Defects in pressure systems are often detected during in-service inspection. The significance of these defects can be assessed using fitness-for-purpose methods. These methods are usually applied by specialists but it is the pressure system user's responsibility to ensure the assessments are fully completed and reported on.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
The pressure systems and transportable gas container regulations 1989, Health and Safety 1989, No. 2169, 1990 (HMSO, London).
2.
A guide to the pressure systems and transportable gas containers regulations 1989, Guidance on Regulations, Health and Safety Executive, Booklet HS (R) 30, 1990 (HMSO, London).
3.
Safety of pressure systems. Pressure systems and transportable gas containers regulations 1989, Approved Code of Practice, COP 27, 1990 (HMSO, London).
4.
SalterG. R.GethinJ. W.An analysis of defects in pressure vessel standards, paper 15, 1972 (The Welding Institute, London).
5.
HarrisonJ. D.The economics of a fitness-for-purpose approach to weld acceptance. Conference on Fitness-for-purpose validation of welded structures, November 1981, paper 45 (The Welding Institute, London).
6.
BSI PD 6493: 1991Guidance on methods for assessing the acceptability of flaws in fusion welded structures (British Standards Institution, London).
7.
HopkinsP.EdwardD. C.The application of fracture mechanics to defects detected during service in pipeline pressure vessels. ASME Symposium on Pressure vessel and piping, San Antonio, Texas, June 1984, paper 84-Mat-16 (American Society of Mechanical Engineers).
8.
AdamsN. J. I.A damage tolerant design and inspection philosophy for nuclear and other pressure vessels. Trans. ASME, J. Pressure Vessel Technol., November 1980, 102, 334–341.
9.
BushS. H.Statistics of pressure vessel and piping failures. Trans. ASME, J. Pressure Vessel Technol., August 1988, 110, 215–237.
10.
ArnettL. M.Optimisation of in-service inspection of pressure vessels. Conference on NDT in the nuclear industry, ASM, Denver, 1975.
11.
HarrisD. O.A means of assessing the effects of periodic proof load testing and NDE on the reliability of cyclically loaded structures. Trans. ASME, J. Pressure Vessel Technol., May 1978, 100, 150–157.
12.
HarropL. P.LidiardA. B.Enhancement of the reliability of reactor pressure vessels by in-service inspection. IMechE Conference on Periodic inspection of pressurised components, May 1979, paper C23/79 (Mechanical Engineering Publications, London).
13.
SmithT. A.WarwickR. G.A survey of defects in pressure vessels in the UK for the period 1962 1978 and its relevance to nuclear pressure vessels. Int. J. Pressure Vessel and Piping, 1983, 11, 127–166.
14.
NicholsR. W.Faults and failures in pressure vessels. In Pressure vessel engineering technology, 1971 (Elsevier Publishing Company Limited, London).
15.
BurdekinF. M.Comparison of COD, R6 and J-contour integral methods of defect assessment modified to give critical defect sizes. Conference on Fitness-for-purpose validation of welded constructions, 1981, paper 41 (The Welding Institute, London).
16.
HopkinsP.The assessment of weld defects detected in British Gas pressure vessels. International Gas Research Conference, Tokyo, Japan, November 1989.
17.
HopkinsP.The results of a round-robin exercise on pressure vessel defect assessment. Int. J. Pressure Vessel and Piping, 1990, 42, 333–351.
18.
Anon. Reservations with respect to the application of elastic-plastic fracture mechanics to welded structures. Welding in the World, 1982, 20(7/8).
19.
NewmanJ. C.An evaluation of fracture analysis methods. In Elastic-plastic fracture mechanics technology, 1985, ASTM STP 896, pp. 5–96 (American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa.).
20.
WearneS. H.A review of reports of failures. Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs, 1979, 193, 125–136.
21.
WicksK. M.Inherent safety of pressure vessels and systems. Loss Prevention Bulletin 053, 1984, pp. 7–14.
