Engineering infrastructure evaluation method and system

Abstract

The invention provides an engineering basic structure evaluation method and system, and the method comprises the steps: carrying out the engineering critical evaluation of an engineering basic structure based on probability fracture mechanics, and constructing a failure evaluation curve; according to the failure assessment curve, constructing a failure assessment diagram, combining the failure assessment diagram and the Paris's law, performing comprehensive assessment of fracture and fatigue on the engineering foundation structure, and analyzing the failure probability of the engineering foundation structure in the designed service life; before failure probability analysis, random extraction is carried out on uncertainty parameters input in the engineering critical evaluation through a Monte Carlo method, and determinacy evaluation is carried out on each extracted parameter; and executing random extraction and deterministic evaluation for multiple times, analyzing whether the component is invalid or not for each evaluation, and calculating a final failure probability Pif. According to the method, the uncertainty of engineering basic structure parameters is reasonably considered, and the structure can be better and more accurately evaluated.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the technical field of safety assessment, and particularly relates to an engineering infrastructure assessment method and system. Background Art

[0002] The existing safety assessments of engineering infrastructures such as offshore wind power, onshore wind power, offshore drilling platforms, and offshore oil and gas pipelines usually use deterministic fracture mechanics methods for evaluation, which only involve conservative estimates of the input parameters required for the assessment of engineering infrastructures. However, due to the influence of complex service environments and loads (such as factors like wind, waves, and currents), high requirements are put forward for the safe operation and maintenance of their infrastructures. For example, for offshore wind power infrastructures, in deep waters, tension leg, semi-submersible, and column-type infrastructures can be selected in sequence according to water depth. Offshore wind power infrastructures stand in harsh marine environments for a long time, are greatly affected by wind, waves, tides, etc., and have above-water parts, underwater parts, and parts impacted by sea waves.

[0003] The material properties of engineering infrastructures often cannot be directly obtained, and with the increase of service time, the material properties show obvious degradation. Therefore, it can be found that there are large uncertainties in the loads, material properties, defects, etc. of engineering infrastructures during service. The current engineering critical assessment methods fail to take into account the uncertainties of these parameters, making the evaluation and prediction results too conservative, resulting in increased operation and maintenance costs and reduced service life of engineering infrastructures. Figure 6 It is a traditional failure assessment diagram in the prior art.

[0004] In addition, due to the action of cyclic loads such as wind, waves, and currents, fatigue crack growth failure is also a potential failure form for engineering infrastructures, and it is extremely difficult to obtain the fatigue crack growth rate parameters under service environments. In order to reasonably consider the uncertainties of the assessment parameters of offshore wind power infrastructures, there is an urgent need for a method based on probabilistic fracture mechanics to better evaluate the safety and reliability of engineering infrastructures. Summary of the Invention

[0005] To solve the above problems, the present disclosure provides an engineering infrastructure assessment method and system to better and more accurately evaluate the safety and reliability of engineering infrastructures.

[0006] The present invention discloses an engineering infrastructure assessment method, including the following steps:

[0007] Conduct engineering critical assessment based on probabilistic fracture mechanics for the engineering infrastructure and construct a failure assessment curve;

[0008] Construct a failure assessment diagram based on the failure assessment curve, and combine the failure assessment diagram and Paris' law to comprehensively evaluate the fracture and fatigue of the engineering infrastructure, and analyze the failure probability of the engineering infrastructure within the designed service life;

[0009] Before the failure probability analysis, randomly extract the uncertain parameters input in the engineering critical assessment by the Monte Carlo method, and conduct a deterministic assessment on each extracted parameter;

[0010] Execute the random extraction and deterministic assessment multiple times, and analyze whether the component fails for each assessment to calculate the final failure probability Pof.

[0011] Furthermore, the elements of the engineering critical assessment include material properties, loads, and geometric information of components and defects.

[0012] Furthermore, the failure assessment curve is;

[0013]

[0014] In the formula, f(L r ) represents the failure assessment curve, Lr,max represents the maximum value of the load ratio Lr, and Lr represents the load ratio;

[0015] Among them,

[0016]

[0017]

[0018] In the formula, E represents the elastic modulus, σ Y represents the yield strength, and σ U represents the tensile strength.

[0019] Furthermore, the load ratio L r is obtained by the following formula:

[0020]

[0021] In the formula, P represents the applied load, P L represents the ultimate load, σ ref represents the reference stress, and σ Y represents the yield strength;

[0022] Among them, the load ratio L r is the abscissa of the failure assessment diagram, that is, the load ratio represents the possibility of plastic limit failure of the structure.

[0023] Furthermore, the abscissa Kr of the failure assessment diagram is obtained by the following formula:

[0024]

[0025] In the formula, Kr represents the fracture ratio, K represents the stress intensity factor, and K mat represents the fracture toughness, σ represents the stress, and Y represents the stress intensity correction factor.

[0026] Furthermore, by combining the failure assessment diagram and Paris' law, a comprehensive assessment of fracture and fatigue of the engineering infrastructure is carried out, including:

[0027] The comprehensive assessment includes: fracture assessment, fatigue crack growth assessment, and fracture-fatigue comprehensive assessment;

[0028] Using the failure assessment diagram, the fracture assessment and fracture-fatigue comprehensive assessment of the engineering infrastructure are respectively carried out;

[0029] Using Paris' law, the fatigue crack growth assessment of the engineering infrastructure is carried out;

[0030] Among them, by calculating the abscissa and ordinate of the failure assessment diagram, the assessment of the engineering infrastructure in the failure assessment diagram is realized:

[0031] When (Kr, Lr) is within the failure assessment curve, it is considered that the assessment of the engineering infrastructure passes;

[0032] When (Kr, Lr) is outside the failure assessment curve, it is considered that the assessment of the engineering infrastructure fails.

[0033] Furthermore, using Paris' law, the fatigue crack growth assessment of the engineering infrastructure is carried out through the following formula:

[0034]

[0035] In the formula, a represents the crack depth, N represents the number of cycles, A and m both represent constants, and ΔK is the stress intensity factor range;

[0036] Among them, the stress intensity factor range is:

[0037]

[0038] In the formula, Y represents the stress intensity correction factor, and Δσ represents the applied stress range.

[0039] Based on the same inventive concept, the present invention also discloses an engineering infrastructure evaluation system, and the system includes:

[0040] The first evaluation unit is used to perform an engineering critical assessment based on probabilistic fracture mechanics on the engineering infrastructure and construct a failure assessment curve;

[0041] A second evaluation unit, configured to construct a failure evaluation diagram according to a failure evaluation curve, and comprehensively evaluate the fracture and fatigue of an engineering infrastructure in combination with the failure evaluation diagram and Paris' law, and analyze the failure probability of the engineering infrastructure within the designed service life;

[0042] An extraction unit, configured to randomly extract the uncertain parameters input in the engineering critical evaluation by means of the Monte Carlo method before the failure probability analysis, and perform a deterministic evaluation on each extracted parameter;

[0043] A calculation unit, configured to perform random extraction and deterministic evaluation multiple times, and analyze whether the component fails for each evaluation, and calculate the final failure probability Pof.

[0044] Based on the same inventive concept, an embodiment of the present invention further provides an electronic device, including: a memory, a processor; the processor is configured to read and execute a computer program stored in the memory to implement the foregoing method for evaluating an engineering infrastructure.

[0045] Based on the same inventive concept, an embodiment of the present invention further provides a computer storage medium, in which computer-executable instructions are stored, and when the computer-executable instructions are executed, the foregoing method for evaluating an engineering infrastructure is implemented.

[0046] Compared with the prior art, the present disclosure has the following advantages: The method for evaluating an engineering infrastructure of the present invention reasonably considers the uncertainty of the evaluation parameters of the engineering infrastructure, and can better and more accurately evaluate the safety and reliability of the engineering infrastructure.

[0047] Other features and advantages of the present invention will be described in the following specification, and part of them will become obvious from the specification, or will be understood by implementing the present invention. The objectives and other advantages of the present invention can be achieved and obtained by the structures pointed out in the specification, claims and drawings. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0048] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention or the prior art, the following will briefly introduce the drawings required for the description of the embodiments or the prior art. Obviously, the following drawings are some embodiments of the present invention. For those of ordinary skill in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative efforts.

[0049] Figure 1 Shows a flowchart of a method for evaluating an engineering infrastructure of the present invention;

[0050] Figure 2 Shows a flowchart of the output of the failure probability in the method of the present invention;

[0051] Figure 3 Shows a schematic diagram of the probability fracture evaluation result using the Monte Carlo method in the present invention;

[0052] Figure 4 Shows a schematic diagram of failure evaluation based on probability fracture mechanics obtained by the method of the present invention;

[0053] Figure 5 Shows a flowchart of fatigue evaluation based on fracture mechanics in the present invention;

[0054] Figure 6 Shows the yield strength distribution diagram of the case in the present invention;

[0055] Figure 7 Shows the tensile strength distribution diagram of the case in the present invention;

[0056] Figure 8 Shows the fracture toughness distribution diagram of the case in the present invention;

[0057] Figure 9 Shows the failure evaluation diagram based on probability fracture mechanics of the case in the present invention;

[0058] Figure 10 Shows a schematic diagram of the structure of an engineering infrastructure evaluation system of the present invention;

[0059] Figure 11 Shows a schematic diagram of the structure of an electronic device of the present invention;

[0060] Figure 12 Shows the traditional failure evaluation diagram in the prior art. Detailed implementation manners

[0061] To make the objectives, technical solutions and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings in the embodiments of the present invention. Apparently, the described embodiments are some, but not all, of the embodiments of the present invention. All other embodiments obtained by those of ordinary skill in the art based on the embodiments of the present invention without creative efforts shall fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

[0062] Such as Figure 1-6 , an engineering infrastructure evaluation method of the present invention includes the following steps:

[0063] Step S1: Conduct an engineering critical assessment based on probability fracture mechanics on the engineering infrastructure to construct a failure evaluation curve;

[0064] Among them, the elements of the engineering critical assessment include material properties, loads, geometric information of components and defects.

[0065] Step S2: Construct a failure assessment diagram based on the failure assessment curve, and comprehensively evaluate the fracture and fatigue of the engineering infrastructure by combining the failure assessment diagram and Paris' law, and analyze the failure probability of the engineering infrastructure within the designed service life; including:

[0066] The failure assessment curve is:

[0067]

[0068] In the formula, f(L r ) represents the failure assessment curve, L r,max represents the maximum value of the load ratio L r , and L r represents the load ratio;

[0069] Among them,

[0070]

[0071]

[0072] In the formula, E represents the elastic modulus, σ Y represents the yield strength, and σ U represents the tensile strength.

[0073] The abscissa of the failure assessment diagram is the load ratio L r , representing the possibility of structural plastic limit failure, which can be calculated by the following formula:

[0074]

[0075] In the formula, P represents the applied load, P L represents the ultimate load, σ ref represents the reference stress, and σ Y represents the yield strength.

[0076] The abscissa Kr of the failure assessment diagram represents the possibility of component fracture, which can be calculated by the following formula:

[0077]

[0078] In the formula, Kr represents the fracture ratio, K represents the stress intensity factor, K mat represents the fracture toughness, σ represents the stress, and Y represents the stress intensity correction factor.

[0079] Among them, by combining the failure assessment diagram and Paris' law, the comprehensive assessment of the fracture and fatigue of the engineering infrastructure includes:

[0080] The comprehensive assessment includes: fracture assessment, fatigue crack growth assessment, and fracture-fatigue comprehensive assessment;

[0081] Using the failure assessment diagram, fracture assessment and fracture-fatigue comprehensive assessment are respectively carried out on the engineering foundation structure; using the Paris law, fatigue crack growth assessment is carried out on the engineering foundation structure (when evaluating fatigue failure, fatigue crack growth is taken into account).

[0082] Among them, by calculating the abscissa and ordinate of the failure assessment diagram, the evaluation of the engineering foundation structure in the failure assessment diagram is realized:

[0083] When (Kr, Lr) is within the failure assessment curve, it is considered that the evaluation of the engineering foundation structure passes; when (Kr, Lr) is outside the failure assessment curve, it is considered that the evaluation of the engineering foundation structure fails.

[0084] Using the Paris law, the fatigue crack growth assessment of the engineering foundation structure is carried out by the following formula:

[0085]

[0086] In the formula, a represents the crack depth, N represents the number of cycles, A and m both represent constants, and ΔK is the stress intensity factor range;

[0087] Among them, the stress intensity factor range is:

[0088]

[0089] In the formula, Y represents the stress intensity correction factor, and Δσ represents the applied stress range.

[0090] Combining the failure assessment diagram and the Paris law method, a comprehensive assessment of fracture and fatigue of the engineering foundation structure can be carried out, the failure probability analysis of the engineering foundation structure within the design service life can be obtained, the maximum allowable defect size of the structure at the time of commissioning can be obtained by inversion, and the life of the defective structure during service can be evaluated.

[0091] For the engineering foundation structure, its potential failure modes are mainly fatigue failure or fatigue-fracture failure. Therefore, the commonly used failure modes are fatigue crack growth assessment or fracture-fatigue comprehensive assessment. In the fatigue crack growth assessment, its critical state is the thickness of the engineering foundation structure, that is, when the crack grows into a through crack, it is considered a failure; in the fracture-fatigue comprehensive assessment, its critical state is defined as the failure assessment curve.

[0092] Step S3: Before the failure probability analysis, randomly extract the uncertain parameters input in the engineering critical assessment by the Monte Carlo method, and conduct a deterministic assessment on each extracted parameter; specifically including:

[0093] Engineering critical assessment based on probabilistic fracture mechanics. The engineering critical assessment method based on probabilistic fracture mechanics can consider the uncertainty of input parameters during the assessment process, so as to reasonably evaluate the failure probability of the structure.

[0094] Based on the traditional engineering critical assessment method, a random sampling technique method, namely the Monte Carlo method, is adopted to randomly extract the parameter distribution considering uncertainty, evaluate each extracted parameter value, and then obtain the failure probability by using statistical methods.

[0095] Randomly select the parameters containing uncertainty by the Monte Carlo method to make the residual between them and the original data as small as possible, so as to achieve the purpose of simulating the parameter values of real uncertainty as much as possible.

[0096] Step S4: Execute random extraction and deterministic assessment multiple times, and analyze whether the component fails for each assessment, and calculate the final failure probability Pof; specifically including:

[0097] When randomly selecting the parameters containing uncertainty by the Monte Carlo method, since the failure probability is equal to the ratio of the number of samples exceeding the critical equation to the total number of samples; therefore, it is necessary to define the limit state (i.e., the critical equation) of the three assessment methods in step 2.

[0098] Among them, the critical state equations of the three assessment methods are defined as:

[0099] (1) Fracture assessment: Failure assessment curve;

[0100] (2) Fatigue evaluation (i.e., fatigue crack growth assessment): When the defect depth is equal to the component thickness, that is, it becomes a penetrating defect;

[0101] (3) Comprehensive fracture fatigue assessment: Failure assessment curve.

[0102] Considering the accuracy of the Monte Carlo algorithm, the number of algorithm iterations (i.e., the number of samples) considered in this project is at least 10 6 times. The basic component of the Monte Carlo method is to generate random numbers from a uniform distribution (between 0 and 1); when a random number u between 0 and 1 is generated, it can be used to generate the value of the required random variable with a given distribution. A commonly used method is the inverse transformation method.

[0103] Using the cumulative distribution function, the random variable x satisfies the following formula (8).

[0104]

[0105] To calculate the final probability, N deterministic evaluations need to be performed, and for each evaluation, it is analyzed whether the component fails. Assume the number of failures is N f , and the estimation of the probability of failure is: PoF = N f / N.

[0106] Based on the same inventive concept, the present invention also discloses an engineering infrastructure evaluation system, as Figure 7 shown, the system includes:

[0107] A first evaluation unit, configured to perform engineering critical evaluation based on probabilistic fracture mechanics on the engineering infrastructure and construct a failure evaluation curve;

[0108] A second evaluation unit, configured to construct a failure evaluation diagram according to the failure evaluation curve, combine the failure evaluation diagram and Paris' law, perform a comprehensive evaluation of fracture and fatigue on the engineering infrastructure, and analyze the failure probability of the engineering infrastructure within the designed service life;

[0109] An extraction unit, configured to randomly extract the uncertain parameters input in the engineering critical evaluation by the Monte Carlo method before the failure probability analysis, and perform a deterministic evaluation on each extracted parameter;

[0110] A calculation unit, configured to perform random extraction and deterministic evaluation multiple times, analyze whether the component fails for each evaluation, and calculate the final failure probability Pof.

[0111] Regarding the system in the above embodiments, the specific manners in which each unit module performs operations have been described in detail in the embodiments related to the method, and will not be elaborated herein.

[0112] Based on the same inventive concept, an embodiment of the present invention also provides an electronic device, the structure of which is as Figure 8 shown, including: a memory, a processor, and the processor is configured to read and execute the computer program stored in the memory to implement the foregoing engineering infrastructure evaluation method.

[0113] Based on the same inventive concept, an embodiment of the present invention also provides a computer storage medium, in which computer-executable instructions are stored, and when the computer-executable instructions are executed, the foregoing engineering infrastructure evaluation method is implemented.

[0114] Embodiment 1:

[0115] Taking a typical offshore wind turbine foundation structure of an engineering infrastructure as an example, using an engineering infrastructure evaluation method proposed in the present invention, combining the traditional engineering critical assessment method based on fracture mechanics with the Monte Carlo method to form an engineering critical assessment method based on probabilistic fracture mechanics, and realizing the prediction of the failure probability of the offshore wind turbine structure.

[0116] The following further illustrates the evaluation method based on probabilistic fracture mechanics in combination with specific embodiments.

[0117] The fracture analysis of the above-water part (Node 1) of the offshore wind turbine foundation structure is carried out by using the engineering critical assessment method based on probabilistic fracture mechanics.

[0118] The outer diameter of the conduit at Node 1 is 711.2 mm, and the wall thickness is 12.7 mm; the outer diameter of the chord tube is 355.6 mm, and the wall thickness is 9.53 mm. Generally, cracks in the offshore wind turbine foundation structure occur and expand from the position on the conduit side at the connection of the conduit and the chord tube. Therefore, the external surface crack on the conduit side is considered in this part. According to the assessment method for offshore structures in Appendix B of BS 7910, a flat plate structure with a crack is used in this part to calculate the stress intensity factor of Node 1. Although this method is a simplified geometric structure method, if the influence of the stress concentration effect caused by the weld and the shell correction parameter can be considered, it can obtain consistent results with the T / K / Y node with a crack in the conduit structure. For the T / K / Y node with a surface crack on the conduit side of the offshore wind turbine jacket structure, the shell correction coefficient is generally very close to 1. Therefore, the shell correction coefficient is not considered in this analysis. The stress concentration effect caused by the weld is considered through the stress intensity factor amplification coefficient, Mk. Here, the width of the weld needs to be twice the wall thickness, that is, L = 25.4 mm.

[0119] When performing probabilistic fracture mechanics analysis, the uncertainties of the yield strength, tensile strength, and fracture toughness are considered. According to historical data, the mean value of the yield strength is selected as 336 MPa, and the standard deviation is 12.8 MPa; the mean value of the tensile strength is selected as 550 MPa, and the standard deviation is 55 MPa (the coefficient of variation is 0.1); the shape parameter of the Weibull distribution of the fracture toughness is selected as 5.35, and the scale parameter is 88.01. The distributions of the yield strength, tensile strength, and fracture toughness are as shown in Figure 6 , Figure 7 and Figure 8 respectively. The maximum static hot spot stress of Node 1 is obtained from the static analysis of the offshore wind turbine structure as 106 MPa. Considering that the nodes of the offshore wind turbine structure are mainly subjected to bending loads, the hot spot stress can be decomposed into membrane stress and bending stress. The ratio of the membrane stress to the bending stress is taken as 0.2. Therefore, the membrane stress and bending stress of Node 1 can be obtained. The input parameters are sorted out from the above information and shown in Table 1 respectively.

[0120] Table 1 Input parameters for probabilistic fracture mechanics evaluation of the examples

[0121]

[0122]

[0123] According to the parameters in Table 1 and considering that the residual stress is equal to the yield strength of the base metal as the evaluation input condition, when the defect size is the minimum detection size of PAUT given in Appendix T of BS 7910, which is 2 mm x 7 mm, the failure probability of Node 1 is 4.2x10 -2 , which is much greater than the target failure probability of 5x10 -4 , that is, the nodes in this analysis do not meet the requirements of failure risk control. Figure 9 It is the calculation result diagram of the example, and the number of samples used in the calculation is 1 million.

[0124] The present invention aims at the problem that the evaluation and prediction results of the engineering critical assessment method for engineering infrastructure projects are too conservative, resulting in increased operation and maintenance costs and reduced service life of engineering infrastructure projects. In order to reasonably consider the uncertainty of the evaluation parameters of engineering infrastructure projects, the present invention can better evaluate the safety and reliability of engineering infrastructure projects.

[0125] The present invention conducts a failure probability analysis on engineering infrastructure projects within the designed service life by establishing an engineering critical assessment method based on probabilistic fracture mechanics.

[0126] For those skilled in the art, it is obvious that the present invention is not limited to the details of the above-described exemplary embodiments, and can be implemented in other specific forms without departing from the spirit or basic characteristics of the present invention. Therefore, in any aspect, the embodiments should be regarded as exemplary and non-limiting. The scope of the present invention is defined by the appended claims rather than the above description. Therefore, all changes falling within the meaning and scope of the equivalent elements of the claims are intended to be encompassed by the present invention. Any reference signs in the claims should not be regarded as limiting the claims involved.

[0127] In addition, it should be understood that although this specification is described according to embodiments, not every embodiment only contains an independent technical solution. This narrative manner of the specification is only for clarity. Those skilled in the art should regard the specification as a whole, and the technical solutions in each embodiment can also be appropriately combined to form other embodiments that can be understood by those skilled in the art.

Claims

1. An engineering infrastructure evaluation method, characterized in that, It includes the following steps: Conduct an engineering critical assessment of the engineering infrastructure based on probabilistic fracture mechanics to construct a failure assessment curve; Construct a failure assessment diagram according to the failure assessment curve. Combine the failure assessment diagram and Paris' law to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the fracture and fatigue of the engineering infrastructure, and analyze the failure probability of the engineering infrastructure within the designed service life; Before the failure probability analysis, randomly extract the uncertain parameters input in the engineering critical assessment by the Monte Carlo method, and conduct a deterministic assessment on each extracted parameter; Execute the random extraction and deterministic assessment multiple times, and analyze whether the component fails for each assessment to calculate the final failure probability Pof.

2. The engineering infrastructure evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The elements of the engineering critical assessment include material properties, loads, and geometric information of components and defects.

3. The engineering infrastructure evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The failure assessment curve is; f(L r ) = 0 L r ≥ L r，max (1), where f(L r ) represents the failure assessment curve, L r,max represents the maximum value of the load ratio L r , and L r represents the load ratio; Among them, where E represents the elastic modulus, and σ Y represents the yield strength, and σ U represents the tensile strength.

4. The engineering infrastructure evaluation method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The load ratio L is obtained by the following formula r as follows: Wherein, P represents the applied load, and P L represents the ultimate load, σ ref represents the reference stress, and σ Y represents the yield strength; Among them, the load ratio L r is the abscissa of the failure assessment diagram, that is, the load ratio represents the possibility of structural plastic limit failure.

5. The engineering infrastructure evaluation method according to claim 4, characterized in that, The abscissa Kr of the failure assessment diagram is obtained by the following formula: In the formula, Kr represents the fracture ratio, K represents the stress intensity factor, K mat represents the fracture toughness, σ represents the stress, and Y represents the stress intensity correction factor.

6. The engineering infrastructure evaluation method according to claim 5, characterized in that, Combine the failure assessment diagram and Paris' law to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the fracture and fatigue of the engineering infrastructure, including: The comprehensive assessment includes: fracture assessment, fatigue crack growth assessment, and fracture-fatigue comprehensive assessment; Use the failure assessment diagram to conduct fracture assessment and fracture-fatigue comprehensive assessment on the engineering infrastructure respectively; Use Paris' law to conduct fatigue crack growth assessment on the engineering infrastructure; Among them, by calculating the abscissa and ordinate of the failure assessment diagram, the engineering infrastructure is evaluated in the failure assessment diagram: When (Kr, Lr) is within the failure assessment curve, it is considered that the assessment of the engineering infrastructure passes; When (Kr, Lr) is outside the failure assessment curve, it is considered that the assessment of the engineering infrastructure fails.

7. The engineering infrastructure evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Use Paris' law to conduct fatigue crack growth assessment on the engineering infrastructure by the following formula: In the formula, a represents the crack depth, N represents the number of cycles, A and m both represent constants, and ΔK is the stress intensity factor range; Among them, the stress intensity factor range is: In the formula, Y represents the stress intensity correction factor, and Δσ represents the applied stress range.

8. An engineering infrastructure evaluation system, characterized in that, The system includes: The first assessment unit is used to conduct an engineering critical assessment of the engineering infrastructure based on probabilistic fracture mechanics to construct a failure assessment curve; The second assessment unit is used to construct a failure assessment diagram according to the failure assessment curve, combine the failure assessment diagram and Paris' law to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the fracture and fatigue of the engineering infrastructure, and analyze the failure probability of the engineering infrastructure within the designed service life; The extraction unit is used to randomly extract the uncertain parameters input in the engineering critical assessment by the Monte Carlo method and conduct a deterministic assessment on each extracted parameter before the failure probability analysis; The calculation unit is used to execute the random extraction and deterministic assessment multiple times, and analyze whether the component fails for each assessment to calculate the final failure probability Pof.

9. An electronic device, characterized in that, It includes: A memory and a processor; The processor is used to read and execute the computer program stored in the memory to implement an engineering infrastructure evaluation method according to any one of claims 1-7.

10. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that, The computer-readable storage medium stores computer-executable instructions, and when the computer-executable instructions are executed, the engineering infrastructure evaluation method according to any one of claims 1-7 is implemented.

Images