• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文会议>International Pipeline Conference >COMPARISON BETWEEN YIELD STRENGTH RESULTS OBTAINED FROM METHODS USING BOTH FLATTENED AND NON-FLATTENED SPECIMENS
【24h】

COMPARISON BETWEEN YIELD STRENGTH RESULTS OBTAINED FROM METHODS USING BOTH FLATTENED AND NON-FLATTENED SPECIMENS

机译：使用扁平和非扁平标本的方法获得的屈服强度结果的比较

获取原文
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Tensile properties of API 5L large diameter pipes are typically determined with the use of full thickness flattened strap samples extracted in the transverse direction with respect to the longitudinal pipe axis (TPA) [1, 2, 3, 4]. It has been well established that the process of sample flattening has a significant influence on determination of the yield strength of the pipe [5, 6]. The flattening process is sensitive to a number of variables such as method of flattening, equipment used, number/sequence of strokes, and operators conducting the flattening. As a result, issues with repeatability are frequently encountered and despite several efforts, the industry lacks any type of official standard for universal use. Historically, the industry has been focused on ensuring that the actual strength of pipes was safely higher than the specified minimum. Recently, there has been interest to also establish an upper limit on pipe strength particularly in the longitudinal direction with respect to the pipe axis (LPA) in order to avoid under matching between pipe and girth weld properties. These new requirements create the need for enhanced process control to minimize the variation due to flattening. Samples obtained from longitudinally welded (SAWL) and helically welded (SAWH) seam Grade X70M line pipe of various nominal wall thickness to diameter (t/D) ratios were flattened using different procedures, measured for curvature, and tensile tested, all in controlled laboratory environments with minimized repeatability variation. Special attention was given to the definition and measurement of different types of curvatures observed through the range of different t/D ratios and effort was made to assess criteria for curvature measurement prior to testing. Additionally, non-flattened specimens were tensile tested using round bar and full ring expansion test methods, and a comparison between the results obtained from both flattened and non-flattened specimen methods was made. The sample transverse yield strength results confirmed the expected variation between samples flattened by different methods. In addition, a much greater variation was observed when comparing the yield strength results between flattened and non-flattened samples. Considerations of extending the use of non-flattened specimens as a production test and benefits or limitations associated with such practice are discussed.
机译：API 5L大直径管道的拉伸性能通常与使用全厚度的平坦化来确定在横向方向相对于所述纵向管轴线（TPA）[1，2，3，4]中提取带样品。已经很好地确定了样品平整的过程对测定管道的屈服强度的影响有显着影响[5,6]。扁平化过程对许多变量敏感，例如扁平化，使用的设备，笔划的数量/序列和传导扁平的操作者。因此，经常遇到重复性问题，尽管有几项努力，但该行业缺乏任何类型的普遍使用官方标准。从历史上看，该行业一直专注于确保管道的实际实力安全高于指定的最低限度。最近，有兴趣的是在管轴（LPA）相对于管轴（LPA）的纵向方向上建立管材强度的上限，以避免管道和周长焊接性能之间的匹配。这些新要求创造了增强过程控制的需求，以最大限度地减少由于平坦化引起的变化。使用不同的程序，从纵向焊接（锯切）和螺旋焊接（锯切焊接（锯切焊接（锯切焊接）和螺旋焊接（锯切焊接（锯切焊接的（锯切）和螺旋焊接（Sawh）焊缝的X70m线管，测量为曲率的不同程序，以及所有在受控实验室中的拉伸测试具有最小化可重复变化的环境。特别注意通过不同的T / D比率范围观察到不同类型的曲率的定义和测量，并在测试之前评估曲率测量标准的努力。另外，使用圆形杆和全环膨胀试验方法测试的非扁平样品是用圆形杆和满环膨胀试验方法进行的，并且制备了从扁平和非平坦样品方法获得的结果之间的比较。样品横向屈服强度结果证实了通过不同方法扁平的样品之间的预期变化。另外，当比较屈服强度导致扁平和非扁平样品之间产生更大的变化时，观察到更大的变化。讨论了将非扁平标本延伸为生产测试和益处或与这种做法相关的益处的考虑。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号