An Evaluation of Probabilistic Integrity Assessment Codes

Lingyun Guo, M. Niffenegger
{"title":"An Evaluation of Probabilistic Integrity Assessment Codes","authors":"Lingyun Guo, M. Niffenegger","doi":"10.1115/pvp2022-84277","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In recent years, a large number of failure assessment models (FAMs), like SINTAP, BS7910 and API 579 have been developed to evaluate the structural integrity of pipelines. Based on them, various software, such as PRO-LOCA, PROST, xLPR, etc, have been established to evaluate the safety and reliability of pipelines. However, which of these codes fit best the user’s requirements is a difficult problem because it depends on scientific as well as on personal criteria. Therefore, in this paper, we propose several multiple evaluation criteria to discuss the integrity assessment codes. Furthermore, we apply mathematical methods to evaluate the prediction performance (PP) of the codes PRO-LOCA and PROST.\n The PP covers seven criteria: correlation, multimodality, dispersion, risk, conservativeness, robustness and accuracy. The correlation, multimodality and dispersion reflect the stability of the predicted results, while risk, conservativeness, robustness and accuracy illustrate distributional location characteristics (DLC) of the prediction accuracy (PA).","PeriodicalId":23700,"journal":{"name":"Volume 2: Computer Technology and Bolted Joints; Design and Analysis","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 2: Computer Technology and Bolted Joints; Design and Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/pvp2022-84277","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent years, a large number of failure assessment models (FAMs), like SINTAP, BS7910 and API 579 have been developed to evaluate the structural integrity of pipelines. Based on them, various software, such as PRO-LOCA, PROST, xLPR, etc, have been established to evaluate the safety and reliability of pipelines. However, which of these codes fit best the user’s requirements is a difficult problem because it depends on scientific as well as on personal criteria. Therefore, in this paper, we propose several multiple evaluation criteria to discuss the integrity assessment codes. Furthermore, we apply mathematical methods to evaluate the prediction performance (PP) of the codes PRO-LOCA and PROST. The PP covers seven criteria: correlation, multimodality, dispersion, risk, conservativeness, robustness and accuracy. The correlation, multimodality and dispersion reflect the stability of the predicted results, while risk, conservativeness, robustness and accuracy illustrate distributional location characteristics (DLC) of the prediction accuracy (PA).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
概率完整性评估码的一种评价
近年来,人们开发了大量的失效评估模型(FAMs),如SINTAP、BS7910和API 579等,用于评估管道结构的完整性。在此基础上,建立了PRO-LOCA、PROST、xLPR等各种管道安全可靠性评价软件。然而,这些代码中哪一个最适合用户的需求是一个难题,因为它取决于科学和个人标准。因此,在本文中,我们提出了几个多重评价准则来讨论完整性评价规范。此外,我们应用数学方法对PRO-LOCA和PROST代码的预测性能(PP)进行了评价。PP包括七个标准:相关性、多模态、分散性、风险、保守性、稳健性和准确性。相关性、多模态和离散性反映了预测结果的稳定性,风险性、保守性、稳健性和准确性反映了预测精度的分布位置特征(DLC)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
High-Temperature Design of 700°C Heat Exchanger in a Large Scale High-Temperature Thermal Energy Storage Performance Test Facility On the Effect of Hot-Box Size on Coke Drum Skirt Fatigue Life Numerical Approaches for Bolt Interactions in Flange Gasket Assemblies Experimental Investigation on the Fatigue Strength for Different Tightening Procedures and Materials in Metric Screws Study on Post-Buckling Behaviors of Lower Heads for Fracture Control of Reactor Vessels Under BDBE
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1