The equipment may contain flaws, have sustained damage, or have aged so that it cannot be evaluated by use of the original construction codes. The main types of equipment covered by this standard are pressure vessels, piping, and tanks. The material presented in the course shows how the disciplines of stress analysis, materials engineering, and nondestructive inspection interact and apply to fitness-for-service assessment. The assessment methods apply to pressure vessels, piping, and tanks that are inservice. The course includes an extensive set of notes to supplement the contents of the recommended practice, and the recommended practice contains numerous example problems that illustrate fitness-for-service assessment.
|Published (Last):||15 October 2010|
|PDF File Size:||15.7 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.22 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The purpose of the document is to provide a consensus of methods to quantitatively evaluate commonly observed damage to in-service pressure equipment. Since it was first issued by API in , this Fitness-For-Service standard has been used worldwide as a means of evaluating whether pressure equipment was fit for continued service, and in many cases, for how long.
This standard has been used to avoid costly and unnecessary unplanned outages, while maintaining safe and reliable equipment.
The Second Edition was released in , followed by the most current release of the document in June of In addition to the many clarifications, updated references to codes and standards, several changes and additions have been made to improve the standard in its most recent update.
In the edition, the material properties are no longer in a separate annex, but are instead moved to the assessment part where they are mostly referenced. For example, material data needed for creep assessments — Part 10 — are now found in Annex 10B.
Another example is the previous Annex B1, which contained the procedures for demonstrating protection against various failure modes using stress analysis, which is now under Part 2 in Annex 2D.
Several of the assessment methodologies are no longer shown in full, e. Introduction — Part 1 Scope of the standard has been expanded to include additional Construction Codes. Clarifies applicability of Div 1, Div 2 and B Clarifies stress determination in assessment of piping systems — Method A.
General Metal Loss — Part 4 Revised definitions of corrosion losses. The Standard now has a lower minimum thickness limit for piping than for vessels. Revised definition of average thickness, which now includes FCA. Since the FCA is included in the acceptance criteria, this appears to be a double counting error and we expect future errata documents will remedy this.
Local Metal Loss — Part 5 Revised definitions of corrosion losses. Revised procedure for assessing groove-like flaws. New Level 1 and Level 2 criteria for circumferential extent of flaw. Change in Level 2 procedure for combining closely spaced flaws.
Pitting — Part 6 Includes criteria for minimum acceptable thickness. New criteria for evaluating pitting damage as LTA.
Crack-like Flaws — Part 9 Revised method for calculating plasticity interaction factor. Clarification of weld joint efficiency in stress computations for Crack-like flaw evaluations. Completely rewrite of old Annex E for residual stresses in what is now Annex 9D. Updated flaw interaction rules. Updated guidance on material toughness in crack-like flaw evaluations.
Creep — Part 10 The standard now advises a higher allowable creep damage. Suggested creep strain acceptance criteria are now offered. Guidance is given for how to implement the MPC Omega method in numeric analysis, i. The MPC Omega creep data have been expanded with additional materials. Laminations — Part 13 Re-arranging of the assessment procedures with unfortunate modifications that results in Level 1 and Level 2 assessment to yield identical results.
Fatigue — Part 14 The new Part 14 includes the procedures for demonstrating protection against cyclic failure previously found in Annex B1. These procedures have been divided into assessment levels with the screening methods as Level 1 and the stress analyses methods S-N curve and Structural Stress as Level 2.
A Level 3 assessment is introduced in the form of a new strain-life assessment procedure with mean stress correction using the critical plane approach. This method is complex and will for all but the simplest cases require dedicated post-processing software. Becht Engineering has extensive experience and expertise in the conduct of Fitness-For-Service.
Our wealth of knowledge and experience enables us to provide authoritative, practical, knowledge based answers, and to solve your problems. Read more about the software HERE. Share This Article:.
API RP 579-1 / ASME FFS-1 API 579-1 / ASME FFS-1, Fitness-For-Service, Third Edition
Full Description Fitness-For-Service FFS assessments are quantitative engineering evaluations that are performed to demonstrate the structural integrity of an in-service component that may contain a flaw or damage, or that may be operating under a specific condition that might cause a failure. This Standard provides guidance for conducting FFS assessments using methodologies specifically prepared for pressurized equipment. The guidelines provided in this Standard can be used to make run-repair-replace decisions to help determine if components in pressurized equipment containing flaws that have been identified by inspection can continue to operate safely for some period of time. These FFS assessments are currently recognized and referenced by the API Codes and Standards , , and , and by NB as suitable means for evaluating the structural integrity of pressure vessels, piping systems, and storage tanks where inspection has revealed degradation and flaws in the equipment. This Standard has broad applications since the assessment procedures are based on allowable stress methods and plastic collapse loads for non-crack-like flaws, and the Failure Assessment Diagram Approach for crack-like flaws. The FFS assessment procedures in this Standard can be used to evaluate flaws commonly encountered in pressure vessels, piping, and tankage. The procedures are not intended to provide a definitive guideline for every possible situation that may be encountered.
Fitness-For-Service API 579-1/ASME FFS-1: Substantive Changes to the 2016 Edition
API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 Fitness-for-Service