REGISTER

FR
Search
×
FR

Placeholder headline

This is just a placeholder headline

API STD 12R1: Installation, Operation, Maintenance, Inspection, and Repair of Tanks in Production Service

$

285

BUY NOW

Placeholder headline

This is just a placeholder headline

API Technical Report 2583 – Measurement of Produced Water for Custody Transfer

$

174

BUY NOW

Placeholder headline

This is just a placeholder headline

API Bulletin 592 – Elements of a Fixed Equipment Mechanical Integrity (FE MI) Program

$

142

BUY NOW

Placeholder headline

This is just a placeholder headline

API SPEC Q1: Addenda 2

$

0

BUY NOW

Placeholder headline

This is just a placeholder headline

API TR 2583 : Measurement of Produced Water for Custody Transfer

$

174

BUY NOW

Placeholder headline

This is just a placeholder headline

API TR 2581: Wet Gas Sampling

$

189

BUY NOW

Placeholder headline

This is just a placeholder headline

API TR 2581 Wet Gas Sampling : Errata 1

$

0

BUY NOW

Placeholder headline

This is just a placeholder headline

API 510: Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: In-service Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration

$

481

BUY NOW

Placeholder headline

This is just a placeholder headline

API SPEC 6AV1: Validation of Safety and Shutdown Valves for Sandy Service : Edition 4

$

208

BUY NOW

API TR 579-A

API Technical Report 579-A : Development of FEA-based Reference Stress Solutions for Level 2 and Level 3 Crack Assessments

CDN $189.00

This publication was last reviewed and confirmed in 2025.

Description

This research study provides background information that may be used to revise the Fitness-For-Service (FFS) document, API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 2021 (aka “API 579”), more specifically the Part 9 Level 2 Assessment, along with a new Level 3 option for Part 9.

The Part 9 Level 2 crack-like flaw FFS procedure relies on the Failure Assessment Diagram (FAD) approach, which is the most widely used crack assessment methodology in the world. Several industry standards for crack assessment implement the FAD approach, including BS 7910 from the British Standards Institute and the R6 document from the British nuclear power generation industry.

The FAD approach was first introduced in 1976 as a simple approximation for fracture stability assessment of structural components that experience plastic deformation prior to failure. Modern industry standards use improved versions of the FAD, but the approach still contains approximations and simplifications.

The main purpose of the present work is to remove some of the approximations in the existing Part 9 Level 2 FAD procedure and thereby improve accuracy. A side benefit of this work is a new Level 3 option that is even more accurate than the improved Level 2 procedure. This study includes a large number of 3D elastic-plastic Finite Element Analyses (FEA) of components with cracks.

 

Edition

1

Published Date

2025-05-03

Status

Current

Pages

131

Language Detail Icon

English

Format Secure Icon

Secure PDF

Abstract

This research study provides background information that may be used to revise the Fitness-For-Service (FFS) document, API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 2021 (aka “API 579”), more specifically the Part 9 Level 2 Assessment, along with a new Level 3 option for Part 9. The Part 9 Level 2 crack-like flaw FFS procedure relies on the Failure Assessment Diagram (FAD) approach, which is the most widely used crack assessment methodology in the world. Several industry standards for crack assessment implement the FAD approach, including BS 7910 from the British Standards Institute and the R6 document from the British nuclear power generation industry. The FAD approach was first introduced in 1976 as a simple approximation for fracture stability assessment of structural components that experience plastic deformation prior to failure. Modern industry standards use improved versions of the FAD, but the approach still contains approximations and simplifications. The main purpose of the present work is to remove some of the approximations in the existing Part 9 Level 2 FAD procedure and thereby improve accuracy. A side benefit of this work is a new Level 3 option that is even more accurate than the improved Level 2 procedure. This study includes a large number of 3D elastic-plastic Finite Element Analyses (FEA) of components with cracks.  

Previous Editions

Can’t find what you are looking for?

Please contact us at: