CN111465837B - Life evaluation device and life evaluation method - Google Patents
Life evaluation device and life evaluation method Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN111465837B CN111465837B CN201880080126.0A CN201880080126A CN111465837B CN 111465837 B CN111465837 B CN 111465837B CN 201880080126 A CN201880080126 A CN 201880080126A CN 111465837 B CN111465837 B CN 111465837B
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- evaluation
- lifetime
- data
- intensity data
- equivalent
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Active
Links
- 238000011156 evaluation Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 207
- 238000007689 inspection Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 49
- 239000010421 standard material Substances 0.000 claims abstract description 19
- 238000012360 testing method Methods 0.000 claims description 19
- 238000009826 distribution Methods 0.000 claims description 13
- 238000012545 processing Methods 0.000 claims description 13
- 230000001186 cumulative effect Effects 0.000 description 31
- 239000000463 material Substances 0.000 description 13
- 238000003860 storage Methods 0.000 description 13
- 238000010586 diagram Methods 0.000 description 12
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 description 10
- 230000014509 gene expression Effects 0.000 description 9
- 238000012423 maintenance Methods 0.000 description 7
- 238000013461 design Methods 0.000 description 6
- 238000013210 evaluation model Methods 0.000 description 6
- 231100000809 Damage Assessment Model Toxicity 0.000 description 4
- 230000006870 function Effects 0.000 description 4
- 239000011148 porous material Substances 0.000 description 4
- 238000004364 calculation method Methods 0.000 description 3
- 238000010276 construction Methods 0.000 description 3
- 238000004519 manufacturing process Methods 0.000 description 3
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 3
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000003449 preventive effect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000004891 communication Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000006866 deterioration Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000001887 electron backscatter diffraction Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000007619 statistical method Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000015556 catabolic process Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000006731 degradation reaction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000002050 diffraction method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000010438 heat treatment Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000004973 liquid crystal related substance Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000013507 mapping Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000003287 optical effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000010248 power generation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000011160 research Methods 0.000 description 1
- 102220039198 rs7243081 Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 239000004065 semiconductor Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000011800 void material Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000003466 welding Methods 0.000 description 1
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G01—MEASURING; TESTING
- G01N—INVESTIGATING OR ANALYSING MATERIALS BY DETERMINING THEIR CHEMICAL OR PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
- G01N17/00—Investigating resistance of materials to the weather, to corrosion, or to light
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G01—MEASURING; TESTING
- G01N—INVESTIGATING OR ANALYSING MATERIALS BY DETERMINING THEIR CHEMICAL OR PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
- G01N3/00—Investigating strength properties of solid materials by application of mechanical stress
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y02—TECHNOLOGIES OR APPLICATIONS FOR MITIGATION OR ADAPTATION AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE
- Y02P—CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION TECHNOLOGIES IN THE PRODUCTION OR PROCESSING OF GOODS
- Y02P90/00—Enabling technologies with a potential contribution to greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions mitigation
- Y02P90/30—Computing systems specially adapted for manufacturing
Landscapes
- Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
- Analytical Chemistry (AREA)
- Chemical & Material Sciences (AREA)
- Environmental & Geological Engineering (AREA)
- Environmental Sciences (AREA)
- Biochemistry (AREA)
- Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Ecology (AREA)
- Biodiversity & Conservation Biology (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Immunology (AREA)
- Pathology (AREA)
- Testing Resistance To Weather, Investigating Materials By Mechanical Methods (AREA)
- Investigating Strength Of Materials By Application Of Mechanical Stress (AREA)
- Testing Of Devices, Machine Parts, Or Other Structures Thereof (AREA)
Abstract
The purpose of the present invention is to improve the accuracy of analytical lifetime assessment. The life evaluation device (1) is provided with: a first lifetime evaluation unit (32) that performs lifetime evaluation using actual inspection data of a plurality of evaluation sites of the target member, and obtains a first lifetime evaluation result; a second lifetime evaluation unit (33) that performs analytical lifetime evaluation on the plurality of evaluation sites using standard material strength data of the target member, and obtains a second lifetime evaluation result; and an equivalent strength data creation unit (34) for calculating, for each evaluation site, strength data of a second lifetime evaluation result, which is obtained such that a difference from the first lifetime evaluation result is within a predetermined allowable range, as inherent strength data, and creating equivalent strength data of the target member using the calculated inherent strength data of each evaluation site.
Description
Technical Field
The present invention relates to a lifetime evaluation device and a lifetime evaluation method.
Background
As risk evaluation in terms of probability theory of time-lapse degradation such as creep or fatigue generated in a machine, analytical life evaluation using an evaluation model, life evaluation using an inspection result, and the like are known.
For example, the analytical lifetime evaluation is an evaluation method for evaluating load-stress-strength deviation based on design/manufacturing information and the like to evaluate lifetime and breakage probability analytically.
The life evaluation using the inspection result is an evaluation method for predicting future damage by using a correspondence relationship between the state of deterioration/damage and the remaining life with respect to the state of deterioration/damage such as crack length and pore number density obtained by the damage/non-damage inspection.
In analytical life evaluation, strength data used for evaluation of variation in strength is generally obtained by performing fatigue/creep tests using a plurality of test bodies provided by domestic major material manufacturers and statistically processing the results. For example, if the weld is a weld, a fatigue/creep test is performed using a plurality of test bodies having various groove shapes provided by major material manufacturers, and the strength data is prepared by obtaining an approximation formula from a plurality of values obtained as the test results. Such intensity data typically utilizes data made by, for example, a specialized research institution or manufacturer.
For example, fig. 11 shows creep rupture life data as an example of the strength data. In fig. 11, the horizontal axis represents the breaking time (logarithmic) and the vertical axis represents the stress (logarithmic), and the lower the temperature, the longer the breaking time for the same stress.
Prior art literature
Patent literature
Patent document 1: japanese patent No. 4745366
Patent document 2: japanese patent No. 4699344
Disclosure of Invention
Problems to be solved by the invention
As described above, since the strength data used for the analytical life evaluation is strength data including variations in strength and life due to differences in material manufacturer, groove shape, welding material, construction method, and the like, there is a possibility that errors occur in actual strength data of an evaluation portion where life evaluation is performed, and the accuracy of life evaluation may be lowered.
The present invention has been made in view of such circumstances, and an object thereof is to provide a lifetime assessment device and a lifetime assessment method that can improve the accuracy of analytical lifetime assessment.
Means for solving the problems
An embodiment of a lifetime assessment device according to several embodiments of the present invention includes: a first lifetime evaluation unit that performs lifetime evaluation using actual inspection data of a plurality of evaluation sites of the target member, and obtains a first lifetime evaluation result; a second lifetime evaluation unit that performs analytical lifetime evaluation on the plurality of evaluation sites using standard material strength data of the target member, and obtains a second lifetime evaluation result; and an equivalent strength data creation unit that creates equivalent strength data of the target member using the calculated inherent strength data of each evaluation site, wherein the equivalent strength data is obtained by statistically processing data obtained based on a test body manufactured by a manufacturer different from the target member or a test body having a different characteristic shape, and wherein the equivalent strength data obtained by the equivalent strength data creation unit is used to perform analytical lifetime evaluation on an unevaluated site of the target member.
According to the above configuration, the intrinsic intensity data of each evaluation site is identified (identified) using the first lifetime evaluation result obtained by performing lifetime evaluation using the actual inspection data and the second lifetime evaluation obtained by performing analytical lifetime evaluation. Specifically, the first lifetime evaluation results obtained for each evaluation site are regarded as accurate results, and the intensity data that can obtain the second lifetime evaluation that matches or approximates the first lifetime evaluation results is obtained as the intrinsic intensity data. The equivalent strength data of the material used for the target member is prepared using the inherent strength data obtained for each evaluation site. This can provide equivalent strength data unique to the target member, in which errors due to differences in manufacturer, feature shape, and the like are reduced. Further, the analytical lifetime evaluation is performed on other non-evaluated portions using the equivalent strength data, and thus the evaluation accuracy can be improved as compared with the case of using the standard material strength data. Since it is not necessary to acquire actual data for other non-evaluated portions, labor and time can be reduced.
In the lifetime evaluation device, the equivalent intensity data creation unit may have information indicating a distribution of the standard material intensity data and a deviation of source data of the standard material intensity data, and may be configured to scan a percentile of the distribution to identify a percentile at which the second lifetime evaluation result having a difference from the first lifetime evaluation result within the allowable range is obtained, thereby obtaining the intrinsic intensity data.
In this way, the intrinsic intensity data can be obtained relatively easily by using the percentile of the distribution of the deviation of the source data representing the standard material intensity.
In the lifetime evaluation device, the equivalent intensity data generation unit may generate the equivalent intensity data by statistically processing the intrinsic intensity data of each of the evaluation sites.
The lifetime evaluation device may further include a damage probability evaluation unit that evaluates a damage probability until a next inspection using the equivalent intensity data.
An embodiment of a lifetime assessment method according to several embodiments of the present invention includes the steps of: performing life evaluation by using actual inspection data of a plurality of evaluation parts of the object member to obtain a first life evaluation result; using standard material strength data of the target member, performing analytical lifetime evaluation on the plurality of evaluation sites to obtain a second lifetime evaluation result; calculating, for each of the evaluation sites, intensity data of the second lifetime evaluation result, which is capable of obtaining a difference from the first lifetime evaluation result within a predetermined allowable range, as intrinsic intensity data; using the calculated inherent strength data of each evaluation site to generate equivalent strength data of the target member; and performing analytical lifetime evaluation on an unevaluated portion of the target member using the equivalent strength data, wherein the standard material strength data is strength data including a deviation obtained by statistically processing data obtained based on test pieces manufactured by different manufacturers or test pieces having different characteristic shapes.
Effects of the invention
According to several embodiments of the present invention, the accuracy of analytical lifetime assessment can be improved.
Drawings
Fig. 1 is a diagram showing a hardware configuration of one embodiment of a lifetime assessment device according to several embodiments of the present invention.
Fig. 2 is a functional block diagram showing one embodiment of functions provided in a lifetime assessment device according to several embodiments of the present invention.
Fig. 3 is a diagram showing an example of a main curve of material damage.
Fig. 4 is a diagram showing an example of an evaluation site evaluated by the lifetime evaluation device according to several embodiments of the present invention.
Fig. 5 is a diagram showing an example of standard intensity data at a certain temperature.
Fig. 6 is a diagram showing an example of the lifetime evaluation result obtained by the second lifetime evaluation unit.
Fig. 7 is a graph showing intensity data at 25% percentile among the standard intensity data shown in fig. 5.
Fig. 8 is a diagram showing an example of equivalent intensity data.
Fig. 9 is a diagram showing the breakage probability on the equivalent intensity data.
Fig. 10 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure of one embodiment of a lifetime assessment method according to several embodiments of the present invention.
Fig. 11 is a diagram showing an example of general intensity data.
Detailed Description
Hereinafter, a life evaluation device and a life evaluation method according to several embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.
Fig. 1 is a diagram showing a hardware configuration of a lifetime assessment device 1 according to an embodiment of the present invention. As shown in fig. 1, the lifetime evaluation device 1 includes, for example, a CPU11, a ROM (Read Only Memory) for storing programs and the like executed by the CPU11, RAM (Random Access Memory) functioning as a work area when each program is executed, a Hard Disk Drive (HDD) 14 serving as a mass storage device, an input unit 15 including a keyboard, a mouse, and the like, a display unit 16 including a liquid crystal display device and the like, a communication interface 17 for connecting to a network, an access unit 19 to which an external storage device 18 is attached, and the like. The above-described portions are connected via a bus 20.
Fig. 2 is a functional block diagram showing functions of the lifetime assessment device 1. A series of processes for realizing various functions described below are exemplified as a program stored in a storage medium such as the ROM12 or the HDD14, and the CPU11 reads the program into the RAM13 or the like to execute processing and arithmetic processing of information, thereby realizing various functions. The program may be provided in a state of being stored in a computer-readable storage medium, distributed via a wired or wireless communication means, or the like, as well as being installed in advance in the ROM12, the HDD14, or another storage medium. The computer readable storage medium is a magnetic disk, optical disk, CD-ROM, DVD-ROM, semiconductor memory, or the like.
As shown in fig. 2, the lifetime evaluating device 1 includes a storage unit 31, a first lifetime evaluating unit 32, a second lifetime evaluating unit 33, an equivalent strength data creating unit 34, and a breakage probability evaluating unit 35 as main configurations.
The storage unit 31 stores various information necessary for life evaluation. As the main data, for example, basic data related to the evaluation target device, inspection related data, and the like are cited.
Examples of the basic data related to the equipment to be evaluated include operation data, manufacturing data, modification history data, processing/heat treatment data, and design data. The design data includes a design drawing, damage evaluation type, standard intensity data, inspection schedule data, and the like.
The inspection-related data is data related to damage/non-damage inspection or the like, and examples thereof include a main curve of damage to a material. Examples of the main curve of the material damage include a relational expression of the void number density and creep damage, a relational expression of the intra-crystalline azimuth difference and fatigue damage degree, and the like. These pieces of information may be stored as relational expressions or as mapping information.
The first lifetime assessment unit 32 obtains actual inspection data obtained by performing nondestructive inspection on a plurality of assessment sites, and performs lifetime assessment using the actual inspection data, for example, to obtain the cumulative damage degree B (see fig. 6) for each assessment site. Examples of the actual examination data include the pore number density, the pore area ratio, the A parameter, and the electron back scattering diffraction method (EBSD: electron Backscatter Diffraction). Since the above-described actual inspection data is related to the creep damage fracture time or the fatigue damage fracture time, the life evaluation can be performed using these actual inspection data. For example, the first lifetime evaluation unit 32 calculates the damage degree di_ins of each evaluation site from the above-described actual inspection data using the main curve of the material damage as shown in fig. 3 stored in the storage unit 31. FIG. 3 is a graph showing the number density of pores [ in/mm ] 2 ]Degree of creep damage [%]An example of a main curve of the relationship between the two.
For example, when a boiler setting for thermal power generation or the like is set as an evaluation target equipment, and a large-diameter pipe of the boiler is set as an evaluation target, and weld lines A1 to Ak of the large-diameter pipe are set as evaluation sites of the first life evaluation unit 32 as shown in fig. 4, the first life evaluation unit 32 obtains actual inspection data of the respective evaluation sites A1 to Ak, and obtains cumulative damage degrees d1_ins to dk_ins of the respective evaluation sites A1 to Ak using the actual inspection data and a main curve of material damage stored in the storage unit 31.
The second lifetime assessment unit 33 uses standard material strength data of the target member in the assessment model of the target member, and performs analytical lifetime assessment on a plurality of assessment sites, thereby obtaining a second lifetime assessment result. For example, the second lifetime assessment unit 33 selects a damage assessment model in consideration of the estimated time point of the design of the assessment site or the actual damage condition, and performs lifetime assessment for each assessment site by using the basic data on the equipment to be assessed stored in the storage unit 31 in the selected damage assessment model.
More specifically, if the damage at the damaged portion is fatigue failure, the second life evaluation unit 33 selects a damage evaluation model such as an S-N curve, a cumulative fatigue failure law, a fatigue crack growth law (Paris law, etc.), and if the damage at the damaged portion is creep failure, the second life evaluation unit 33 selects a damage evaluation model using a Time-temperature parameter (TTP: time-Temperature Parameter). Examples of the time-temperature parameters of the TTP method include Larson-Miller, orr-Shereby-Dorn, manson-Succop, manson-Haferd, and the like. The selection of the damage evaluation model may be set by the user from the input unit 15 (see fig. 1), or information in which the damage evaluation model is associated may be prepared in advance for each site, and the damage evaluation model associated with the site may be determined based on the information.
Next, the second lifetime assessment unit 33 uses the basic data stored in the storage unit 31 and the selected damage assessment model to assess the lifetime of each assessment site. For example, the second lifetime assessment unit 33 performs lifetime assessment using standard material strength data on the above-described assessment sites A1 to Ak for lifetime assessment by the first lifetime assessment unit 32. In this case, the second lifetime assessment unit 33 uses the operation time, temperature, stress, and the like of the assessment site as input conditions, and adds these input conditions to the selected damage assessment model to calculate the remaining lifetime/damage degree of the assessment site. Here, the stress may be calculated using FEM (finite element method) or the like based on the actual service environment.
In the case of using Larson-Miller as the above creep rupture life evaluation using TTP, the life evaluation (damage degree evaluation) was performed using the creep rupture curve as standard strength data. Fig. 5 shows an example of a creep rupture curve (standard strength data) under a certain temperature condition. In fig. 5, the horizontal axis represents the breaking time, and the vertical axis represents the stress (logarithm). In fig. 5, the characteristics shown by the straight lines represent creep rupture curves, and the characteristics shown by the lognormal distribution represent the deviation frequency of test data (creep data). That is, the standard material strength data is a characteristic expressed by performing a creep rupture test on a test body having various groove shapes provided by a national main material manufacturer, and obtaining an approximation formula from the test result (creep data). The characteristics of the straight line portion shown in fig. 5 are characteristics showing an example of an approximation formula obtained from a plurality of test results, and the lognormal distribution is a curve showing the degree of deviation of the test results from standard material strength data represented by the approximation formula.
The creep rupture curve shown in fig. 5 is represented by, for example, the following expression (1).
[ mathematics 1]
In the above formula (1), logLi is the logarithmic value of the break time, N (μ, σ) is a normal distribution according to the average μ, standard deviation σ, T is temperature, σ is stress, a 0 、a 1 、a 2 、a 3 C is the material constant, and SEE is the standard error. As shown in the above expression (1), logLi appears as a probability variable conforming to the normal distribution on the right.
Fig. 6 shows an example of the lifetime evaluation result obtained by the second lifetime evaluation unit 33. As shown in fig. 6, manufacturing conditions and dimension conditions are set as design conditions, and actual supply use conditions up to the inspection time point are set as operation conditions. For example, when the operation 1 is to be performed to the operation n from the present inspection time, the operation period T, the pressure p, and the temperature T are set for each of the operations 1 to n, the stress σ is estimated from the above conditions, and the estimated stress σ is set as the operation condition. Then, based on the set conditions, the damage degree (breaking time) at the end of each operation was obtained using the standard intensity data shown in fig. 5.
Specifically, the second lifetime assessment unit 33 calculates the lifetime (breaking time) L under each of the operating conditions 1 to n for each assessment site by substituting the stress σ and the temperature T corresponding to the operating condition into the operation formula shown in the above formula (1).
The damage degree D is obtained from the lifetime (breaking time) L calculated under each operation condition and the operation period t of each operation condition. For example, the damage degree D11 of the evaluation site A1 under the operation condition 1 is expressed by the following expression (2).
D11＝t11/L11 (2)
Next, the second lifetime assessment unit 33 adds the damage degrees D of the respective operation conditions calculated for each assessment site to obtain the cumulative damage degrees di_sum (i=1 to k) for the respective assessment sites A1 to Ak.
The equivalent strength data creating unit 34 creates equivalent strength data of the target member by using the inherent strength data of each of the evaluation sites A1 to Ak, which is obtained by using the cumulative damage degree di_ins as the evaluation result of the first lifetime evaluating unit 32 and the cumulative damage degree di_sum as the evaluation result of the second lifetime evaluating unit 33. Specifically, the equivalent intensity data creation unit 34 sets, as the intrinsic intensity data, intensity data of the cumulative damage degree di_sum such that the difference between the cumulative damage degree di_ins and the cumulative damage degree di_sum becomes 0 or within an allowable range for each evaluation site.
For example, the equivalent intensity data creation unit 34 scans the percentile of the log-normal distribution of the standard intensity data for each evaluation site, and calculates the cumulative damage degree di_sum' from the intensity data at each percentile. For example, as shown in fig. 7, the intensity data at 25% percentile can be obtained by shifting the standard intensity data (creep rupture curve) shown in fig. 5 in parallel. Then, the cumulative damage degree di_sum' obtained as a result of this is searched for a percentile at which the cumulative damage degree di_ins obtained by the first lifetime evaluation unit 32 matches or differs from the cumulative damage degree di_ins within the allowable range.
Here, for example, when the cumulative damage degree di_sum is smaller than the cumulative damage degree di_ins, it is considered that the standard intensity data used for lifetime evaluation is higher than the actual intensity, and thus the percentile can be changed to a smaller value. On the other hand, when the cumulative damage degree di_sum is larger than the cumulative damage degree di_ins, the standard intensity data used for lifetime evaluation is considered to be lower than the actual intensity, and therefore the percentile can be changed to a value larger than 50%.
As a result, as shown in fig. 6, the percentiles are determined for the evaluation sites A1 to Ak.
Next, the equivalent intensity data creation unit 34 obtains the intrinsic intensity data for the evaluation sites A1 to Ak using the percentile (for example, 10%,35%, …%) determined for the evaluation sites A1 to Ak. For example, if the evaluation site A1 is an evaluation site, the intensity data of 10% by percentile is set as the intrinsic intensity data.
The method for obtaining the above-described inherent intensity data is not limited to the above-described method, and a known calculation technique such as a statistical calculation method can be suitably applied.
Next, based on the percentile determined for the evaluation sites A1 to Ak, probability distribution characteristics of the percentile are obtained using a probability paper plot or a statistical method. And, the equivalent intensity data is calculated from the probability distribution characteristics.
For example, when the percentiles of the evaluation sites A1 to Ak are assumed to conform to the normal distribution, equivalent intensity data such as that shown in fig. 8 is obtained.
In this way, when the equivalent intensity data is generated by the equivalent intensity data generation unit 34, the second lifetime estimation unit 33 performs analytical lifetime estimation on the non-estimated parts ak+1 to An (see fig. 4) of the target member using the equivalent intensity data obtained by the equivalent intensity data generation unit 34. Thus, the lifetime can be evaluated for the other evaluation sites ak+1 to An using equivalent intensity data estimated from the intensity data inherent to the target member. As a result, the evaluation accuracy can be improved as compared with the case of performing lifetime evaluation using standard intensity data. Since actual data does not need to be acquired for the evaluation sites ak+1 to An, labor can be reduced and time can be shortened.
The breakage probability evaluation unit 35 (see fig. 2) performs breakage probability evaluation at the next inspection time using the equivalent intensity data created by the equivalent intensity data creation unit 34 and information on the predetermined operation conditions up to the next inspection time.
Here, the first lifetime estimating unit 32 calculates the estimated positions A1 to Ak of the cumulative damage degree di_ins, and obtains the intrinsic intensity data corresponding to each estimated position A1 to Ak. Therefore, the cumulative damage degree di_ins at the present inspection time, the respective intrinsic intensity data, and the operation conditions up to the next inspection time are used for the evaluation sites A1 to Ak, and the cumulative damage degree at the next inspection time is calculated.
The evaluation sites ak+1 to An where the intrinsic intensity data does not exist because the cumulative damage degree di_ins based on the first lifetime evaluation unit 32 does not exist are calculated using the cumulative damage degree di_sum at the present inspection time calculated using the equivalent intensity data generated by the equivalent intensity data generation unit 34 and the cumulative damage degree calculated from the equivalent intensity data and the operation conditions up to the next inspection time.
When the cumulative damage degree at the next inspection time is calculated for each of the evaluation sites A1 to An, the damage probability evaluation unit 35 calculates the damage probability (PoF: probability of Failure) at the next inspection using the following expression (3).
[ math figure 2]
In the above expression (3), li_next is the fracture life of the evaluation site Ai (i=an integer of 1 to n) at the time of the next inspection, ti_next is the operation time of the evaluation site Ai (i=an integer of 1 to n) from the time of the present inspection to the time of the next inspection, and di_sum is the cumulative damage degree of the evaluation site Ai (i=an integer of 1 to n) at the time of the present inspection.
Fig. 9 is a diagram showing the breakage probability PoF on the equivalent intensity data.
In this way, by calculating the breakage probability at the next inspection, the member that has to be replaced at the present time can be quantitatively evaluated.
Next, a life evaluation method by the life evaluation device 1 having the above-described configuration will be briefly described with reference to fig. 10.
First, in step SA1, a plurality of evaluation sites (for example, A1 to An in fig. 4) for which lifetime evaluation is performed in the current inspection are set. Next, in step SA2, the lifetime evaluation based on the inspection data is performed for a specified part of the evaluation sites A1 to Ak among the plurality of evaluation sites A1 to An set in step SA 1. For example, nondestructive inspection is performed on a part of the evaluation sites A1 to Ak, and life evaluation is performed based on the inspection data. Thus, the cumulative damage degree di_ins (see fig. 6) was calculated as the first lifetime evaluation result for a part of the evaluation sites A1 to Ak.
In step SA3, analytical lifetime evaluation is performed on a part of the evaluation sites A1 to Ak, whereby the cumulative damage degree di_sum (see fig. 6) is calculated as a second lifetime evaluation result.
In step SA4, equivalent intensity data is generated. Specifically, the percentile is identified so that the cumulative damage degree di_sum of each evaluation site obtained in step SA3 matches the cumulative damage degree di_ins, and equivalent intensity data is prepared from the obtained percentile.
In step SA5, analytical lifetime evaluations are performed for the remaining evaluation sites ak+1 to An using the equivalent intensity data prepared in step SA 4.
In step SA6, the breakage probability PoF is evaluated. Specifically, the breakage probability PoF is calculated using the intrinsic intensity data obtained from the percentile obtained by the recognition for a part of the evaluation sites A1 to Ak, and the breakage probability PoF is calculated using the equivalent intensity data obtained in step SA5 for the remaining evaluation sites ak+1 to An.
As described above, according to the present embodiment, the cumulative damage degree di_ins (first life evaluation result) obtained by the first life evaluation unit 32 can be regarded as a correct life evaluation result, and the intensity data of the second life evaluation that matches or approximates the cumulative damage degree di_ins can be calculated as the intrinsic intensity data. The equivalent strength data of the material used for the target member is prepared using the inherent strength data obtained for each evaluation site. This can provide equivalent strength data unique to the target member, in which errors due to differences in manufacturer, feature shape, and the like are reduced. Further, by performing analytical lifetime evaluation on other non-evaluated sites (for example, ak+1 to An) using equivalent strength data, the evaluation accuracy can be improved as compared with the case of using standard material strength data. Since it is not necessary to acquire actual data for other non-evaluated portions, labor and time can be reduced.
While the embodiments of the present invention have been described above, the technical scope of the present invention is not limited to the scope described in the above embodiments. Various changes and modifications may be made to the above-described embodiments without departing from the spirit of the invention, and the embodiments to which such changes and modifications are applied are also included in the technical scope of the invention. The above embodiments may be appropriately combined.
The flow of the information presentation processing described in the above embodiment is also an example, and unnecessary steps may be deleted, new steps may be added, or the processing order may be changed within a range not departing from the gist of the present invention.
For example, in the above embodiment, the number of evaluation sites (k in the above example) required for obtaining equivalent intensity data is arbitrarily set, but the number of evaluation sites required for obtaining equivalent intensity data may be calculated using a statistical method, and a more appropriate number may be set. For example, a calculation method of the confidence level 1- γ in accordance with the consideration of the sample statistics may be introduced, the minimum number of data required to obtain equivalent intensity data having a constant confidence or higher may be calculated, and an evaluation site corresponding to the number of data may be set.
When an evaluation site for acquiring actual inspection data is selected, the accuracy of life evaluation based on the actual inspection data tends to be low in a case where creep is often minute even if creep occurs in a site immediately after component replacement. Therefore, as for the evaluation sites for acquiring the actual inspection data, that is, the evaluation sites A1 to Ak in the above-described embodiment, it is possible to set the sites at which the use period passes to a certain extent, for example, the sites at which the use period is longer than or equal to the preset period. In this way, by selecting a part having a long use period to a certain extent as an evaluation part for actual inspection, analytical lifetime evaluation using equivalent intensity data is performed for a part having a short trial period. This makes it possible to perform life evaluation with higher accuracy than life evaluation based on actual inspection data.
In the above-described embodiment, the breakage probability was calculated for each of the evaluation sites A1 to An as An independent site, but for example, as shown in fig. 4, when a damage occurs in one site in a member configured by connecting a plurality of sites, it is inevitable to replace other sites connected to the damaged site. Such connection conditions may also be taken into consideration to calculate the breakage probability. For example, the damage degree of the entire member may be calculated by multiplying the damage degrees of the respective portions constituting the member by each other, the members being formed by connecting a plurality of portions.
In the above-described embodiment, the life evaluation and breakage probability of each evaluation portion are evaluated, but the evaluation results may be used to provide information on the cost and time spent for preventive maintenance or post-accident maintenance as input information, thereby evaluating unplanned stop risks (operating rates), maintenance costs (preventive maintenance costs, post-accident maintenance costs), customer damage amounts (accident handling costs, loss of opportunity for selling) and the like corresponding to the number of replacement.
For example, the total construction cost TC can be quantitatively evaluated by the following expression (4) by using the inspection construction cost (PMC: preventive Maintenance Cost) and the accident handling cost at the time of failure (CMC: corrective Maintenance Cost) in addition to the breakage probability (PoF) calculated by the breakage probability evaluation unit 35.
TC＝PMC+CMC×PoF (4)
Further, by taking into consideration the facility stop time associated with the accident and the opportunity loss of the customer associated with the stop (for example, the loss of the opportunity to sell a motor if it is a power plant) in the accident-handling cost CMC, the total cost considering the facility operation rate and profitability can be quantified. Thus, for example, operating conditions and the like that minimize the total cost can be proposed.
Description of the reference numerals
1. Life evaluation device
31. Storage unit
32. First life evaluation unit
33. Second lifetime evaluation unit
34. Equivalent intensity data creation unit
35. Breakage probability evaluation unit
A1 to An evaluation sites.
Claims (5)
1. A lifetime evaluation device is provided with:
a first lifetime evaluation unit that performs lifetime evaluation using actual inspection data of a plurality of evaluation sites of the target member, and obtains a first lifetime evaluation result;
a second lifetime evaluation unit that performs analytical lifetime evaluation on the plurality of evaluation sites using standard material strength data of the target member, and obtains a second lifetime evaluation result; and
An equivalent strength data creation unit that calculates, for each of the evaluation sites, strength data that can obtain the second lifetime evaluation result such that a difference from the first lifetime evaluation result is within a predetermined allowable range as intrinsic strength data, creates equivalent strength data of the target member using the calculated intrinsic strength data of each of the evaluation sites,
the standard material strength data is strength data including a deviation obtained by statistically processing data obtained based on a test body manufactured by a manufacturer different from the target member or a test body having a different characteristic shape,
the second lifetime assessment unit uses the equivalent intensity data generated by the equivalent intensity data generation unit to perform analytical lifetime assessment on an unevaluated portion of the target member.
2. The lifetime assessment device according to claim 1, wherein,
the equivalent intensity data creation unit includes information indicating a distribution of the standard material intensity data and a deviation of source data of the standard material intensity data, and obtains the intrinsic intensity data by scanning a percentile of the distribution to identify a percentile that is capable of obtaining the second lifetime evaluation result in which a difference from the first lifetime evaluation result is within the allowable range.
3. The lifetime assessment device according to claim 2, wherein,
the equivalent intensity data creation unit creates the equivalent intensity data by statistically processing the inherent intensity data of each of the evaluation sites.
4. The life evaluation device according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein,
the lifetime evaluation device is provided with a damage probability evaluation unit that evaluates the damage probability until the next inspection using the equivalent intensity data.
5. A life evaluation method includes the following steps:
performing life evaluation by using actual inspection data of a plurality of evaluation parts of the object member to obtain a first life evaluation result;
using standard material strength data of the target member, performing analytical lifetime evaluation on the plurality of evaluation sites to obtain a second lifetime evaluation result;
calculating, for each of the evaluation sites, intensity data of the second lifetime evaluation result, which is capable of obtaining a difference from the first lifetime evaluation result within a predetermined allowable range, as intrinsic intensity data;
using the calculated inherent strength data of each evaluation site to generate equivalent strength data of the target member; and
Using the equivalent intensity data to perform analytical lifetime evaluation on an unevaluated portion of the target member,
the standard material strength data is strength data including a deviation obtained by statistically processing data obtained based on test pieces manufactured by different manufacturers or test pieces having different characteristic shapes.
Applications Claiming Priority (3)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| JP2017245197A JP7039784B2 (en) | 2017-12-21 | 2017-12-21 | Life evaluation device and life evaluation method |
| JP2017-245197 | 2017-12-21 | ||
| PCT/JP2018/037984 WO2019123792A1 (en) | 2017-12-21 | 2018-10-11 | Service life evaluating device and service life evaluating method |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN111465837A CN111465837A (en) | 2020-07-28 |
| CN111465837B true CN111465837B (en) | 2023-08-08 |
Family
ID=66992557
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201880080126.0A Active CN111465837B (en) | 2017-12-21 | 2018-10-11 | Life evaluation device and life evaluation method |
Country Status (3)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| JP (1) | JP7039784B2 (en) |
| CN (1) | CN111465837B (en) |
| WO (1) | WO2019123792A1 (en) |
Families Citing this family (3)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN111707348B (en) * | 2020-06-24 | 2022-04-15 | 中国电子产品可靠性与环境试验研究所（（工业和信息化部电子第五研究所）（中国赛宝实验室）） | Method for evaluating service life of optical fiber hydrophone |
| JP2023012668A (en) * | 2021-07-14 | 2023-01-26 | 三菱重工業株式会社 | Failure predicting device, failure predicting method, and program |
| JP7363964B1 (en) * | 2022-05-25 | 2023-10-18 | Ｊｆｅスチール株式会社 | Optimization analysis method, device, and program for vehicle body joint positions |
Citations (5)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JP2001032724A (en) * | 1999-07-19 | 2001-02-06 | Toshiba Corp | On-line life diagnostic system |
| JP2004144549A (en) * | 2002-10-23 | 2004-05-20 | Hatsuden Setsubi Gijutsu Kensa Kyokai | Non-breaking high-temperature creep damage evaluation method |
| CN103063528A (en) * | 2012-12-20 | 2013-04-24 | 广东电网公司电力科学研究院 | Method for fast evaluating high temperate member residual service life on spot |
| CN105277481A (en) * | 2015-10-27 | 2016-01-27 | 武汉钢铁(集团)公司 | Method and device for detecting eroding degree of refractory material |
| CN105403582A (en) * | 2015-12-22 | 2016-03-16 | 中国科学院金属研究所 | Damage evaluation method of service tissue of gas turbine blade |
Family Cites Families (9)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JP3372437B2 (en) * | 1996-12-13 | 2003-02-04 | 三菱重工業株式会社 | Creep life evaluation method for high temperature equipment materials |
| JP2002195935A (en) * | 2000-12-25 | 2002-07-10 | Babcock Hitachi Kk | Method for evaluating life of apparatus |
| JP2002328085A (en) * | 2001-02-27 | 2002-11-15 | Nkk Corp | Corrosion-proof life predicting method, designing method, and manufacturing method for surface treated steel material |
| JP2003130986A (en) * | 2001-10-23 | 2003-05-08 | Babcock Hitachi Kk | Maintenance method for apparatus |
| JP2008134095A (en) * | 2006-11-27 | 2008-06-12 | Toshiba Corp | Lifetime evaluation device of high temperature apparatus, and lifetime evaluation method of high temperature apparatus |
| WO2014147830A1 (en) * | 2013-03-22 | 2014-09-25 | 中国電力株式会社 | Method for predicting remaining creep life expectancy of product with bainite structure and method for producing standard curve used in this prediction method |
| JP6564231B2 (en) * | 2015-04-23 | 2019-08-21 | 日立Ｇｅニュークリア・エナジー株式会社 | Damage evaluation method for members, creep damage evaluation method, and damage evaluation system |
| WO2017163562A1 (en) * | 2016-03-25 | 2017-09-28 | 株式会社日立製作所 | Remaining service life evaluating device and method, and wind power electricity generating system |
| JP6739986B2 (en) * | 2016-04-26 | 2020-08-12 | 株式会社東芝 | Life assessment device and life assessment method |
-
2017
- 2017-12-21 JP JP2017245197A patent/JP7039784B2/en active Active
-
2018
- 2018-10-11 CN CN201880080126.0A patent/CN111465837B/en active Active
- 2018-10-11 WO PCT/JP2018/037984 patent/WO2019123792A1/en active Application Filing
Patent Citations (5)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JP2001032724A (en) * | 1999-07-19 | 2001-02-06 | Toshiba Corp | On-line life diagnostic system |
| JP2004144549A (en) * | 2002-10-23 | 2004-05-20 | Hatsuden Setsubi Gijutsu Kensa Kyokai | Non-breaking high-temperature creep damage evaluation method |
| CN103063528A (en) * | 2012-12-20 | 2013-04-24 | 广东电网公司电力科学研究院 | Method for fast evaluating high temperate member residual service life on spot |
| CN105277481A (en) * | 2015-10-27 | 2016-01-27 | 武汉钢铁(集团)公司 | Method and device for detecting eroding degree of refractory material |
| CN105403582A (en) * | 2015-12-22 | 2016-03-16 | 中国科学院金属研究所 | Damage evaluation method of service tissue of gas turbine blade |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| WO2019123792A1 (en) | 2019-06-27 |
| JP2019113345A (en) | 2019-07-11 |
| JP7039784B2 (en) | 2022-03-23 |
| CN111465837A (en) | 2020-07-28 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CN111465837B (en) | Life evaluation device and life evaluation method | |
| KR101115277B1 (en) | Crack progress predicting method and computer-readable recording medium embodying crack progress predicting program | |
| AU752024B2 (en) | Method and equipment for assessing the life of members put under high in-service temperature environment for long period | |
| US9792555B2 (en) | Probabilistic modeling and sizing of embedded flaws in ultrasonic nondestructive inspections for fatigue damage prognostics and structural integrity assessment | |
| EP2423664A2 (en) | Fatigue life estimation method and system | |
| US10275546B2 (en) | Method of predicting crack growth and information processing device therefor | |
| KR101526313B1 (en) | Method for predicting fatigue life | |
| JP2008003009A (en) | Lifetime diagnosis device for high-temperature equipment, and lifetime diagnosis method and program for high-temperature equipment | |
| JP6944736B1 (en) | Fatigue life prediction method, fatigue life prediction device, fatigue life prediction program and storage medium | |
| JP2007263603A (en) | System for assessing remaining life of high-temperature plant equipment and remaining life assessment method using same | |
| JP2009092652A (en) | Remaining life evaluation method and deformation amount evaluation method for metallic material | |
| JP2010164430A (en) | Method and apparatus for evaluating creep damage of metallic material | |
| JP5410395B2 (en) | Method and apparatus for evaluating crack growth rate of metallic material | |
| JP2018142106A (en) | Aircraft management device and method, and program | |
| CN109983484B (en) | Device state estimation apparatus, device state estimation method, and recording medium | |
| JP5583489B2 (en) | Method and apparatus for evaluating damage of metal materials | |
| JP5710515B2 (en) | Structure life diagnosis apparatus, method and program | |
| JP2012234226A (en) | Plant equipment operable period evaluation method and operable period evaluation device | |
| KR100716902B1 (en) | The damage evaluation system of metal and The damage evaluation method of metal using the same | |
| KR101982842B1 (en) | Apparatus and method for analyzing failure characteristic of material | |
| JP2017198500A (en) | Life evaluation device and life evaluation method | |
| Efremov et al. | Assessment of the sensors lifetime on the basis of test results | |
| CN118313259A (en) | Steel template service life assessment method and device based on deep learning | |
| Bicova et al. | ANALYSIS AND DEPENDABILITY OF PRODUCTION PROCESSES FOR THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY. | |
| CN118447393A (en) | Pipeline detection method, system, electronic equipment and storage medium |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| CB02 | Change of applicant information |
Address after: Kanagawa Prefecture, Japan Applicant after: Mitsubishi Power Co.,Ltd. Address before: Kanagawa Prefecture, Japan Applicant before: MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, Ltd. |
|
| CB02 | Change of applicant information | ||
| TA01 | Transfer of patent application right |
Effective date of registration: 20220901 Address after: Tokyo Applicant after: MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, Ltd. Address before: Kanagawa Applicant before: Mitsubishi Power Co.,Ltd. |
|
| TA01 | Transfer of patent application right | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant |