Method and device for determining stress corrosion cracking risk of pipeline and electronic equipment

Abstract

The invention discloses a method and device for determining the stress corrosion cracking risk of a pipeline and electronic equipment, relates to the technical field of petroleum and natural gas engineering, and aims to solve the problem of how to accurately determine the stress corrosion cracking risk of a target pipeline. The method comprises the following steps: acquiring material information and soil environment information of a target pipeline; determining a first evaluation parameter set based on the material information and the soil environment information; the first evaluation parameter set comprises an electrochemical parameter, a mechanical damage parameter, a crack propagation parameter and a fracture embrittlement parameter, and each evaluation parameter in the first evaluation parameter set is used for reflecting the risk state of the target pipeline; determining a second evaluation parameter set based on the first evaluation parameter set; and determining the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline based on the second evaluation parameter set. Therefore, the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline can be accurately determined, and safe and stable operation of the target pipeline is guaranteed.

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD

[0001] The present application relates to the technical field of oil and gas engineering, and particularly relates to a method and device for determining stress corrosion cracking risk of a pipeline and electronic equipment. BACKGROUND

[0002] Stress corrosion cracking is a low-stress brittle fracture phenomenon of metal materials under the combined action of tensile stress and specific corrosion environment. Stress corrosion cracking often affects the safe and stable operation of buried pipelines.

[0003] The existing technology usually determines the stress corrosion cracking risk of a buried pipeline by simulating the soil environment with a standard solution (such as NS4 solution) or by electrochemical testing. However, the soil environment cannot be truly restored by the standard solution, and the results determined by electrochemical testing are too one-sided, resulting in that the determined cracking risk does not match the actual situation.

[0004] Therefore, how to accurately determine the stress corrosion cracking risk of a target pipeline to ensure the safe and stable operation of the target pipeline becomes a technical problem to be solved. SUMMARY

[0005] The present application aims to provide a method and device for determining stress corrosion cracking risk of a pipeline and electronic equipment, and aims to solve the problem of how to accurately determine the stress corrosion cracking risk of a target pipeline to ensure the safe and stable operation of the target pipeline.

[0006] To achieve the above-mentioned purpose, the present application adopts the following technical solutions:

[0007] In a first aspect, the present application provides a method for determining stress corrosion cracking risk of a pipeline, the method comprising: obtaining material information and soil environment information of a target pipeline; determining a first set of evaluation parameters based on the material information and the soil environment information; the first set of evaluation parameters comprising: an electrochemical parameter, a mechanical damage parameter, a crack propagation parameter, and a brittle fracture parameter, each evaluation parameter in the first set of evaluation parameters being used to reflect the risk state of the target pipeline; determining a second set of evaluation parameters based on the first set of evaluation parameters; the second set of evaluation parameters being a parameter set obtained by screening the first set of evaluation parameters; determining the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline based on the second set of evaluation parameters.

[0008] According to the technical means, the first evaluation parameter set including the electrochemical parameter, the mechanical damage parameter, the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter can be determined based on the material information and the soil environment information. The second evaluation parameter set is determined based on the first evaluation parameter set, and the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline is determined. The stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline is accurately determined from multiple aspects by fusing the electrochemical parameter, the mechanical damage parameter, the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter, so that the safe and stable operation of the target pipeline is ensured.

[0009] In a possible manner, the second evaluation parameter set is determined based on the first evaluation parameter set, including: determining a first comparison result based on the electrochemical parameter and the mechanical damage parameter, the first comparison result being used to indicate whether the risk state represented by the electrochemical parameter is the same as the risk state represented by the mechanical damage parameter; determining a second comparison result based on the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter, the second comparison result being used to indicate whether the risk state represented by the crack propagation parameter is the same as the risk state represented by the fracture embrittlement parameter; and determining the second evaluation parameter set based on the first comparison result and the second comparison result.

[0010] According to the technical means, the first comparison result is determined based on the electrochemical parameter and the mechanical damage parameter. The second comparison result is determined based on the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter. The second evaluation parameter set is determined based on the first comparison result and the second comparison result. The second evaluation parameter set capable of determining the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline is determined by further comparing the electrochemical parameter and the mechanical damage parameter and further comparing the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter, so that the accuracy of the subsequent result is improved.

[0011] In a possible manner, the second evaluation parameter set is any one of the following: a first parameter set, a second parameter set, a third parameter set and a fourth parameter set. The first parameter set includes the electrochemical parameter, the mechanical damage parameter, the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter. The second parameter set includes the electrochemical parameter, the mechanical damage parameter and a micro-area composition parameter, the micro-area composition parameter being a parameter determined through a micro-area composition analysis experiment. The third parameter set includes a hydrogen permeation parameter, the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter, the hydrogen permeation parameter being a parameter determined through a hydrogen permeation analysis experiment. The fourth parameter set includes the hydrogen permeation parameter and the micro-area composition parameter.

[0012] In a possible implementation, the second evaluation parameter set is determined based on the first comparison result and the second comparison result, including: in a case where the first comparison result is same and the second comparison result is same, determining the second evaluation parameter set as the first parameter set; in a case where the first comparison result is same and the second comparison result is different, determining the second evaluation parameter set as the second parameter set; in a case where the first comparison result is different and the second comparison result is same, determining the second evaluation parameter set as the third parameter set; and in a case where the first comparison result is different and the second comparison result is different, determining the second evaluation parameter set as the fourth parameter set.

[0013] According to the technical means, in a case where the first comparison result is different, the hydrogen permeation parameter determined through the hydrogen permeation experiment is used to replace the electrochemical parameter and the mechanical damage parameter in the first evaluation parameter set, so as to obtain the second evaluation parameter set. In a case where the second comparison result is different, the micro-area composition parameter determined through the micro-area composition analysis experiment is used to replace the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter in the first evaluation parameter set, so as to obtain the second evaluation parameter set. In a case where the comparison result of the parameters in the first evaluation parameter set is different, a more accurate parameter is introduced, so as to obtain the second evaluation parameter set. The accuracy of subsequent determination of the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline is improved.

[0014] In a possible implementation, the first evaluation parameter set is determined based on the material information and the soil environment information, including: determining an experimental parameter set based on the soil environment information and the material information, the experimental parameter set including the electrochemical parameter, the mechanical damage parameter and the crack propagation parameter; and determining the fracture embrittlement parameter based on the soil environment information, the material information and the mechanical damage parameter.

[0015] According to the technical means, the electrochemical parameter, the mechanical damage parameter, the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter are determined based on the soil environment information and the material information, so as to provide a data basis for subsequent determination of the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline.

[0016] In a possible implementation, the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline is determined based on the second evaluation parameter set, including: determining a risk evaluation parameter based on the second evaluation parameter set, the risk evaluation parameter being used to indicate a stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline; and determining the stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline based on the risk evaluation parameter and a preset risk range.

[0017] According to the technical means, the risk evaluation parameter is determined based on the second evaluation parameter set, and the stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline is determined based on the risk evaluation parameter and the preset risk range, so as to accurately determine the stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline.

[0018] In one possible approach, the preset risk range includes a first preset risk threshold, a second preset risk threshold, and a third preset risk threshold. Based on a second evaluation parameter and the preset risk range, the crack sensitivity risk level of the target pipeline is determined, including: when the risk evaluation parameter is less than the first preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a safe state; when the risk evaluation parameter is greater than or equal to the first preset risk threshold and less than the second preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a low-risk state; when the risk evaluation parameter is greater than or equal to the second preset risk threshold and less than the third preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a medium-risk state; and when the risk evaluation parameter is greater than or equal to the third preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a high-risk state.

[0019] In one possible approach, each evaluation parameter in the first set of evaluation parameters is used to reflect the risk status of the target pipeline; the method further includes: for each evaluation parameter, determining the risk status reflected by the evaluation parameter based on the evaluation parameter and the preset parameter threshold corresponding to the evaluation parameter, wherein the risk status reflected by the evaluation parameter is a low-risk state or a high-risk state; the evaluation parameter is any one of electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters.

[0020] Secondly, this application provides a device for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking, the device comprising:

[0021] The system comprises: an acquisition unit for acquiring material information and soil environmental information of the target pipeline; a processing unit for determining a first set of evaluation parameters based on the material and soil environmental information; the first set of evaluation parameters includes electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters, each of which reflects the risk status of the target pipeline; a processing unit for determining a second set of evaluation parameters based on the first set of evaluation parameters; the second set of evaluation parameters is a set of parameters obtained by filtering the first set of evaluation parameters; and a processing unit for determining the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline based on the second set of evaluation parameters.

[0022] In one possible approach, the processing unit is specifically configured to: determine a first comparison result based on electrochemical parameters and mechanical damage parameters, wherein the first comparison result indicates whether the risk state represented by the electrochemical parameters is the same as the risk state represented by the mechanical damage parameters; determine a second comparison result based on crack propagation parameters and fracture embrittlement parameters, wherein the second comparison result indicates whether the risk state represented by the crack propagation parameters is the same as the risk state represented by the fracture embrittlement parameters; and determine a second set of evaluation parameters based on the first comparison result and the second comparison result.

[0023] In one possible approach, the second set of evaluation parameters can be any of the following: a first set of parameters, a second set of parameters, a third set of parameters, or a fourth set of parameters; the first set of parameters includes: electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters; the second set of parameters includes: electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, and micro-area composition parameters, wherein the micro-area composition parameters are parameters determined through micro-area composition analysis experiments; the third set of parameters includes: hydrogen permeation parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters, wherein the hydrogen permeation parameters are parameters determined through hydrogen permeation analysis experiments; and the fourth set of parameters includes: hydrogen permeation parameters and micro-area composition parameters.

[0024] In one possible approach, the processing unit is specifically configured to: determine a second set of evaluation parameters as a first set of parameters when the first comparison results are the same and the second comparison results are the same; determine a second set of evaluation parameters as a second set of parameters when the first comparison results are the same and the second comparison results are different; determine a second set of evaluation parameters as a third set of parameters when the first comparison results are different and the second comparison results are the same; and determine a second set of evaluation parameters as a fourth set of parameters when the first comparison results are different and the second comparison results are different.

[0025] In one possible approach, the processing unit is specifically used to determine a set of experimental parameters based on soil environmental information and material information, the set of experimental parameters including electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, and crack propagation parameters; and to determine fracture embrittlement parameters based on soil environmental information, material information, mechanical damage parameters, and crack propagation parameters.

[0026] In one possible approach, the processing unit is specifically used to determine risk assessment parameters based on a second set of assessment parameters, the risk assessment parameters being used to indicate the stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline; and to determine the stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline based on the risk assessment parameters and a preset risk range.

[0027] In one possible approach, the preset risk range includes a first preset risk threshold, a second preset risk threshold, and a third preset risk threshold. The processing unit is specifically configured to: 1) When the risk assessment parameter is less than the first preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a safe state; 2) When the risk assessment parameter is greater than or equal to the first preset risk threshold and less than the second preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a low-risk state; 3) When the risk assessment parameter is greater than or equal to the second preset risk threshold and less than the third preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a medium-risk state; and 4) When the risk assessment parameter is greater than or equal to the third preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a high-risk state.

[0028] In one possible approach, each evaluation parameter in the first set of evaluation parameters is used to reflect the risk status of the target pipeline; the processing unit is specifically used to determine the risk status reflected by each evaluation parameter based on the evaluation parameter and the preset parameter threshold corresponding to the evaluation parameter, wherein the risk status reflected by the evaluation parameter is a low-risk state or a high-risk state; the evaluation parameter is any one of electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters.

[0029] Thirdly, this application provides an electronic device including a memory and a processor; the memory and the processor are coupled; the memory is used to store instructions executable by the processor; when the processor executes the instructions, it performs the methods described in the first aspect and any possible implementation thereof.

[0030] Fourthly, this application provides a computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that, when executed on a computer, cause the computer to perform the methods described in the first aspect and any possible implementation thereof.

[0031] Fifthly, this application provides a chip including a processor and a communication interface, the communication interface being coupled to the processor, the processor being used to run computer programs or instructions to implement the methods described in the first aspect and any possible implementation thereof.

[0032] Sixthly, this application provides a computer program product containing instructions that, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to perform the methods described in the first aspect and any possible implementation thereof.

[0033] The technical problems that the device, electronic equipment, computer storage medium, chip or computer program product used to determine the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking can solve and the technical effects it can achieve can be found in the technical problems and effects solved in the first aspect above, and will not be repeated here. Attached Figure Description

[0034] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of this application, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of this application. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0035] Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating a method for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking, provided in an embodiment of this application;

[0036] Figure 2A flowchart illustrating yet another method for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking provided in this application embodiment;

[0037] Figure 3 A flowchart illustrating yet another method for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking provided in this application embodiment;

[0038] Figure 4 This is a structural diagram of a device for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking, provided in an embodiment of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0039] The technical solutions of the embodiments of this application will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of this application, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of this application, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of this application.

[0040] In the description of this application, it should be understood that the terms "upper," "lower," "left," "right," "front," "rear," "inner," and "outer," etc., indicate the orientation or positional relationship based on the orientation or relative positional relationship shown in the accompanying drawings. They are used only for the convenience of describing this application and for simplification, and do not indicate or imply that the device or element referred to must have a specific orientation, or be constructed and operated in a specific orientation. Therefore, they should not be construed as limitations on this application. Unless otherwise specified, the above-mentioned orientational descriptions can be flexibly set in practical applications, provided that the relative positional relationships shown in the accompanying drawings are satisfied.

[0041] The terms "first" and "second" are used for descriptive purposes only and should not be construed as indicating or implying relative importance or implicitly specifying the number of technical features indicated. Therefore, a feature defined as "first" or "second" may explicitly or implicitly include one or more of that feature. In the description of this application, unless otherwise stated, "a plurality of" means two or more.

[0042] In the description of this application, it should be noted that, unless otherwise expressly specified and limited, the terms "installation," "connection," "linking," and "communication" should be interpreted broadly. For example, they can refer to a fixed connection, a detachable connection, or an integral connection. They can refer to a direct connection or an indirect connection through an intermediate medium, or a connection within two components. Those skilled in the art can understand the specific meaning of the above terms in this application according to the specific circumstances.

[0043] In embodiments of this application, the terms "comprising," "including," or any other variations thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, article, or apparatus that comprises a list of elements includes not only those elements but also other elements not expressly listed, or elements inherent to such a process, article, or apparatus. Without further limitation, an element defined by the phrase "comprising one..." does not exclude the presence of other identical elements in the process, article, or apparatus that includes that element.

[0044] In the embodiments of this application, the terms "exemplary" or "for example" are used to indicate that something is an example, illustration, or description. Any embodiment or design that is described as "exemplary" or "for example" in the embodiments of this application should not be construed as being more preferred or advantageous than other embodiments or design. Specifically, the use of the terms "exemplary" or "for example" is intended to present the relevant concepts in a specific manner.

[0045] In the description of this specification, specific features, structures, materials, or characteristics may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments or examples.

[0046] In some embodiments, such as Figure 1 As shown, this application provides a method for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking, specifically including: S101-S104.

[0047] S101. Obtain material information and soil environment information of the target pipeline.

[0048] Among them, the material information of the target pipeline refers to the materials used in the target pipeline, and the soil environmental information of the target pipeline refers to the soil environmental parameters of the location where the target pipeline is buried. The soil environmental information includes: anion and cation concentration, moisture content, redox potential, microbial content, etc.

[0049] For example, if the target pipe uses X80 steel, then the material information of the target pipe is X80 steel.

[0050] In one possible implementation, the device for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking stores material information of the target pipeline and soil environmental information of the pipeline network in which the target pipeline is located at various locations. Based on the location identifier of the target pipeline, the material information and soil environmental information of the target pipeline are determined.

[0051] It should be noted that soil environmental information can be obtained in practice by collecting soil samples and analyzing the soil leachate from these samples. For details, please refer to existing technologies; they will not be elaborated upon here.

[0052] S102. Based on material information and soil environmental information, determine the first set of evaluation parameters.

[0053] The first set of evaluation parameters includes: electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters. Each evaluation parameter in the first set of evaluation parameters reflects the risk status of the target pipeline.

[0054] In one possible implementation, a set of experimental parameters is determined based on soil environmental information and material information. Then, based on the soil environmental information, material information, mechanical damage parameters, and crack propagation parameters, fracture embrittlement parameters are determined.

[0055] The experimental parameter set includes electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, and crack propagation parameters.

[0056] For example, taking electrochemical parameters as an example, the self-corrosion current density of the target material is obtained. Based on the self-corrosion current density of the target material, the electrochemical parameters of the target material are determined.

[0057] It should be noted that the self-corrosion current density of the target material can be determined by placing the target material with the same material information as the target pipeline in the soil leachate of the surrounding soil of the target pipeline and performing an electrochemical double-scan experiment.

[0058] For example, the electrochemical parameters satisfy the following formula:

[0059]

[0060] Where X1 represents the electrochemical parameter, I sim Used to represent the self-corrosion current density.

[0061] For example, consider mechanical damage parameters. Obtain the reduction of section (RCS) of the target material after tensile fracture in a corrosive medium and the reduction of section (RCS) of the target material after tensile fracture in air. Based on the RCS of the target material after tensile fracture in a corrosive medium and the reduction of section (RCS) of the target material after tensile fracture in air, determine the mechanical parameters of the target material.

[0062] It should be noted that the section reduction rate of the target material after tensile fracture in a corrosive medium and the section reduction rate of the target material after tensile fracture in air can be determined by a slow strain rate tensile test (SSRT).

[0063] For example, the mechanical damage parameters satisfy the following formula two:

[0064]

[0065] Where X2 represents the mechanical damage parameter. Used to represent the rate of loss due to reduction of area.

[0066] For example, the reduction of area loss rate satisfies the following formula three:

[0067]

[0068] in, Used to represent the rate of reduction of area loss. Used to represent the reduction of area of ​​a target material after tensile fracture in a corrosive medium. Used to represent the reduction of area of ​​a target material after it fractures under tension in air.

[0069] For example, consider crack propagation parameters. Obtain the crack propagation rate of the target material. Based on the crack propagation rate, determine the crack propagation parameters.

[0070] It should be noted that the crack propagation rate can be determined by the double cantilever beam test (DCB).

[0071] For example, the crack propagation parameters satisfy the following formula four:

[0072]

[0073] Where X4 represents the crack propagation parameter, and da / dt represents the crack propagation rate.

[0074] For example, consider fracture embrittlement parameters. Obtain scanning electron microscope (SEM) images of the target material's fracture surface after SSRT and crack propagation experiments. Based on the SEM images, determine the proportion of brittle regions in the fracture surface and the total area of ​​the target material. Then, based on the proportion of brittle regions in the fracture surface and the total area of ​​the target material, determine the fracture embrittlement parameters.

[0075] For example, the fracture embrittlement parameters satisfy the following formula five:

[0076]

[0077] Where X3 is used to represent the brittle fracture parameter, brittle ratio Used to indicate the fracture embrittlement ratio.

[0078] For example, the fracture embrittlement ratio satisfies the following formula six:

[0079]

[0080] Among them, brittle ratio A is used to represent the fracture embrittlement ratio. brittle A is used to represent the proportion and area of ​​the brittle region in the fracture surface of the target material. total Used to represent the total fracture area of ​​the target material.

[0081] S103. Based on the first set of evaluation parameters, determine the second set of evaluation parameters.

[0082] The second set of evaluation parameters is the set of parameters obtained by filtering the first set of evaluation parameters.

[0083] In one possible implementation, a first comparison result and a second comparison result are determined based on a first set of evaluation parameters. A second set of evaluation parameters is then determined based on the first and second comparison results.

[0084] The first comparison result indicates whether the risk state represented by the electrochemical parameters is the same as the risk state represented by the mechanical damage parameters. The second comparison result indicates whether the risk state represented by the crack propagation parameters is the same as the risk state represented by the fracture embrittlement parameters.

[0085] S104. Based on the second set of evaluation parameters, determine the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline.

[0086] In one possible implementation, parameters from the second set of evaluation parameters are fused and calculated to determine risk evaluation parameters. These risk evaluation parameters are then compared with a preset risk range to determine the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline.

[0087] The risk assessment parameters are used to indicate the stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline. The preset risk ranges include a first preset risk threshold, a second preset risk threshold, and a third preset risk threshold.

[0088] In some embodiments, for each evaluation parameter, the risk status reflected by the evaluation parameter is determined based on the evaluation parameter and the preset parameter threshold corresponding to the evaluation parameter.

[0089] The evaluation parameters reflect either a low-risk or high-risk state. These evaluation parameters can be any one of the following: electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters.

[0090] For example, taking the fracture embrittlement parameter as the evaluation parameter, with a value of 0.8 and a preset threshold value of 0.4, if the fracture embrittlement parameter value is greater than the preset threshold value, the cracking risk status of the target pipeline is determined to be high-risk.

[0091] It should be understood that any one of the evaluation parameters can be used to determine the stress corrosion cracking risk of a target pipeline. However, using only one parameter to assess the stress corrosion cracking risk of a target pipeline is too one-sided. Therefore, this application integrates multiple evaluation parameters to more accurately determine the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline.

[0092] As can be seen from the above technical solution, this application can determine a first set of evaluation parameters, including electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters, based on material information and soil environmental information. Then, based on the first set of evaluation parameters, a second set of evaluation parameters is determined, thereby determining the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline. This application, by integrating electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters, analyzes from multiple perspectives, thus accurately determining the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline and ensuring its safe and stable operation.

[0093] In some embodiments, such as Figure 2 As shown, the above method S103 specifically includes: S201-S203.

[0094] S201. Based on electrochemical parameters and mechanical damage parameters, the first comparative result is determined.

[0095] In one possible implementation, the risk state represented by electrochemical parameters is compared with the risk state represented by mechanical damage parameters. If the risk state represented by the electrochemical parameters is the same as that represented by the mechanical damage function, the first comparison result is determined to be the same. If the risk state represented by the electrochemical parameters is different from that represented by the mechanical damage function, the first comparison result is determined to be different.

[0096] The risk status is categorized as either high risk or low risk. The risk status refers to the stress corrosion cracking risk status of the target pipeline.

[0097] It should be noted that if the initial comparison results are the same, it indicates that the risk status represented by the electrochemical parameters is consistent with the risk status represented by the mechanical damage parameters. For example, the electrochemical parameters indicate a high-risk risk for the target pipeline, while the mechanical damage parameters indicate a low-risk risk. Therefore, the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline can be further determined based on the electrochemical and mechanical damage parameters.

[0098] If the initial comparison results are different, it indicates that the risk status represented by the electrochemical parameters is inconsistent with the risk status represented by the mechanical damage parameters. For example, the electrochemical parameters indicate a high-risk risk status for the target pipeline, while the mechanical damage parameters indicate a low-risk risk status. Further experiments are needed to determine the risk status of the target pipeline.

[0099] S202. Based on crack propagation parameters and fracture embrittlement parameters, determine the second comparison result.

[0100] In one possible implementation, the risk state represented by the crack propagation parameter is compared with the risk state represented by the fracture embrittlement parameter. If the risk state represented by the crack propagation parameter and the risk state represented by the fracture embrittlement parameter are the same, the first comparison result is determined to be the same. If the risk state represented by the crack propagation parameter and the risk state represented by the fracture embrittlement parameter are different, the first comparison result is determined to be different.

[0101] It should be noted that if the second comparison result is the same, it indicates that the risk status represented by the fracture embrittlement parameter is consistent with the risk status represented by the crack propagation parameter. For example, the fracture embrittlement parameter indicates that the target pipeline has a high risk status, while the crack propagation parameter indicates that the target pipeline has a low risk status. Therefore, the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline can be further determined based on the fracture embrittlement parameter and the crack propagation parameter.

[0102] If the second comparison result is different, it indicates that the risk status represented by the fracture embrittlement parameter is inconsistent with the risk status represented by the crack propagation parameter. For example, the risk status of the target pipeline represented by the fracture embrittlement parameter may be high-risk, while the risk status represented by the crack propagation parameter may be low-risk. Further experiments are needed to determine the risk status of the target pipeline.

[0103] S203. Based on the first comparison result and the second comparison result, determine the second set of evaluation parameters.

[0104] The second set of evaluation parameters includes: the first set of parameters, the second set of parameters, the third set of parameters, and the fourth set of parameters.

[0105] In one possible implementation, if the first comparison result is the same and the second comparison result is the same, the second set of evaluation parameters is determined as the first set of parameters.

[0106] The first set of parameters includes: electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters.

[0107] In another possible implementation, if the first comparison result is the same and the second comparison result is different, the second set of evaluation parameters is determined as the second parameter set.

[0108] The second parameter set includes: electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, and micro-area composition analysis parameters. The micro-area composition parameters are those determined through micro-area composition analysis experiments.

[0109] It should be noted that if the second comparison results are different, that is, if the risk state represented by the crack propagation parameter contradicts the risk state represented by the fracture embrittlement parameter, then further confirmation of the risk states represented by the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter is required through micro-area composition analysis experiments. Therefore, the micro-area composition parameter is used instead of the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter as the second evaluation parameter.

[0110] It should be understood that the experimental cost and complexity of micro-area composition analysis are far higher than those of crack propagation and fracture embrittlement analysis. Therefore, this application first obtains crack propagation and fracture embrittlement parameters through crack propagation and fracture embrittlement analysis to determine whether the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline can be determined based on these parameters. If the risk status indicated by the crack propagation parameters contradicts that indicated by the fracture embrittlement parameters, micro-area composition analysis is then used to obtain more accurate experimental data, thereby determining the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline. This aims to reduce costs and improve efficiency.

[0111] In another possible implementation, if the first comparison result is different and the second comparison result is the same, the second set of evaluation parameters is determined as the third set of parameters.

[0112] The third parameter set includes: hydrogen permeation parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters. The hydrogen permeation parameters are determined through hydrogen permeation analysis experiments.

[0113] It should be noted that if the initial comparison results are different, meaning the risk state represented by the electrochemical parameters contradicts the risk state represented by the mechanical damage parameters, then further confirmation of the risk states represented by the electrochemical and mechanical damage parameters is required through hydrogen permeation experiments. Therefore, micro-area composition parameters are used instead of electrochemical and mechanical damage parameters as the primary evaluation parameters.

[0114] It should be understood that the experimental cost and complexity of hydrogen permeation experiments are far higher than those of crack propagation experiments and fracture embrittlement analysis experiments. Therefore, this application first obtains electrochemical and mechanical damage parameters through crack propagation and fracture embrittlement analysis experiments to determine whether the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline can be determined based on these parameters. When the risk states indicated by the electrochemical parameters and those indicated by the mechanical damage parameters contradict each other, hydrogen permeation experiments are then conducted to obtain more accurate experimental data, thereby determining the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline. This aims to reduce costs and improve efficiency.

[0115] In another possible implementation, if the first comparison result is different and the second comparison result is different, the second evaluation parameters are determined to be combined into a fourth parameter set.

[0116] The fourth parameter set includes hydrogen permeation parameters and micro-area composition parameters.

[0117] As described in the above technical solution, this application determines a first comparative result based on electrochemical parameters and mechanical damage parameters. A second comparative result is determined based on crack propagation parameters and fracture embrittlement parameters. A second set of evaluation parameters is then determined based on the first and second comparative results. By further comparing electrochemical parameters and mechanical damage parameters, as well as further comparing crack propagation parameters and fracture embrittlement parameters, this application determines a second set of evaluation parameters capable of assessing the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline, thereby improving the accuracy of subsequent results.

[0118] In cases where the first comparison results differ, this application replaces the electrochemical and mechanical damage parameters in the first evaluation parameter set with hydrogen permeation parameters determined through hydrogen permeation experiments to obtain a second evaluation parameter set. In cases where the second comparison results differ, it replaces the crack propagation and fracture embrittlement parameters in the first evaluation parameter set with micro-area composition parameters determined through micro-area composition analysis experiments to obtain a second evaluation parameter set. Furthermore, in cases where the parameter comparison results in the first evaluation parameter set differ, more precise parameters are introduced to obtain a second evaluation parameter set. This improves the accuracy of subsequent determination of the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline.

[0119] In some embodiments, such as Figure 3 As shown, the above method S104 specifically includes: S301-S302.

[0120] S301. Based on the second set of evaluation parameters, determine the risk evaluation parameters.

[0121] In one possible implementation, a second set of evaluation parameters is used to determine the calculation method for the corresponding evaluation parameters. Based on the second set of evaluation parameters and the calculation method for the second evaluation parameters, the risk evaluation parameters are then determined.

[0122] For example, taking the second set of evaluation parameters as the first set of parameters. The risk evaluation parameters satisfy the following formula seven.

[0123] I scc =0.2X1+0.25X2+0.25X3+0.3X4 Formula 7.

[0124] Among them, I scc X1 is used to represent the risk assessment parameters, X2 is used to represent the mechanical damage parameters, X3 is used to represent the fracture embrittlement parameters, and X4 is used to represent the crack propagation parameters.

[0125] For example, consider the combination of the second evaluation parameters into a second parameter set. The risk evaluation parameters satisfy the following formula eight:

[0126] I scc =0.2X1+0.25X2+0.55X5 Formula 8.

[0127] Among them, I scc X1 is used to represent risk assessment parameters, X2 is used to represent electrochemical parameters, X5 is used to represent mechanical damage parameters, and X5 is used to represent micro-area differentiation parameters.

[0128] For example, consider the combination of the second evaluation parameters into a third parameter set. The risk evaluation parameters satisfy the following formula nine:

[0129] I scc =0.45X6+0.25X3+0.3X4 Formula Nine.

[0130] Among them, I scc X3 is used to represent the risk assessment parameter, X4 is used to represent the fracture embrittlement parameter, X4 is used to represent the crack propagation parameter, and X6 is used to represent the hydrogen permeation parameter.

[0131] For example, consider the combination of the second evaluation parameters into the fourth parameter set. The risk evaluation parameters satisfy the following formula:

[0132] I scc =0.45X6+0.55X5 Formula 10.

[0133] Among them, I scc X6 is used to represent the risk assessment parameter, X5 is used to represent the hydrogen permeation parameter, and X5 is used to represent the micro-region differentiation parameter.

[0134] S302. Based on risk assessment parameters and preset risk range, determine the stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline.

[0135] In one possible implementation, the target pipeline is determined to be in a safe state if the risk assessment parameter is less than a first preset risk threshold.

[0136] For example, taking a first preset risk threshold of 0.3 and a risk assessment parameter of 0.2 as an example, if the risk assessment parameter is less than the first preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is determined to be in a safe state.

[0137] If the risk assessment parameter is greater than or equal to the first preset risk threshold and less than the second preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is determined to be in a low-risk state.

[0138] For example, taking a first preset risk threshold of 0.3, a second preset risk threshold of 0.5, and a risk assessment parameter of 0.4 as an example, if the risk assessment parameter is greater than or equal to the first preset risk threshold and less than the second preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is determined to be in a low-risk state.

[0139] If the risk assessment parameter is greater than or equal to the second preset risk threshold and less than the third preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is determined to be in a medium-risk state.

[0140] For example, taking a second preset risk threshold of 0.5, a third preset risk threshold of 0.7, and a risk assessment parameter of 0.6 as an example, if the risk assessment parameter is greater than or equal to the second preset risk threshold and less than the third preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is determined to be in a medium-risk state.

[0141] If the risk assessment parameter is greater than or equal to the third preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is determined to be in a high-risk state.

[0142] For example, taking a third preset risk threshold of 0.7 and a risk assessment parameter of 0.9 as an example, if the risk assessment parameter is greater than or equal to the third preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is determined to be in a high-risk state.

[0143] Based on the aforementioned technical means, this application determines risk assessment parameters based on a second set of evaluation parameters. Based on these risk assessment parameters and a preset risk range, the stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline is determined. This accurately determines the stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline.

[0144] The above primarily describes the solutions provided in the embodiments of this application from a methodological perspective. It is understood that the device for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking includes hardware structures and / or software modules corresponding to the execution of each function in order to achieve the aforementioned functions. Those skilled in the art should readily recognize that the pipeline stress corrosion cracking risk determination method steps described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed in this application can be implemented in hardware or a combination of hardware and computer software. Whether a function is executed in hardware or by computer software driving hardware depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Those skilled in the art can use different methods to implement the described functions for each specific application, but such implementation should not be considered beyond the scope of this application.

[0145] This application also provides a device for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking. This device can be a server, a CPU within the server, a module within the server used to determine the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking, or a client within the server used to determine the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking.

[0146] This application embodiment can divide the device for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking into functional modules or functional units according to the above method example. For example, each function can be divided into a separate functional module or functional unit, or two or more functions can be integrated into one processing unit. The integrated module can be implemented in hardware or in software as a functional module or functional unit. The module or unit division in this application embodiment is illustrative and only represents one logical functional division; other division methods may be used in actual implementation.

[0147] When dividing each function into modules according to its corresponding function. Figure 4 A structural diagram of a device for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking provided in this application is shown below. Figure 4 As shown, the device for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking can be used to perform... Figure 1 , Figure 2 , Figure 3 The method for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking is shown. The pipeline stress corrosion cracking risk determination device 40 includes: an acquisition unit 401 and a processing unit 402.

[0148] The acquisition unit 401 is used to acquire material information and soil environment information of the target pipeline.

[0149] The processing unit 402 is used to determine a first set of evaluation parameters based on material information and soil environmental information. The first set of evaluation parameters includes: electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, crack propagation parameters and fracture embrittlement parameters. Each evaluation parameter in the first set of evaluation parameters is used to reflect the risk status of the target pipeline.

[0150] The processing unit 402 is used to determine a second set of evaluation parameters based on a first set of evaluation parameters; the second set of evaluation parameters is a set of parameters obtained by filtering the first set of evaluation parameters.

[0151] Processing unit 402 is used to determine the stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline based on a second set of evaluation parameters.

[0152] In one possible approach, the processing unit 402 is specifically configured to: determine a first comparison result based on electrochemical parameters and mechanical damage parameters, wherein the first comparison result indicates whether the risk state represented by the electrochemical parameters is the same as the risk state represented by the mechanical damage parameters; determine a second comparison result based on crack propagation parameters and fracture embrittlement parameters, wherein the second comparison result indicates whether the risk state represented by the crack propagation parameters is the same as the risk state represented by the fracture embrittlement parameters; and determine a second set of evaluation parameters based on the first comparison result and the second comparison result.

[0153] In one possible approach, the second set of evaluation parameters can be any of the following: a first set of parameters, a second set of parameters, a third set of parameters, or a fourth set of parameters; the first set of parameters includes: electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters; the second set of parameters includes: electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, and micro-area composition parameters, wherein the micro-area composition parameters are parameters determined through micro-area composition analysis experiments; the third set of parameters includes: hydrogen permeation parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters, wherein the hydrogen permeation parameters are parameters determined through hydrogen permeation analysis experiments; and the fourth set of parameters includes: hydrogen permeation parameters and micro-area composition parameters.

[0154] In one possible approach, the processing unit 402 is specifically configured to: determine the second set of evaluation parameters as the first set of parameters when the first comparison results are the same and the second comparison results are the same; determine the second set of evaluation parameters as the second set of parameters when the first comparison results are the same and the second comparison results are different; determine the second set of evaluation parameters as the third set of parameters when the first comparison results are different and the second comparison results are the same; and determine the second set of evaluation parameters as the fourth set of parameters when the first comparison results are different and the second comparison results are different.

[0155] In one possible approach, the processing unit 402 is specifically used to determine a set of experimental parameters based on soil environmental information and material information, the set of experimental parameters including electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters and crack propagation parameters; and to determine fracture embrittlement parameters based on soil environmental information, material information, mechanical damage parameters and crack propagation parameters.

[0156] In one possible approach, the processing unit 402 is specifically used to determine risk assessment parameters based on a second set of evaluation parameters, the risk assessment parameters being used to indicate the stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline; and to determine the stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline based on the risk assessment parameters and a preset risk range.

[0157] In one possible approach, the preset risk range includes a first preset risk threshold, a second preset risk threshold, and a third preset risk threshold. The processing unit 402 is specifically configured to: 1) When the risk assessment parameter is less than the first preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a safe state; 2) When the risk assessment parameter is greater than or equal to the first preset risk threshold and less than the second preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a low-risk state; 3) When the risk assessment parameter is greater than or equal to the second preset risk threshold and less than the third preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a medium-risk state; and 4) When the risk assessment parameter is greater than or equal to the third preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a high-risk state.

[0158] In one possible approach, each evaluation parameter in the first set of evaluation parameters is used to reflect the risk status of the target pipeline; the processing unit 402 is specifically used to determine the risk status reflected by each evaluation parameter based on the evaluation parameter and the preset parameter threshold corresponding to the evaluation parameter, wherein the risk status reflected by the evaluation parameter is a low-risk state or a high-risk state; the evaluation parameter is any one of electrochemical parameters, mechanical damage parameters, crack propagation parameters, and fracture embrittlement parameters.

[0159] This disclosure also provides a computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that, when executed by a processor of an electronic device, enable the electronic device to perform the method for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking provided in the embodiments of this disclosure.

[0160] This disclosure also provides a computer program product containing instructions that, when run on an electronic device, cause the electronic device to execute the method for determining the risk of pipeline stress corrosion cracking provided in the above-described embodiments of this disclosure.

[0161] The computer-readable storage medium may be, for example, but not limited to, an electrical, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, or device, or any combination thereof. More specific examples (a non-exhaustive list) of computer-readable storage media include: electrical connections having one or more wires; portable computer disks; hard disks; random access memory (RAM); read-only memory (ROM); erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM); registers; hard disks; optical fibers; portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM); optical storage devices; magnetic storage devices; or any suitable combination thereof; or any other form of computer-readable storage medium known in the art. An exemplary storage medium is coupled to a processor, enabling the processor to read information from and write information to the storage medium. Of course, the storage medium may also be a component of the processor. The processor and the storage medium may reside in an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC). In the embodiments of this application, the computer-readable storage medium can be any tangible medium that contains or stores a program that can be used by or in conjunction with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

[0162] Through the above description of the embodiments, those skilled in the art can clearly understand that, for the sake of convenience and brevity, only the division of the above functional modules is used as an example. In actual applications, the above functions can be assigned to different functional modules as needed, that is, the internal structure of the device can be divided into different functional modules to complete all or part of the functions described above.

[0163] In the several embodiments provided in this application, it should be understood that the disclosed apparatus and methods can be implemented in other ways. For example, the apparatus embodiments described above are merely illustrative; for instance, the division of modules or units is only a logical functional division, and in actual implementation, there may be other division methods. For example, multiple units or components may be combined or integrated into another apparatus, or some features may be ignored or not executed. Furthermore, the mutual coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed may be through some interfaces; the indirect coupling or communication connection between apparatuses or units may be electrical, mechanical, or other forms.

[0164] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separate. A component shown as a unit can be one or more physical units; that is, it can be located in one place or distributed in multiple different locations. Some or all of the classified units can be selected to achieve the purpose of this embodiment, depending on actual needs.

[0165] Furthermore, the functional units in the various embodiments of this application can be integrated into one processing unit, or each unit can exist physically separately, or two or more units can be integrated into one unit. The integrated unit can be implemented in hardware or as a software functional unit.

[0166] If the integrated unit is implemented as a software functional unit and sold or used as an independent product, it can be stored in a readable storage medium. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the embodiments of this application, essentially, or the part that contributes to the prior art, or a complete or partial classification of the technical solution, can be embodied in the form of a software product. This software product is stored in a storage medium and includes several instructions to cause a device (which may be a microcontroller, chip, etc.) or processor to execute all or part of the steps of the methods of the various embodiments of this application. The aforementioned storage medium includes various media capable of storing program code, such as USB flash drives, portable hard drives, ROM, RAM, magnetic disks, or optical disks.

[0167] The above are merely specific embodiments of this application, but the scope of protection of this application is not limited thereto. Any variations or substitutions that can be easily conceived by those skilled in the art within the scope of the technology disclosed in this application should be included within the scope of protection of this application. Therefore, the scope of protection of this application should be determined by the scope of the claims.

Claims

1. A method of determining the risk of stress corrosion cracking of a pipeline, characterized in that, The method comprises: obtaining material information of a target pipeline and soil environment information; determining a first evaluation parameter set based on the material information and the soil environment information; the first evaluation parameter set comprises the electrochemical parameter, the mechanical damage parameter, the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter, and each evaluation parameter in the first evaluation parameter set is used for reflecting a risk state of the target pipeline; determining a second evaluation parameter set based on the first evaluation parameter set; the second evaluation parameter set is a parameter set obtained by screening the first evaluation parameter set; determining a stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline based on the second evaluation parameter set.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein, The determining of the second evaluation parameter set based on the first evaluation parameter set comprises: determining a first comparison result based on the electrochemical parameter and the mechanical damage parameter; the first comparison result is used for indicating whether the risk state represented by the electrochemical parameter is the same as the risk state represented by the mechanical damage parameter; determining a second comparison result based on the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter; the second comparison result is used for indicating whether the risk state represented by the crack propagation parameter is the same as the risk state represented by the fracture embrittlement parameter; determining the second evaluation parameter set based on the first comparison result and the second comparison result.

3. The method of claim 2, wherein, The second evaluation parameter set is any one of a first parameter set, a second parameter set, a third parameter set and a fourth parameter set; the first parameter set comprises the electrochemical parameter, the mechanical damage parameter, the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter; the second parameter set comprises the electrochemical parameter, the mechanical damage parameter and a micro-area composition parameter; the micro-area composition parameter is a parameter determined through a micro-area composition analysis experiment; the third parameter set comprises the hydrogen permeation parameter, the crack propagation parameter and the fracture embrittlement parameter; the hydrogen permeation parameter is a parameter determined through a hydrogen permeation analysis experiment; the fourth parameter set comprises the hydrogen permeation parameter and the micro-area composition parameter.

4. The method of claim 3, wherein, The determining of the second evaluation parameter set based on the first comparison result and the second comparison result comprises: in a case where the first comparison result is the same and the second comparison result is the same, determining that the second evaluation parameter set is the first parameter set; in a case where the first comparison result is the same and the second comparison result is different, determining that the second evaluation parameter set is the second parameter set; in a case where the first comparison result is different and the second comparison result is the same, determining that the second evaluation parameter set is the third parameter set; in a case where the first comparison result is different and the second comparison result is different, determining that the second evaluation parameter set is the fourth parameter set.

5. The method according to any one of claims 1-4, characterized in that, The determining of the first evaluation parameter set based on the material information and the soil environment information comprises: determine, based on the soil environment information and the material information, an experiment parameter set, the experiment parameter set comprising the electrochemical parameter, the mechanical damage parameter, and the crack propagation parameter; determine, based on the soil environment information, the material information, the mechanical damage parameter, and the crack propagation parameter, the fracture embrittlement parameter.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein, determine, based on the second evaluation parameter set, a stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline, comprising: determine, based on the second evaluation parameter set, a risk evaluation parameter, the risk evaluation parameter being used to indicate a stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline; determine, based on the risk evaluation parameter and a preset risk range, the stress corrosion cracking risk level of the target pipeline.

7. The method of claim 6, wherein, The preset risk range comprises a first preset risk threshold, a second preset risk threshold, and a third preset risk threshold. The determination of the cracking sensitivity risk level of the target pipeline based on the second evaluation parameter set and the preset risk range comprises: in a case where the risk evaluation parameter is less than the first preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a safe state; in a case where the risk evaluation parameter is greater than or equal to the first preset risk threshold and less than the second preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a low-risk state; in a case where the risk evaluation parameter is greater than or equal to the second preset risk threshold and less than the third preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a medium-risk state; in a case where the risk evaluation parameter is greater than or equal to the third preset risk threshold, the target pipeline is in a high-risk state.

8. The method according to any one of claims 1-4, characterized in that, Each evaluation parameter in the first evaluation parameter set is used to reflect a risk state of the target pipeline. The method further comprises: for each evaluation parameter, determining, based on the evaluation parameter and a preset parameter threshold corresponding to the evaluation parameter, a risk state reflected by the evaluation parameter, the risk state reflected by the evaluation parameter being a low-risk state or a high-risk state; the evaluation parameter is any one of the electrochemical parameter, the mechanical damage parameter, the crack propagation parameter, and the fracture embrittlement parameter.

9. An apparatus for determining the risk of stress corrosion cracking of a pipeline, characterized in that, The device comprises: an acquisition unit configured to acquire material information and soil environment information of a target pipeline; a processing unit configured to determine, based on the material information and the soil environment information, a first evaluation parameter set, the first evaluation parameter set comprising the electrochemical parameter, the mechanical damage parameter, the crack propagation parameter, and the fracture embrittlement parameter, each evaluation parameter in the first evaluation parameter set being used to reflect a risk state of the target pipeline; a processing unit configured to determine, based on the first evaluation parameter set, a second evaluation parameter set, the second evaluation parameter set being a parameter set obtained by screening the first evaluation parameter set; a processing unit configured to determine, based on the second evaluation parameter set, a stress corrosion cracking risk of the target pipeline.

10. An electronic device, comprising: A computer program product comprising a memory and a processor; the memory and the processor coupled; the memory for storing instructions executable by the processor; the processor executing the instructions performing the method of any one of claims 1-8.

Images