A Bayesian framework is used for updating the probability distributions of the parameters of a fracture mechanics model and of crack size in tubular joints using information from inspection reports of fixed offshore structures. An error model, defined as the logarithmic difference between measured crack size during inspection and crack size predicted by the fracture mechanics model, is assumed to have a normal distribution with known mean and uncertain variance. The distribution of the error variance is modeled by a conjugate distribution for samples of normal variables with known mean and uncertain variance. Based on these assumptions, an analytical model is obtained using a Bayesian approach for the updated distributions of the parameters of the fracture mechanics model and of crack size based. The capabilities of the model are illustrated by means of examples using the Paris-Erdogan formulation for crack growth. The examples illustrate the effects of inspection times, measured crack size, and the distribution of stress ranges on the updated density functions of crack size, time varying reliability and expected cost of failure.

Issue Section:
Technical Papers
Keywords:
fatigue, Bayes methods, fracture mechanics, offshore installations, cable jointing, inspection, cracks, engineering computing
Topics:
Fracture (Materials), Inspection, Reliability, Statistical distributions, Tubular joints, Probability, Fracture mechanics, Density
1.
Heredia-Zavoni
,
E.
,
Zeballos
,
A.
, and
Esteva
,
L.
,
2000
, “
Theoretical models and recorded response in the estimation of cumulative seismic damage on non-linear structures
,”
Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics
,
29
, pp.
1779
–
1796
.
2.
Dharmavasan, S., and Peers, S. M. S., 1996, “Inspection, maintenance and repair planning and scheduling for tubular joints using reliability methods,” Fatigue in Offshore Structures, chap. 25, Vol. 2. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co.
3.
Moan, T., and Song, R., 1998, “Implication of inspection updating on system fatigue reliability of offshore structures,” Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering (OMAE), ASME.
4.
Sørensen, J. D., Faber, M. H., and Kroon, I. B., 1995, “Optimal reliability-based planning of experiments for POD curves,” Proceedings of the Fifth International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Netherlands, 11–16 June.
5.
DeGroot, M. H., 1988, “Probabilidad y Estadı´stica,” Addison-Wesley Iberoamericana, S.A., Wilmington, Delaware, E.U.A., 2nd ed.
6.
Paris
,
P.
, and
Erdogan
,
F.
,
1963
, “
A critical analysis of crack propagation laws
,”
Journal of Basic Engineering, ASME
,
85
, pp.
258
–
534
.
7.
Kirkemo
,
F.
,
1988
, “
Applications of probabilistic fracture mechanics to offshore structures
,”
Applied Mechanics Review, ASME
,
41, 2
, pp.
61
–
84
.
8.
Newman
,
J. R.
, and
Raju
,
I. S.
,
1981
, “
An Empirical Stress-Intensity Factor Equation for the Surface Crack
,”
Eng. Fract. Mech.
,
15, 1–2
, pp.
185
–
192
.
9.
Moan, T., Varda˚l, O. T., and Johannesen J. M., 2000, “Probabilistic inspection planning of offshore structures,” Applications of Statistics and Probability, Civil Engineering and Risk Analysis, Vol. 1. Proceedings of the ICASP8 Conference, Australia, 12–15 dic., 1999, Robert E. Melchers and Mark G. Steward eds, Balkema, Rotterdam.
10.
Bloch, A., Sørensen, J. D., and Faber, M. H., 2000, “Simplified Approach to Inspection Planning,” Specialty Conference on Probabilistic Mechanics and Structural Reliability, ASCE.
Copyright © 2004
 by ASME
You do not currently have access to this content.