deformation. • Some methods to measure deformation: - String and weight - Surveying and use of mathematical calculation - Laser reference and manual measurement - Laser scanning • A 200mm by 200mm grid was marked on shell. • The grid covers 2.8m in height and 1.8m in width. Deformation Contour • According to API 579, a numerical interpolation is needed for extra node generation. • The interpolation is required to obtain a smooth shell curvature by producing interpolated nodes between measured points. • API 579 recommends using piece wise cubic spline curve fitting method. • A cubic spline curve fit was applied in both vertical and circumferential directions. Site measured pattern Interpolated pattern • In total 1716 nodes were generated and imported to FEA package. Cubic Spline Curve Fitting FEA Modelling • Strand7 package was used for FEA. • The tank shell was modelled by four nodes plate element. • Beam element represents curb angle. • Shell deformed area modelled by importing nodes to FEA. • Boundary condition. • API 579 analysis approaches: Elastic Analysis, Elastic Plastic Analysis • Elastic Plastic FEA analysis was used in this assessment. • Nonlinearity in geometry & nonlinearity in material. Portion of shell with deformation Boundary conditions Stress – Strain Relationship • API 579 suggests below models for stress-strain curve: MPC Model. Ramberg Osgood Model. • AS3678 Gr 250 plate: Module of elasticity: 200GPa Yield stress: 250MPa Tensile strength: 410MPa MPC Model Coefficients: API 579 Annex F Load Cases • Tank understudy is subject to dead load, hydrostatic pressure, internal pressure and wind force. • API 579 Global loading cases: (for API 650 storage tanks) • API 579 Local loading cases: (for API 650 storage tanks) FFS Assessment Elastic Method Protection Against Plastic Limit Load Method • API 579 level 3 FFS assessment requires below failure collapse scenarios to be evaluated for the defective tank. Elastic Plastic Method • Protection Against Plastic Collapse (PAPC). Elastic Method Level 3 FFS • Protection Against Local Failure (PALF). Protection Against Assessment Local Failure • Protection Against Collapse From Buckling (PACB). Elastic Plastic Method Protection Against Collapse From Buckling Protection Against Plastic Collapse (PAPC) • PAPC criterion studies the overall instability of the structure subject to Global loading cases. • PAPC defines plastic collapse load as the load that causes overall structural instability. • This load can be determined as the point that any further increment in the load will result in divergence in the analysis and inability to achieve equilibrium. • In practise, PAPC will be satisfied if FEA converges under all relevant Global loading combinations. Loading Case: Operation 2.25(P+Pso+D) PAPC: FEA • Tank shell model has been analysed subject to Global load combination cases. • Using nonlinear elastic plastic solver. Loading Case: Test 2.1375(Pst+D)+2.475Wt FEA convergence under all Global loading case: PAPC Satisfaction Protection Against Local Failure: (PALF) • In addition to PAPC, tank integrity should be investigated for another criterion called protection against local failure (PALF). • According to its definition, PALF discusses the possibility of local failure due to the emergence of an imperfection in the structure. • This criterion needs to be checked against Local loading cases. • Using the elastic-plastic method, PALF will be satisfied if Equivalent Plastic Strain in a location of the component under investigation, plus any Forming Strain due to initial forming is less than allowable strain, called Limiting Triaxial Strain. PALF: FEA • Loading case: (operation) 1.53(P+Pso+D) • Using nonlinear elastic plastic solver. • Principal stresses σ1=307.48MPa σ2= 107.39MPa Maximum principal stress σ Maximum equivalent plastic strain 2 Maximum principal stress σ1 • Equivalent plastic strain εpeq= 0.00141 PALF: Code Check Protection Against Collapse From Buckling (PACB) • Apart from PAPC and PALF, another API 579 criterion called “protection against collapse from buckling‟ should also be considered in FFS assessment. • This requirement checks the structural instability of a component with a compressive stress field under applied load cases. • For tank understudy, this part of FFS assessment will become important if tank is subject to high wind forces or vacuum. • According to API 579, for those analysis where PAPC is performed and imperfections are explicitly modeled in the FEA, the buckling factors are considered in the relevant loading combinations. • Convergence in PAPC analysis will then show that the tank is protected against buckling collapse as well. • Other loading cases producing compressive stress should be checked. Conclusions • A tank with a local shell deformation has been studied for level 3 FFS assessment according to API 579. • PAPC, PALF and PACB satisfied. • Resultantly, the tank under consideration met all FFS requirements and is able to undergo its service again. Tank is ‘‘Fit For Service’’! • FFS helps to predict whether a tank with such an imperfection is able to operate safely until the next repair interval by using similar assessment and predicting the shell thickness at the end of interval. • Loading combinations must be carefully considered in each individual assessment in accordance with the actual condition of the equipment. Thanks For Your Attention Questions?.

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    22 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us