Diagnosis method, system, and program

Abstract

This diagnosis method comprises: a step of measuring a surface pressure range with respect to a gasket using three-dimensional point cloud data of a flange surface; a step of comparing the surface pressure ranges before and after deterioration to calculate any one or two or more of a surface pressure decrease amount, a surface pressure decrease width, a surface pressure decrease rate, and a surface pressure decrease speed; a step of selecting, from a database storing any one or two or more of flange repair content, repair timing, and repair cost related to any one or two or more of the surface pressure decrease amount, the surface pressure decrease width, the surface pressure decrease rate, and the surface pressure decrease speed, any one or two or more of the repair content, repair timing, and repair cost identified by any one or two or more of the surface pressure decrease amount, the surface pressure decrease width, the surface pressure decrease rate, and the surface pressure decrease speed; and a step of presenting a diagnosis result including any one or two or more of the repair content, repair timing, and repair cost. Thus, maintenance information including any one or two or more of repair content, repair timing, and repair cost is presented through digitization of each surface pressure range before and after deterioration.

Description

Diagnostic method, system, and program

[0001] The present disclosure relates to a diagnostic method, system, and program for diagnosing a flange fastener or flange that seals between pipelines through which a fluid or the like flows.

[0002] Conventionally, regarding the aging deterioration of flange fasteners, according to Patent Document 1 (Japanese Unexamined Patent Application Publication No. 2024-44482), three-dimensional shape data is acquired from the flange surface, and based on flaw detection or strain measurement in the evaluation target area, it is disclosed to determine whether repair of the flange surface is necessary.

[0003] Japanese Unexamined Patent Application Publication No. 2024-44482

[0004] By the way, regarding the flange of the flange fastener, its maintenance needs to be carried out before an unexpected situation such as fluid leakage occurs. However, if sudden leakage occurs, there are cases where the operation of the equipment is stopped before regular maintenance to deal with the occurrence of problems. The leakage factors are diverse, and it is difficult to pursue and identify the cause of leakage. In some cases, the flange is repaired in advance due to aging time or leakage history. Moreover, the determination of whether the flange surface is abnormal is qualitative, and there is a problem that planned maintenance is not carried out in order to prioritize emergency treatment.

[0005] On the flange of the flange fastener, unevenness such as distortion, inclination due to excessive tightening or one-sided tightening during construction, aging deterioration, deposits due to insufficient cleaning, and scratches due to mistakes in removing gaskets occur. Even if the sealing function is temporarily exerted by replacing the gasket or adjusting the tightening for a deteriorated flange surface, in a flange where deterioration such as distortion has already occurred, the gasket is compressed unevenly. In addition to the creep of the gasket itself, it cannot follow the thermal expansion and contraction of the fastener, and in some cases, it may cause fluid leakage.

[0006] Traditionally, flange fastener maintenance involves visually inspecting and palpating the deterioration of the flange surface. Determining whether this condition will lead to fluid leakage depends on the worker's technical knowledge and experience. Flange fastener maintenance typically involves multiple tasks, including gasket replacement, flange surface polishing, machining, axial force adjustment, and flange fastener replacement, all of which must be considered in terms of repair time and cost. Therefore, even highly knowledgeable and experienced workers find this judgment difficult, and the variability in these judgments cannot be ignored.

[0007] The inventors of this disclosure have found that, for example, in the diagnosis of flange deterioration, deterioration of the flange, such as scratches and distortions on the flange surface, appears in the surface pressure range with the gasket, and that it is reasonable to select the repair of the flange and the timing of the repair according to this surface pressure range.

[0008] Therefore, in light of the above issues, the purpose of this disclosure is to present maintenance information including repair details, repair timing, or repair costs, or one or more of these, by quantifying the surface pressure range before and after deterioration.

[0009] To achieve the above objective, according to one aspect of the diagnostic method of this disclosure, a diagnostic method for diagnosing the flange of a flange fastening body includes the steps of: measuring the surface pressure range with a gasket using three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface; comparing the surface pressure range before and after deterioration to calculate one or more of the surface pressure reduction amount, surface pressure reduction width, surface pressure reduction rate, or surface pressure reduction rate; selecting one or more of the repair content, repair timing, or repair cost of the flange, which are specified by one or more of the surface pressure reduction amount, surface pressure reduction width, surface pressure reduction rate, or surface pressure reduction rate, from a database storing one or more of the repair content, repair timing, or repair cost of the flange related to one or more of the

[0010] This diagnostic method may include the steps of measuring the radial surface pressure width of the flange surface from the surface pressure range and calculating the surface pressure reduction by comparing the surface pressure width before and after deterioration.

[0011] This diagnostic method may further include the steps of measuring the surface pressure width at at least one location in the surface pressure range before deterioration and at least two locations in the radial direction of the surface pressure range after deterioration, and comparing the surface pressure widths before and after deterioration to calculate the reduction in surface pressure.

[0012] In this diagnostic method, the repair work may include any or more of the following: adjustment of the flange surface in relation to the amount of surface pressure reduction, resetting of the tightening axial force, or replacement of the flange.

[0013] This diagnostic method further includes a cost calculation step for determining the repair costs, in which the costs necessary for resetting the clamping axial force, increasing or decreasing the clamping axial force, adjusting the flange surface, or replacing the flange may be calculated.

[0014] To achieve the above objective, according to one aspect of the diagnostic system of this disclosure, a diagnostic system for diagnosing the flange of a flange fastening body includes: a surface pressure range measuring unit that measures the surface pressure range with a gasket from three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface; a diagnostic unit that compares the surface pressure range before and after deterioration to calculate the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction, and selects from a database storing any or more of the repair details, repair timing, or repair costs of the flange related to any or more of the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction, any or more of the repair details, repair timing, or repair costs of the flange, which are specified by any or more of the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction, any or more of the repair details, repair timing, or repair costs; and a presentation unit that presents a diagnostic result including any or more of the repair details, repair timing, or repair costs.

[0015] To achieve the above objective, according to one aspect of the program of this disclosure, a program to be executed by a computer includes the following functions: a function to measure the surface pressure range with respect to a gasket from three-dimensional point cloud data of a flange surface; a function to calculate the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction by comparing the surface pressure range before and after deterioration; a function to select from a database storing any or more of the repair details, repair timing, or repair costs of a flange related to any or more of the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction, any or more of the repair details, repair timing, or repair costs of a flange, and a function to output presentation information representing a diagnostic result including any or more of the repair details, repair timing, or repair costs.

[0016] According to this disclosure, one of the following effects can be obtained: (1) It is possible to select one or more of the repair content, repair timing, or repair cost in accordance with the deterioration state of the flange surface of the flange, thereby making maintenance easier and improving the accuracy of maintenance.

[0017] (2) With regard to the maintenance of flange fasteners and flanges, a repair plan can be made that is in line with the deterioration state of the flange surface, without relying on the technical knowledge or experience of the worker.

[0018] Furthermore, other purposes, features, and advantages of this disclosure will become clearer by referring to the accompanying drawings and each embodiment.

[0019] Figure 1A is a perspective view showing a flange fastener, which is an example of a target for diagnosis, and Figure 1B is a perspective view showing the flange of the flange fastener. Figure 2A is a perspective view showing an example of a diagnosis method and diagnosis system according to the first embodiment, and Figure 2B is a block diagram showing an example of the hardware of the diagnosis system. Figure 3 is a flowchart showing an example of the diagnosis processing procedure according to the first embodiment. Figure 4 is a diagram showing an example of a first database. Figure 5 is a diagram showing an example of a second database storing the diagnosis results. Figure 6A is a cross-sectional view showing a longitudinal section of the flange before deterioration, and Figure 6B is a plan view showing the flange surface before deterioration. Figure 7A is a cross-sectional view showing a longitudinal section of the flange after deterioration, and Figure 7B is a diagram showing the flange surface after deterioration. Figure 8 is a flowchart showing the diagnosis processing procedure. Figure 9A is a diagram showing the relationship between the surface pressure range of the flange surface and repair, and Figure 9B is a diagram showing the relationship between the reduction in surface pressure and repair costs. Figure 10 is a flowchart showing an example of the diagnosis processing procedure according to the second embodiment. Figure 11A is a plan view showing the flange surface before deterioration, and Figure 11B is a plan view showing the flange surface after deterioration. Figure 12A shows the surface pressure width of section a-a in Figure 11A, Figure 12B shows the surface pressure width of section b1-b1 in Figure 11B, and Figure 12C shows the surface pressure width of section b2-b2 in Figure 11B. Figure 13 is a flowchart showing an example of a diagnostic processing procedure according to the third embodiment. Figure 14 is a flowchart showing an example of a diagnostic processing procedure according to the fourth embodiment. Figure 15 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure for adjusting the tightening axial force according to Example 1. Figure 16 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure for flange surface deterioration diagnosis according to Example 2. Figure 17A shows a life prediction system according to the fifth embodiment, and Figure 17B is an enlarged view of section 17B in Figure 17A. Figure 18 is a flowchart showing a processing procedure for life prediction. Figure 19 is a diagram showing the trend chart T-11. Figure 20 is a graph showing flange strain in the radial direction of the flange. Figure 21 is a graph showing flange strain in the circumferential direction of the flange. Figure 22 is a diagram for explaining the calculation method of the apparent length of a scratch. Figure 23 shows an example of the criteria for determining whether a flange is good or bad.Figure 24A is a diagram for determining the area of ​​damage, and Figure 24B is a table showing the criteria for judgment based on the percentage of the area of ​​damage, etc. Figure 25 is a diagram of damage. Figure 26 is a diagram of damage. Figure 27 is a diagram for explaining damage integration. Figure 28 is a cross-sectional view showing the shape of the flange. Figure 29 is a diagram of trend chart T-12. Figure 30 is a diagram of trend chart T-21. Figure 31 is a diagram of trend chart T-22.

[0020] [Item to be diagnosed] Figure 1A shows a flange fastener, which is an example of an item to be diagnosed in this disclosure, and Figure 1B shows the flange of the flange fastener.

[0021] The flange fastener 2 is used, for example, at the connection point between pipelines in a plant and functions as a sealing part that seals the space between pipelines. In this flange fastener 2, flange 6-1 is welded to the end of the upper pipeline 4-1, and flange 6-2 is welded to the end of the lower pipeline 4-2, with a gasket 8 installed between flanges 6-1 and 6-2. The gasket 8 is an example of a sealing material that seals the space between flanges 6-1 and 6-2. Flanges 6-1 and 6-2 are connected by multiple bolts 10 and nuts 12 that pass through bolt through holes 20, and the tightening axial force F of each bolt 10 functions as the sealing surface pressure between flanges 6-1 and 6-2 and the gasket 8. Therefore, this flange fastener 2 can prevent leakage of fluid 14 passing through the flange fastener 2 between pipelines 4-1 and 4-2.

[0022] As the fluid 14 passes through, the flange fastener 2 is subjected to multiple loads such as pressure, heat, and vibration, and also deteriorates over time due to overtightening or uneven tightening during installation. This deterioration manifests as distortion, unevenness, tilting of the flanges 6-1 and 6-2 and the flange surface 16, and deformation of the gasket 8. Furthermore, the deterioration of the flange surface 16 reduces the surface pressure range, which is the sealing range between the flange surface 16 and the gasket 8.

[0023] The diagnostic method, system, and program described herein are used for diagnosing flanges during periodic or irregular maintenance of flange fasteners 2. This diagnosis can utilize empirical values, experimental values, or estimated values, including measured values ​​such as the surface pressure range before and after flange deterioration, the details of flange repairs obtained during maintenance, the timing of repairs, and the repair costs. The surface pressure range before flange deterioration serves as a comparison point for determining the amount and width of surface pressure reduction in the surface pressure range after deterioration. It may be a reference surface pressure range, or the surface pressure range after repair may be used.

[0024] Therefore, the diagnostic process of this disclosure includes a wide range of functions and information processing, such as (1) comparing the surface pressure range before and after deterioration to calculate one or more of the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction, and selecting the repair content specified by one or more of the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction; (2) calculating the amount of surface pressure reduction based on the surface pressure width of the surface pressure range before and after deterioration; and (3) calculating the cost associated with the repair content.

[0025] [First Embodiment] Figure 2A shows a diagnostic method and diagnostic system according to the first embodiment. In the maintenance of the flange fastener 2, the bolts 10 are removed to separate the flange fastener 2 into flanges 6-1, 6-2 and gasket 8, and the diagnostic system 18 acquires three-dimensional point cloud data representing the flange surface condition from the flange surfaces 16 of flanges 6-1 and 6-2. The flange surface 16 is mainly the surface on which the gasket 8 is placed.

[0026] This diagnostic system 18 includes a 3D (three-dimensional) scanner 22 and a diagnostic device 24. The 3D scanner 22 is an example of the surface pressure range measuring unit of this disclosure. The diagnostic device 24 is an example of the diagnostic unit of this disclosure.

[0027] The 3D scanner 22 is, for example, a handheld, non-contact 3D scanner that acquires three-dimensional shape data of the flange surface 16 in response to manual operation by the worker 26. The 3D scanner 22 can be any type that can acquire three-dimensional shape data, such as a laser type.

[0028] For the diagnosis of the flange surface 16, the flange surface 16 is positioned with the flange 6-2 facing upwards, and the 3D scanner 22 is placed against the upper surface of the flange 6-2 to acquire three-dimensional point cloud data from the flange surface 16. This three-dimensional point cloud data can be acquired by the diagnostic device 24 via wired or wireless connection.

[0029] The diagnostic device 24 includes a diagnostic processing unit 28 and an information display unit 30. The diagnostic device 24 may use any information processing device, such as a laptop PC (e.g., a personal computer), a desktop PC, or a tablet terminal. The diagnostic processing unit 28 acquires three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface 16 from the 3D scanner 22 and performs diagnostic processing.

[0030] In this diagnostic device 24, the processing according to the first embodiment includes processing such as (a) measuring the surface pressure range with the gasket 8, (b) calculating the amount of surface pressure reduction on the flange surface 16, and (c) selecting the repair content specified by the amount of surface pressure reduction. The diagnostic results are presented on the information display unit 30, for example, as image information or text information.

[0031] <Diagnostic System 18 and Diagnostic Device 24> Figure 2B shows an example of the diagnostic system 18 and diagnostic device 24 of this disclosure. The diagnostic processing unit 28 includes a processor 32, memory 34, input / output unit (I / O) 36, etc.

[0032] The processor 32 is an information processing unit that performs diagnostic and other processing. It executes a program stored in the memory 34 and performs diagnostics (execution of a diagnostic program), processing of related items, and controls data acquisition and data recording.

[0033] Memory 34 is an example of a recording medium including ROM (Read-Only Memory) and RAM (Random-Access Memory). The ROM stores the OS (Operating System) as well as a first database (DB) 38 (Figure 4) and a second database (DB) 52 (Figure 5) which store various data such as the diagnostic program and diagnostic data disclosed herein. RAM is used as a work area for information processing.

[0034] I / O 36 is used under the control of the processor 32 to acquire three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface 16 from the 3D scanner 22 and to output information to the information display unit 30.

[0035] The diagnostic device 24 may include a communication unit (not shown) and, under the control of the processor 32, send and receive diagnostic data and the like with the server.

[0036] <Diagnostic Processing Procedure> Figure 3 shows the diagnostic processing procedure according to the first embodiment. In this processing procedure, S represents a process, and the numbers attached to S indicate the order of the processes; however, this disclosure is not limited to this order of processes.

[0037] This processing procedure includes acquiring three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface 16 (S101), measuring the surface pressure range (S102), calculating the amount of surface pressure reduction (S103), acquiring repair information (S104), selecting the repair content (S105), evaluating maintenance including the cumulative repair costs (S106), and presenting the diagnostic results (S107).

[0038] Acquisition of three-dimensional point cloud data of flange surface 16 (S101): Flanges 6-1 and 6-2 are removed from the flange fastener 2, and three-dimensional point cloud data is acquired from the flange surfaces 16 of each flange 6-1 and 6-2 using a 3D scanner 22. This three-dimensional point cloud data is a collection of point information in three-dimensional coordinates of X, Y, and Z, and is shape data including distortion, unevenness, and inclination of the flange surface 16.

[0039] The diagnostic processing unit 28 performs noise reduction, synthesis, and alignment on the three-dimensional point cloud data as a pre-processing step for diagnostic processing, and then creates a 3D model before data conversion. This 3D model creation includes conversion to mesh data. After data conversion of the three-dimensional point cloud data, flange surface information representing the deterioration state of the flange surface 16 is acquired. This flange surface information includes distortion information, unevenness information, and inclination information.

[0040] Measurement of surface pressure range (S102): The surface pressure range with the gasket 8 is measured from the three-dimensional point cloud data. This surface pressure range measurement is performed for each flange surface 16 before and after deterioration, and the surface pressure range before deterioration is used as reference information for the surface pressure range. This reference information may use reference surface information that represents a flange surface 16 equivalent to the flange surface 16 before deterioration.

[0041] Calculation of surface pressure reduction (S103): The diagnostic processing unit 28 compares the surface pressure range before deterioration with the surface pressure range after deterioration and calculates the amount of surface pressure reduction in the surface pressure range after deterioration. To calculate this amount of surface pressure reduction, for example, the surface pressure area representing the surface pressure range before deterioration and the surface pressure area representing the surface pressure range after deterioration can be compared, and the reduction in area of ​​the surface pressure range after deterioration can be taken as the amount of surface pressure reduction. For such point cloud data analysis, for example, analysis using the Finite Element Method (FEM) can be used.

[0042] Acquisition of repair information (S104): The diagnostic processing unit 28 acquires repair information from the first DB 38 (Figure 4) using the surface pressure reduction amount. This repair information includes the repair items necessary for maintenance, repair time, and cost. The repair items include gasket replacement, polishing, cutting, axial force adjustment, flange fastener replacement, etc., which should be selected according to the surface pressure reduction amount.

[0043] Gasket replacement involves replacing a deteriorated gasket 8 with, for example, a new gasket 8. Polishing involves polishing the flange surface 16. Machining involves machining the flange surface 16 to the extent possible. Axial force adjustment involves adjusting the tightening axial force of each bolt 10. Flange fastener replacement involves replacing a flange fastener 2 that is irreparable or unsuitable, or generating new design values ​​for a flange fastener 2 that are suitable for the operating environment such as a plant. Gasket replacement may also involve gasket changes, such as changing the dimensions of the gasket or changing the type of gasket. Changing the dimensions of a gasket involves changing at least one or more values ​​of information such as the thickness, inner diameter, outer diameter, and sealing surface width of the gasket.

[0044] The repair time is the time spent on repairs according to the repair content, and is time information representing the time until the next maintenance or the like. The repair timing is time information representing the repair timing and cycle at which repairs should be carried out according to the reduction in surface pressure. This time information such as the repair time is stored in the second DB 52 (FIG. 5).

[0045] The cost is the cost required for repair. Repairs associated with the reduction in surface pressure of the flange surface 16 incur repair costs according to their content. This cost information is acquired and stored in the second DB 52 (FIG. 5). The repair costs incurred at each repair timing are accumulated as the total repair cost and stored in the second DB 52, and the total repair cost is updated each time a repair cost is incurred.

[0046] Selection of repair content (S105): The first DB 38 (FIG. 4) is used for this selection of repair content, and items suitable for the amount of surface pressure reduction are selected from repair items, repair time, repair timing, cost, etc. associated with the amount of surface pressure reduction.

[0047] Evaluation of maintenance including total repair cost (S106): The diagnosis processing unit 28 refers to the stored data in the second DB 52 and performs an evaluation of maintenance including the total repair cost.

[0048] Presentation of diagnosis result (S107): Various information obtained from the above diagnosis results is generated as presentation information and presented to the information presentation unit 30.

[0049] <First DB 38> The first DB 38 calculates the amount of surface pressure reduction by comparing the respective surface pressure ranges before and after the deterioration of the flange surface 16, and can select repair content and the like using this amount of surface pressure reduction. The first DB 38 constitutes a data conversion table that converts the amount of surface pressure reduction into repair content. Therefore, by using the first DB 38, it is possible to convert to a diagnosis result representing the repair content specified by the amount of surface pressure reduction.

[0050] FIG. 4 shows an example of the first DB 38. This first DB 38 includes a date and time part 40, a flange part 42, a surface pressure range part 44, a repair content part 46, a repair time part 48, a cost part 50, and the like.

[0051] The date and time section 40 stores date and time information at the time of diagnosis. The flange section 42 stores identification information that identifies the flanges 6-1 and 6-2 that are the subject of diagnosis.

[0052] The surface pressure range section 44 includes a deteriorated front surface pressure range section 44-1, a deteriorated post-deterioration surface pressure range section 44-2, and a surface pressure reduction amount section 44-3. The deteriorated front surface pressure range section 44-1 stores range information representing the surface pressure range before deterioration. This surface pressure range information is reference information for calculating the amount of surface pressure reduction in the surface pressure range after deterioration, and for example, it stores area information representing the surface pressure range.

[0053] The deteriorated surface pressure range section 44-2 stores range information representing the surface pressure range of the deteriorated flanges 6-1 and 6-2, for example, area information representing the surface pressure range.

[0054] The surface pressure reduction section 44-3 stores the amount of surface pressure reduction in the deteriorated surface pressure range, which is calculated by comparing the deteriorated front surface pressure range in the deteriorated front surface pressure range section 44-1 with the deteriorated post-deterioration surface pressure range in the deteriorated post-deterioration surface pressure range section 44-2.

[0055] The repair details section 46 includes a gasket replacement section 46-1, a polishing section 46-2, a cutting section 46-3, an axial force adjustment section 46-4, and a flange fastener replacement section 46-5, which represent diagnostic information specified by the amount of surface pressure reduction.

[0056] The gasket replacement section 46-1 stores replacement information indicating the replacement of gasket 8. This replacement information is the result of a diagnosis based on the amount of surface pressure reduction.

[0057] The polishing unit 46-2 stores polishing information representing the polishing content of the flange surface 16, which is selected based on the amount of surface pressure reduction. The polishing content is selected based on the amount of surface pressure reduction, and the degree of polishing is specified according to the amount of surface pressure reduction.

[0058] The cutting section 46-3 stores cutting information such as the cutting depth of the flange surface 16, which is determined by the amount of surface pressure reduction, and the cutting limit. The cutting content is selected based on the amount of surface pressure reduction, and the degree of cutting is determined according to the amount of surface pressure reduction.

[0059] The axial force adjustment unit 46-4 stores axial force increase / decrease information that represents the increase or decrease in the tightening axial force of each bolt 10, which is specified by the amount of surface pressure reduction. In this case, it stores adjustment information that is related to the inclination information of flanges 6-1 and 6-2, which is specified by the amount of surface pressure reduction, and represents the increase or decrease in tightening axial force according to the position of the bolt 10, which is related to the inclination. The content of the axial force increase or decrease is selected by the amount of surface pressure reduction, the increase or decrease in axial force and its position are specified according to the amount of surface pressure reduction, and the amount of the axial force increase or decrease is specified by the amount of surface pressure reduction.

[0060] The flange fastener replacement section 46-5 stores information on the replacement of the flange fastener 2 and its design values. Depending on the amount of surface pressure reduction, it may not be possible to address the issue by replacing the gasket 8, polishing or cutting the flange surface 16, or adjusting the tightening axial force of each bolt 10. In this case, replacement information for the flange fastener is provided. The replacement of the flange fastener 2 is selected according to the amount of surface pressure reduction.

[0061] The repair time section 48 stores time information representing the time required to carry out the repair work. The cost section 50 stores cost information representing the cost required in accordance with the repair work. The repair time is determined by the amount of surface pressure reduction.

[0062] Therefore, according to this first DB38, the amount of surface pressure reduction can be calculated by comparing the surface pressure range of the flange surface 16 before and after deterioration, and one or more diagnostic results of the repair content, repair timing, or repair cost specified by this amount of surface pressure reduction can be selected.

[0063] <Second DB 52> The diagnostic results of the flange surfaces 16 of flanges 6-1 and 6-2 are stored in the second DB 52. Figure 5 shows an example of the second DB 52.

[0064] This second DB 52 includes a date and time section 54, an equipment / plant information section 56, a design information section 58, an operation information section 60, a flange fastening section 62, a surface pressure range section 64, a diagnostic results section 66, and an overall evaluation section 68.

[0065] The date and time section 54 stores time information indicating the date and time of maintenance performed regularly or irregularly. This date and time is used as reference time information for elapsed time and repair timing.

[0066] The equipment / plant information unit 56 is configured with an equipment information unit 56-1 and a plant information unit 56-2. The equipment information unit 56-1 stores ID information to identify the equipment on which the flange fastener 2 is installed, and the plant information unit 56-2 stores ID information to identify the plant.

[0067] The design information unit 58 is configured with a design temperature unit 58-1 and a design pressure unit 58-2. The design temperature unit 58-1 stores temperature information representing the design temperature of the flange fastener 2, and the design pressure unit 58-2 stores pressure information representing the design pressure of the flange fastener 2.

[0068] The operation information unit 60 is configured with an operating temperature unit 60-1, an operating pressure unit 60-2, and a fluid information unit 60-3. The operating temperature unit 60-1 stores temperature information representing the operating temperature of the equipment, the operating pressure unit 60-2 stores pressure information representing the operating pressure of the equipment, and the fluid information unit 60-3 stores information for identifying the fluid, such as the type and composition of the fluid.

[0069] The flange fastening section 62 includes a pipeline information section 62-1, a flange section 62-2, a seal information section 62-3, and a tightening axial force section 62-4. The pipeline information section 62-1 stores information to identify pipelines 4-1 and 4-2 of the flange fastening section 2, such as the hub thickness and material. The flange section 62-2 stores flange information to identify flanges 6-1 and 6-2, such as the flange thickness and material. The seal information section 62-3 stores seal information to identify the seal contents. The tightening axial force section 62-4 stores the tightening axial force of each bolt 10 that fastens flanges 6-1 and 6-2, along with the position information of the bolts 10.

[0070] The surface pressure range section 64 includes a deteriorated front surface pressure range section 64-1, a deteriorated post-surface pressure range section 64-2, and a surface pressure reduction amount section 64-3. The deteriorated front surface pressure range section 64-1 stores range information representing the deteriorated front surface pressure range. The deteriorated post-surface pressure range section 64-2 stores range information representing the deteriorated post-surface pressure range. The surface pressure reduction amount section 64-3 stores information representing the reduction amount of the surface pressure range.

[0071] The diagnostic result unit 66 is configured with a repair unit 66-1 and a cost unit 66-2, and stores repair details and cost details that represent the results of the diagnosis. The repair unit 66-1 is configured with repair details 66-11, repair feasibility unit 66-12, and repair time unit 66-13. Repair details 66-11 stores repair information that represents the repair details, which are specified by the amount of reduction in the surface pressure range of the flange fastener 2. Repair feasibility unit 66-12 stores feasibility information and record information that represent whether the repair is feasible or not, which is specified from the repair details. Repair time unit 66-13 stores time information that represents the time required for the repair.

[0072] The cost section 66-2 includes a repair cost section 66-21, a cumulative repair cost section 66-22, a repair cost threshold section 66-23, and a repair feasibility section 66-24. The repair cost section 66-21 stores cost information representing the cost specified in the repair information. The cumulative repair cost section 66-22 stores cumulative information representing the cumulative repair cost of repairs carried out periodically or irregularly. This cumulative value is updated with the cost incurred for each repair. The repair cost threshold section 66-23 stores cost threshold information representing the marginal cost specified in the flange fastener 2. The repair feasibility section 66-24 stores feasibility information indicating whether repairs are feasible from a cost perspective.

[0073] The overall evaluation unit 68 stores evaluation information and presentation information representing the overall evaluation of the flange fastener 2. This presentation information is displayed to the information presentation unit 30 as appropriate.

[0074] <Measurement of surface pressure range of flanges 6-1 and 6-2 and calculation of surface pressure reduction amount> Figure 6A shows a longitudinal section of flanges 6-1 and 6-2 (flanges in an ideal state) before deterioration. In Figure 6A, the same parts as in Figures 1A and 1B are denoted by the same reference numerals. Flange 6-1 is connected to the end side circumferential surface of pipe 4-1, and flange 6-2 is connected to the end side circumferential surface of pipe 4-2 by welds 70 and 72. The flange surfaces 16 of flanges 6-1 and 6-2 are maintained parallel, and a gasket 8 is installed between these flange surfaces 16. For the sake of ease of explanation, a gap is shown between the flange surfaces 16 of flanges 6-1 and 6-2, but when configured as a flange fastening body 2, it is fixed in close contact with the gasket 8 by the tightening axial force of the bolts 10 described above. In each flange 6-1 and 6-2, the flange surface 16 before deterioration constitutes an ideal flat surface.

[0075] Figure 6B shows the flange surfaces 16 of flanges 6-1 and 6-2 before deterioration. If Sref is the surface pressure area of ​​the surface pressure range 74 of each flange surface 16, then the surface pressure area Sref is formed by annular portions of the same width corresponding to the gasket 8. This surface pressure area Sref indicates the surface pressure range 74 of the gasket 8 that exhibits its sealing function.

[0076] Figure 7A shows a longitudinal section of the flange after deterioration. On the flange surface 16 of flange 6-1, an uneven portion 76-1 representing flange distortion in the deteriorated state is formed, and on the flange surface 16 of flange 6-2, an uneven portion 76-2 representing flange distortion in the deteriorated state is formed. In other words, due to the distortion, the surface pressure range 74 of the uneven portions 76-1 and 76-2 has changed to the surface pressure range 74-1 and 74-2 after deterioration, and is in a more compressed state than before deterioration, and the surface pressure range 74 before deterioration has decreased.

[0077] Figure 7B shows the surface pressure ranges 74-1 and 74-2 of flanges 6-1 and 6-2 after deterioration. Let S1 be the area of ​​surface pressure range 74-1 and S2 be the area of ​​surface pressure range 74-2. The surface pressure area Sref of surface pressure range 74 before deterioration is divided into the area S1 on the smaller diameter side and the area S2 on the larger diameter side as a result of the formation of irregularities 76-1 and 76-2, and the surface pressure range 74 of the flange surface 16 is reduced to surface pressure ranges 74-1 and 74-2.

[0078] If the surface pressure area after degradation is denoted as Sd, then the surface pressure area Sd can be expressed by equation (1): Sd = S1 + S2 ... (1)

[0079] By comparing the surface pressure areas Sref and Sd before and after degradation, and defining the decrease in surface pressure area Sref as the surface pressure reduction ΔS, this surface pressure reduction ΔS can be expressed by equation (2): ΔS = Sref - Sd ... (2)

[0080] If the surface pressure reduction ΔS increases due to deterioration of the flange surface 16, the risk of fluid leakage from the flange fastener 2 increases.

[0081] <Repair Range of Flange Surface 16> Regarding the repair range of the flange surface 16, the amount of material removed from the flange surface 16 can be managed as follows: If the machinable range of the flange surface 16 is Qm, the amount of material removed in one repair is q1, q2, q3, ..., and the sum of the amounts of material removed is qn, then the sum of the amounts of material removed can be expressed by equation (3). qn = q1 + q2 + q3 + ... (3)

[0082] The cumulative cutting amount value qn increases in proportion to the number of cutting operations and is expected to exceed the machinable range Qm. Therefore, it is necessary to monitor the cutting of the flange surface 16 to ensure that the cumulative cutting amount value qn does not exceed the machinable range Qm.

[0083] The diagnostic device 24 acquires cutting information representing the cutting amounts q1, q2, q3, ... and updates the cutting amount sum qn for each cut. Then, it permits cutting within the range where the cutting amount sum qn satisfies equation (4): qn ≤ Qm ... (4)

[0084] In this case, even if the added cutting amount qn is within the cutting range Qm, if the addition of the normal cutting amount qi is expected to exceed the cutting range Qm, prohibition information is generated to prohibit cutting and presented to the information display unit 30.

[0085] <Repair Costs> Regarding the repair costs of the flange surface 16, the repair costs of the flange surface 16 can be managed as follows, for example. If the marginal cost for repairing the flange surface 16 is Mlim, the repair cost for each repair is mi (i = 1, 2, 3, ...), and the cumulative repair cost is Mi (i = 1, 2, 3, ...), then for example, if three repairs are performed, the cumulative repair cost Mi at each repair point can be expressed by equations (5), (6), and (7).

[0086] m1=M1...(5) M1+m2=M2...(6) M2+m3=M3...(7)

[0087] Since the cumulative repair cost Mi increases cumulatively in proportion to the number of cutting operations, it is monitored to ensure that it does not exceed the marginal cost Mlim.

[0088] The diagnostic device 24 acquires repair cost information each time a repair is performed and updates the cumulative repair cost Mi. Then, it permits the repair if the cumulative repair cost Mi satisfies equation (8): Mi ≤ Mlim ... (8)

[0089] In this case, even if the cumulative repair cost Mi is less than or equal to the marginal cost Mlim, if it is expected that the next repair will exceed the marginal cost Mlim, prohibition information is generated and presented to the information presentation unit 30 indicating that the repair should be prohibited.

[0090] <Diagnostic Processing Procedure> Figure 8 shows the processing procedure for flange diagnosis. This processing procedure is a more specific and detailed version of the processes S101 to S106 in Figure 3.

[0091] This processing procedure includes acquiring flange information (S201), cleaning the flange surface 16 (S202), acquiring three-dimensional shape data of the flange surface 16 (S203), creating a three-dimensional point cloud of the state information of the flange surface 16 (S204), comparing the three-dimensional point cloud data with reference data (S205), acquiring surface pressure area data (S206), calculating the amount of surface pressure reduction (S207), acquiring repair information (S208), selecting the repair content (S209), determining the repair content (S210), generating and presenting cutting information (S211), acquiring tightening axial force information (S212), calculating the tightening axial force increase / decrease value (S213), calculating the repair cost (S214), updating the cumulative repair cost (S215), determining the cumulative repair cost (S216), presenting the repair plan (S217), and presenting information on replacement of the flange fastener 2 / presenting information on changes in design values ​​(S218).

[0092] In this flange diagnostic procedure, the diagnostic device 24 acquires flange information (S201), and this flange information is stored in the first DB 38. This flange information is information for identifying the flange fastening body 2.

[0093] After this computer processing, the flange surface 16 of the flange 6-1 or flange 6-2 to be diagnosed is cleaned manually (S202). This cleaning removes any deposits from the flange surface 16.

[0094] After cleaning, the 3D scanner 22 is directed towards the flange surface 16 of flange 6-1 or flange 6-2, and three-dimensional shape data is acquired from the flange surface 16 by scanning (S203).

[0095] The diagnostic device 24, under the control of the processor 32, acquires one or more of the three-dimensional point cloud data representing unevenness, distortion, or inclination, and performs the process of converting this state information into a three-dimensional point cloud (S204).

[0096] The diagnostic device 24 compares the three-dimensional point cloud data, which is the state information of the flange surface 16, with reference data (S205) and acquires the surface pressure area data of the flange surface 16 (S206). Then, it calculates the amount of surface pressure reduction by comparing the surface pressure area Sref before deterioration with the surface pressure area Sd after deterioration (S207).

[0097] This surface pressure reduction amount is used to obtain repair information from the first DB 38 (S208). In other words, the surface pressure reduction amount is converted into repair information as a diagnosis of the flange surface 16. Then, the diagnostic device 24 uses the surface pressure reduction amount to select the repair content from the diagnostic information (S209).

[0098] The diagnostic device 24 determines whether the selected repair item falls within the repairable range (S210). If the repair item is, for example, cutting the flange surface 16, it generates and presents the cutting information (S211). The cutting information is displayed on the information presentation unit 30 in relation to the flange information.

[0099] Furthermore, if the repair involves adjusting the tightening axial force, the diagnostic device 24 acquires tightening axial force information (S212) and calculates the increase or decrease value of the tightening axial force to correct the inclination of the flange surface 16 (S213).

[0100] Once the repair details are identified, the diagnostic device 24 calculates the repair costs (S214) and updates the cumulative repair costs in the second DB 52 (S215).

[0101] When the cumulative repair costs are updated, it is determined whether these cumulative repair costs are below the limit value (S216). If the cumulative repair costs are below the limit value (YES in S216), a repair plan is generated, and this repair plan is presented to the information presentation unit 30 (S217), and this process ends.

[0102] Furthermore, if the cumulative repair costs exceed or are likely to exceed the limit (NO in S216), information for replacing the flange fastener 2 is generated and presented, or new information for replacing the flange fastener 2 or information for changing the design value is presented (S218), and this process is terminated.

[0103] <Relationship between surface pressure range of flange surface 16 and repair> Figure 9A shows the relationship between the decrease in the surface pressure range Fd1 of the flange surface 16 and the repairable range Rf, with the horizontal axis representing the elapsed time t and the vertical axis representing the parameter value.

[0104] The decrease in the surface pressure range Fd1 increases nonlinearly from t=0 as the elapsed time t progresses, and asymptotically approaches the damage limit Dmax, which represents the limit of deterioration. The optimal repair time is denoted as tf, and the repair content when the elapsed time t reaches the optimal repair time tf (t=tf) is, for example, cutting the flange surface 16.

[0105] As a result of cutting the flange surface 16, the decrease in the surface pressure range Fd1 recovers to its initial value, and then a new decrease in the surface pressure range Fd2 increases nonlinearly as time t progresses, asymptotically approaching the damage limit Dmax.

[0106] From t=0 to tf, the machinable range Rf1 exists, whereas after cutting, at t=tf, it changes to machinable range Rf2 (<Rf1). In other words, the repair range decreases as this machinable range Rf2 decreases. By storing and managing this decrease amount information, it is possible to recognize the limits of the repair range, such as cutting the flange surface 16.

[0107] <Relationship between surface pressure reduction and repair costs> Figure 9B shows the relationship between the changes in surface pressure area Sd1 and Sd2 and repair costs, with the horizontal axis representing the time elapsed t and the vertical axis representing the changes in surface pressure area Sd1 and Sd2.

[0108] The surface pressure area Sd1 decreases nonlinearly from t=0 as time t progresses, and asymptotically approaches the surface pressure degradation limit Smin. As previously described, when the optimal repair time tf is reached (t=tf), cutting of the flange surface 16 is performed as a repair related to the surface pressure area Sd1.

[0109] As a result of cutting the flange surface 16, the surface pressure area Sd1 recovers to its initial value, and then the new surface pressure area Sd2 decreases nonlinearly as time t progresses, asymptotically approaching the surface pressure degradation limit Smin.

[0110] From t=0 to tf, the cumulative cost is Cf1, but after cutting, after t=tf, the cumulative cost increases to Cf2 (>Cf1). In other words, the repair cost increases cumulatively in proportion to the number of repairs, and moreover, the more sophisticated the repair work, such as cutting, becomes.

[0111] <Effects of the First Embodiment> According to the first embodiment described above, one of the following effects can be obtained: (1) In maintenance performed regularly or irregularly, the worker 26 can disassemble the flange fastener 2 to be diagnosed and measure the flange surfaces 16 of flanges 6-1 and 6-2 with a 3D scanner 22 to obtain surface pressure information from the flange surfaces 16, and as a result of the diagnosis, obtain one or more of the following: repair details, repair timing, or repair costs. This diagnosis allows for obtaining repair information as a result of a diagnosis that does not depend on the skills or experience of the worker.

[0112] (2) Deterioration information representing the deterioration state of the flange surface 16, such as distortion, unevenness, and inclination, can be converted into a numerical reduction in surface pressure. This process leaves no room for human error, and the severity of fluid leakage can be quantified as a reduction in surface pressure of the flange surface 16.

[0113] (3) From the fluid leakage risk level converted from the state information representing the deterioration state of the flange surface 16, it is possible to determine if it is difficult to address the issue with normal repairs. In this case, information on resetting the tightening axial force of the bolt 10 can be provided, taking into account the strength of the bolt 10, gasket 8, flanges 6-1 and 6-2. This information on increasing or decreasing the tightening axial force can be generated and presented in relation to the position information of the bolt 10 and can be used in on-site construction during repairs.

[0114] (4) In the repair plan, the repairable range of the flange surface 16, i.e., the cuttable range, can be determined using the periodic measurement timing as the horizontal axis. In addition, the cumulative repair cost is updated with each repair, and if the cumulative repair cost exceeds the limit, information on proposals for equipment replacement in addition to normal repairs can be presented.

[0115] (5) Deterioration of the flange surfaces 16 of flanges 6-1 and 6-6 may cause uneven sealing pressure of the gasket 8. However, by comparing the condition information of the flange surfaces 16 after deterioration with the condition information of the flange surfaces 16 in the ideal state before deterioration as a reference, information on the increase or decrease in tightening axial force can be presented along with the position information of the bolts 10.

[0116] (6) The management and handling of fluid leakage factors in the flange fastening body 2 can be made less reliant on the worker's experience and intuition, thereby reducing the burden on the worker and decreasing unforeseen incidents and troubles such as fluid leakage.

[0117] [Second Embodiment] The diagnostic system according to the second embodiment uses the diagnostic system 18 (Figure 2) described above, and the diagnostic process includes the following steps: (a) measurement of the surface pressure range of the flange surface 16; (b) measurement of the surface pressure width from the surface pressure range; (c) calculation of the surface pressure reduction amount using the surface pressure width; and (d) selection of the repair content specified by the surface pressure reduction amount.

[0118] Figure 10 shows the diagnostic processing procedure according to the second embodiment. In this processing procedure, S represents a process, and the numbers attached to S indicate the order of the processes; however, this disclosure is not limited to this order of processes.

[0119] This processing procedure includes acquiring three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface 16 (S301), measuring the surface pressure range (S302), measuring the surface pressure width (S303), calculating the surface pressure reduction width (S304), acquiring repair information (S305), selecting the repair content (S306), evaluating maintenance including the cumulative repair costs (S307), and presenting the diagnostic results (S308).

[0120] The acquisition of three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface 16 (S301) is the same as the acquisition of three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface 16 (S101) described above, and the measurement of the surface pressure range (S302) is the same as the measurement of the surface pressure range (S102) described above, so the explanation is omitted.

[0121] Measurement of surface pressure width (S303): The diagnostic processing unit 28 measures the surface pressure width from the acquired surface pressure range. In other words, since the surface pressure range is annular, it measures the width in the radial direction of the surface pressure range.

[0122] Calculation of surface pressure reduction amount (S304): In this embodiment, the amount of surface pressure reduction due to deterioration is calculated using the surface pressure width measured in S303 and the surface pressure width before deterioration, and this amount of surface pressure reduction is assumed to be the amount of surface pressure reduction.

[0123] Acquisition of repair information (S305): Repair information is acquired using the surface pressure reduction width calculated in S304.

[0124] The selection of repair items (S306) is the same as the selection of repair items (S105) described above, the maintenance evaluation including the cumulative repair costs (S307) is the same as the maintenance evaluation including the cumulative repair costs (S106) described above, and the presentation of diagnostic results (S308) is the same as the presentation of diagnostic results (S107) described above, so these explanations will be omitted.

[0125] <First DB38 and Second DB52 in the Second Embodiment> In this second embodiment, the first DB38 and second DB52 are used in the same way as in the first embodiment, but the difference from the first embodiment is that the surface pressure width and surface pressure reduction width are stored, and the aforementioned repair items, repair time, and cost related to this surface pressure reduction width are stored, and from the repair items specified by the surface pressure reduction width, one or more items such as gasket replacement, polishing, cutting, and flange fastener replacement, repair time, and cost can be selected.

[0126] <Measurement of surface pressure width in the surface pressure range before and after deterioration> Figure 11A shows the flange surface 16 before deterioration, and Figure 11B shows the flange surface 16 after deterioration.

[0127] The surface pressure width W is measured from the surface pressure range 74 before deterioration along the radial a-a line of the flange surface 16. The surface pressure width W is measured from the surface pressure ranges 74-1 and 74-2 after deterioration along the radial b1-b1 sections of the flange surface 16, for example, separated by 45°, and the surface pressure width is measured from the b2-b2 line section.

[0128] Figure 12A shows the surface pressure width W0 measured from surface pressure range 74, Figure 12B shows the surface pressure width W11 measured from the b1-b1 portion of surface pressure range 74-1, and the surface pressure width W12 measured from the b1-b1 portion of surface pressure range 74-2, while Figure 12C shows the surface pressure widths W21 and W22 measured from the b2-b2 portions of surface pressure ranges 74-1 and 74-2.

[0129] By comparing the surface pressure width W0 with the respective surface pressure widths W11, W12, W21, and W22, we can express their relative magnitudes as shown in equation (9).

[0130] W0 > W11 + W12 and W0 > W21 + W22 ... (9) Thus, as an example of calculating the reduction in surface pressure of the surface pressure width, a comparison of surface pressure widths W at at least two locations can be used.

[0131] <Effects of the Second Embodiment> According to this second embodiment, the following effects can be obtained: (1) Even if the surface pressure width is determined from the surface pressure range before and after deterioration, maintenance of flanges 6-1, 6-2, etc., can be performed in accordance with the deterioration of the flange surface 16.

[0132] (2) When the surface pressure range 74 before deterioration changes to the surface pressure range 74-1, 74-2 after deterioration due to deterioration of the flange surface 16, the deterioration state of the flange surface 16 can be identified using the change in surface pressure width. Using this reduced surface pressure width, the previously described repair items, repair time, and cost related to this reduced surface pressure width are stored, and one or more items, repair time, and cost can be selected from the repair items identified by the reduced surface pressure width, such as gasket replacement, polishing, cutting, and flange fastener replacement.

[0133] [Third Embodiment] The diagnostic system according to the third embodiment uses the diagnostic system 18 (Figure 2) described above, and the diagnostic process includes the following: (a) measurement of the surface pressure range of the flange surface 16, (b) calculation of the surface pressure reduction rate, and (c) selection of the repair content specified by the surface pressure reduction rate.

[0134] Figure 13 shows the diagnostic processing procedure according to the third embodiment. In this processing procedure, S represents a process, and the numbers attached to S indicate the order of the processes; however, this disclosure is not limited to this order of processes.

[0135] This processing procedure includes acquiring three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface 16 (S401), measuring the surface pressure range (S402), calculating the surface pressure reduction rate (S403), acquiring repair information (S404), selecting the repair content (S405), evaluating maintenance including the cumulative repair costs (S406), and presenting the diagnostic results (S407).

[0136] The acquisition of three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface 16 (S401) is the same as the acquisition of three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface 16 (S101) described above, and the measurement of the surface pressure range (S402) is the same as the measurement of the surface pressure range (S102) described above, so the explanation is omitted.

[0137] Calculation of surface pressure reduction rate (S403): The surface pressure range before and after deterioration is compared to calculate the surface pressure reduction rate due to deterioration.

[0138] Acquisition of repair information (S404): Acquire repair information related to the surface pressure reduction rate. That is, from the repair items identified from the previously described repair items, repair time, and cost, select one or more items from gasket replacement, polishing, cutting, and flange fastener replacement, along with the repair time and cost.

[0139] The selection of repair items (S405) is the same as the selection of repair items (S105) described above, the maintenance evaluation including the cumulative repair costs (S406) is the same as the maintenance evaluation including the cumulative repair costs (S106) described above, and the presentation of diagnostic results (S407) is the same as the presentation of diagnostic results (S107) described above, so these explanations will be omitted.

[0140] <First DB38 and Second DB52 in the Third Embodiment> In this third embodiment, the first DB38 and second DB52 are used in the same way as in the first embodiment, but the difference from the first embodiment is that the surface pressure reduction rate is stored, and the aforementioned repair items, repair time, and cost related to this surface pressure reduction width are stored, and from the repair items specified by the surface pressure reduction rate, one or more items such as gasket replacement, polishing, cutting, and flange fastener replacement, repair time, and cost can be selected.

[0141] <Effects of the Third Embodiment> According to this third embodiment, one of the following effects can be obtained: (1) Even if the surface pressure reduction rate obtained from the surface pressure range before and after deterioration is used, maintenance of flanges 6-1, 6-2, etc., in accordance with the deterioration of the flange surface 16 can be performed.

[0142] (2) If the surface pressure range 74 before deterioration changes due to deterioration of the flange surface 16, for example, from the surface pressure range 74-1, 74-2 after deterioration, the surface pressure reduction rate is calculated from the change in surface pressure range, and the repair items, repair time, and cost described above, which are related to this surface pressure reduction rate, are stored, and one or more items, repair time, and cost can be selected from the repair items, such as gasket replacement, polishing, cutting, and flange fastener replacement.

[0143] [Fourth Embodiment] The diagnostic system according to the fourth embodiment uses the diagnostic system 18 (Figure 2) described above, and the diagnostic process includes the following: (a) measurement of the surface pressure range of the flange surface 16, (b) calculation of the surface pressure reduction rate, and (c) selection of repair content specified by the surface pressure reduction rate.

[0144] Figure 14 shows the diagnostic processing procedure according to the fourth embodiment. In this processing procedure, S represents a process, and the numbers attached to S indicate the order of the processes; however, this disclosure is not limited to this order of processes.

[0145] This processing procedure includes acquiring three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface 16 (S501), measuring the surface pressure range (S502), calculating the amount of surface pressure reduction (S503), acquiring the elapsed time (S504), calculating the rate of surface pressure reduction (S505), acquiring repair information (S506), selecting the repair content (S507), evaluating the maintenance including the cumulative repair costs (S508), and presenting the diagnostic results (S509).

[0146] The acquisition of three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface 16 (S501) is the same as the acquisition of three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface 16 (S101) described above, and the measurement of the surface pressure range (S502) is the same as the measurement of the surface pressure range (S102) described above, so the explanation is omitted.

[0147] Calculation of surface pressure reduction (S503): The amount of surface pressure reduction due to deterioration is calculated by comparing the surface pressure range before and after deterioration.

[0148] Acquisition of elapsed time (S504): The diagnostic device 24 acquires the elapsed time before and after deterioration. This elapsed time can be, for example, the elapsed time until the first maintenance, the maintenance interval, etc., using the elapsed time before and after deterioration.

[0149] Calculation of surface pressure reduction rate (S505): The diagnostic device 24 calculates the surface pressure reduction rate using, for example, the surface pressure area and elapsed time before and after deterioration, which represent the surface pressure range before and after deterioration. In this case, if the surface pressure area before deterioration is S0, the surface pressure area after deterioration is S1, and the elapsed time is T, the surface pressure reduction rate Sv can be calculated from equation (10).

[0150] Sv=(S0-S1)÷T...(10)

[0151] Acquisition of repair information (S506): Acquire repair information related to the rate of surface pressure reduction. That is, from the previously described repair items, repair time, and cost, select one or more items, repair time, and cost from the repair items specified by the rate of surface pressure reduction, such as gasket replacement, polishing, cutting, and flange fastener replacement.

[0152] The selection of repair items (S507) is the same as the selection of repair items (S105) described above, the maintenance evaluation including cumulative repair costs (S508) is the same as the maintenance evaluation including cumulative repair costs (S106) described above, and the presentation of diagnostic results (S509) is the same as the presentation of diagnostic results (S107) described above, so these explanations will be omitted.

[0153] <First DB38 and Second DB52 in the Fourth Embodiment> In this fourth embodiment, the first DB38 and second DB52 are used in the same way as in the first embodiment, but the difference from the first embodiment is that the surface pressure reduction rate is stored, and the aforementioned repair items, repair time, and cost related to this surface pressure reduction rate are stored, and one or more items, repair time, and cost can be selected from the repair items specified by the surface pressure reduction rate, such as gasket replacement, polishing, cutting, and flange fastener replacement.

[0154] <Effects of the Fourth Embodiment> According to this fourth embodiment, the following effects can be obtained: (1) Even when using the surface pressure reduction rate determined from the surface pressure range before and after deterioration, maintenance of flanges 6-1, 6-2, etc., in accordance with the deterioration of the flange surface 16 can be performed.

[0155] (2) If the surface pressure range 74 before deterioration changes due to deterioration of the flange surface 16, for example, to the surface pressure ranges 74-1 and 74-2 after deterioration, the rate of surface pressure reduction is calculated from the change in surface pressure range, and the repair items, repair time, and cost described above, which are related to this rate of surface pressure reduction, are stored, and one or more items, repair time, and cost can be selected from the repair items specified by the rate of surface pressure reduction, such as gasket replacement, polishing, cutting, and flange fastener replacement.

[0156] <Adjustment of Tightening Axial Force> Figure 15 shows the processing procedure for adjusting the tightening axial force according to Embodiment 1. This processing procedure includes acquiring tightening axial force information (S601), comparing it with the reference tightening axial force (S602), calculating the difference in tightening axial force (S603), presenting tightening axial force distribution information (S604), adjusting the tightening axial force of the corresponding bolt 10 (S605), presenting the tightening axial force distribution information after adjustment (S606), determining the adjustment of all bolts 10 (S607), presenting the final tightening axial force distribution information (S608), determining that the adjustment is complete (S609), and presenting information on the increase or decrease in tightening axial force at each bolt position (S610).

[0157] When adjustment of the tightening axial force is selected as the repair item, the diagnostic device 24 acquires tightening axial force information (S601), compares the tightening axial force with the reference tightening axial force (S602), calculates the difference in tightening axial force (S603), and presents the tightening axial force distribution information, which is related to the position information of the bolt 10, to the information presentation unit 30 (S604).

[0158] With this tightening axial force distribution information displayed, the tightening axial force of a specific bolt 10 is adjusted (S605), the tightening axial force distribution information is updated to reflect the adjusted information, and this updated information is presented to the information display unit 30 (S606). This process is performed for each bolt 10, and the diagnostic device 24 determines whether the adjustment of the tightening axial force has been completed for all bolts 10 (S607).

[0159] If the axial force adjustment of all bolts 10 has not been completed (NO in S607), the process from S601 to S607 continues until the axial force adjustment of all bolts 10 is completed. Then, once the axial force adjustment of all bolts 10 is completed (YES in S607), the final tightening axial force distribution information is presented (S608), and the diagnostic device 24 requests response information to indicate whether the tightening axial force adjustment is complete (S609).

[0160] If the adjustment of the tightening axial force is not completed (NO in S609), the process from S605 to S609 continues until the adjustment of the tightening axial force is completed. Then, when response information indicating that the adjustment of the tightening axial force is completed is received (YES in S609), the diagnostic device 24 presents increase / decrease information representing the increase / decrease value of the tightening axial force at each bolt position (S610), and terminates this process.

[0161] <Effects of Example 1> According to Example 1 described above, one of the following effects can be obtained: (1) The clamping axial force can be adjusted in accordance with the deterioration of the surface pressure range.

[0162] (2) The tightening axial force can be adjusted or set to an appropriate level depending on the deterioration or maintenance of the flange surface 16.

[0163] <Diagnosis of the Deterioration Progression of the Surface Pressure Range of the Flange Surface 16> Figure 16 shows the processing procedure for diagnosing the deterioration progress of the surface pressure range of the flange surface 16 according to Example 2. In addition to repairing the flange surface 16, a diagnosis of the deterioration progress is performed, and processing is carried out to reduce the amount of maintenance that is performed irregularly. In this example, the rate of decrease in surface pressure is used as an example of the deterioration progress.

[0164] This processing procedure includes obtaining surface pressure range information (S701), obtaining time information (S702), calculating the surface pressure reduction rate (S703), determining the surface pressure reduction rate (S704), determining the suitability of the operating environment for the flange fastener 2 (S705), presenting repair information (S706), determining the unsuitability of the operating environment for the flange fastener 2 (S707), and presenting information such as replacement information (S708).

[0165] When the diagnosis of the rate of decrease in surface pressure on the flange surface 16 is selected, the diagnostic device 24 acquires surface pressure range information (S701) and acquires time information representing the elapsed time (S702).

[0166] The diagnostic device 24 calculates the rate of surface pressure reduction using the amount of surface pressure reduction and time information included in the surface pressure range information (S703), and compares the rate of surface pressure reduction with the reference rate (S704). If the rate of surface pressure reduction is less than or equal to the reference rate (YES in S704), the diagnostic device 24 determines that the flange fastener 2 is suitable for the operating environment (S705), presents repair information to the information display unit 30 (S706), and terminates this process.

[0167] If the surface pressure reduction rate is greater than the reference rate (NO in S704), the diagnostic device 24 determines that the flange fastener 2 is unsuitable for the operating environment (S707), and presents replacement information, such as replacing the flange fastener 2, to the information presentation unit 30 (S708), and terminates this process. This replacement information includes optimal design information such as the flange thickness of flanges 6-1 and 6-2 of the flange fastener 2 and the hub thickness of pipes 4-1 and 4-2.

[0168] <Effects of Example 2> According to Example 2 described above, the following effects can be obtained: (1) The rate of decrease in surface pressure is calculated using the amount of decrease in surface pressure and the elapsed time. As a diagnosis of this rate of decrease in surface pressure, if the rate of decrease in surface pressure exceeds the normal rate of decrease, it is expected that the flange fastener 2 is not suitable for the operating environment. This can be used as an opportunity to propose optimal design information for the flange fastener 2 or new equipment, such as changing the flange thickness of flanges 6-1 and 6-2, or the hub thickness of pipes 4-1 and 4-2.

[0169] (2) If the rate of decrease in surface pressure is below the standard rate, repairs can be carried out by waiting for the normal maintenance period to arrive. However, if the rate of decrease in surface pressure exceeds the standard rate, there is a risk of unforeseen events such as fluid leakage occurring before the scheduled maintenance. Measures to avoid such an event can be taken quickly.

[0170] [Fifth Embodiment] The fifth embodiment discloses a life prediction system and life prediction method for performing life prediction diagnosis of a flange fastener 2 (Figure 1). Life prediction diagnosis of the flange fastener 2 includes the accumulation of condition data acquired from the parts flanges 6-1 and 6-2 (hereinafter referred to as "flanges"), and life prediction diagnosis based on the condition data. Life prediction diagnosis includes: (a) prediction of flange damage, (b) prediction of the optimal timing for repair, (c) prediction of the amount of cutting, (d) prediction of maintenance (hereinafter abbreviated as "maintenance") / repair costs, (e) prediction of the sealing surface pressure value, and (f) prediction of the optimal timing for equipment replacement. Damage also includes flange strain amount, scratch amount / maximum depth, etc., that occur on the sealing surface of the flange.

[0171] <Life Prediction System 100> Figure 17A shows a life prediction system 100 according to the fifth embodiment. This life prediction system 100 includes a 3D scanner 22, a terminal device 102, and a server 104. The terminal device 102 constitutes the diagnostic device 24 (Figure 2A) described above. The server 104 is composed of a computer equipped with a processor, memory, input / output (I / O) unit, communication unit, etc. (not shown).

[0172] The 3D scanner 22 is connected to a terminal device 102, for example, by wired or wireless communication, and the terminal device 102 is connected to a server 104 via a network 106. The 3D scanner 22 acquires state data from the flange. The state data is 3D data representing the state of the flange surface 16 or sealing surface 17 of the flange. The terminal device 102 acquires the state data from the 3D scanner 22 and transmits it to the server 104.

[0173] Server 104 acquires and stores status data from terminal device 102. Server 104 acquires status data two or more times at regular time intervals (for example, every 1 year, 4 years, 8 years, etc., as maintenance intervals), specifically acquiring and storing status data for each maintenance, and performs the life prediction diagnosis described above using the status data acquired at different times. As described above, this prediction diagnosis includes prediction of flange damage, prediction of the optimal timing for repair, prediction of cutting amount, prediction of maintenance / repair costs, prediction of seal surface pressure value, prediction of the optimal timing for equipment replacement, etc., and is provided as diagnostic information, for example, a flange medical record.

[0174] The prediction and diagnosis of flange damage includes information on the progression of damage, such as the amount of flange strain and the amount / maximum depth of damage on the sealing surface 17 of the flange. The prediction of the optimal timing for repair includes the optimal timing or duration of repair. The prediction of the amount of cutting includes cutting of the sealing surface as well as cutting after repairing damage. The prediction of maintenance / repair costs includes the costs required for maintenance and repair. The prediction of the sealing surface pressure value includes information on changes in the surface pressure of the sealing surface. The prediction of the optimal timing for equipment replacement includes replacement of the flange fastener 2 as an alternative to repair.

[0175] The server 104 then creates a trend chart based on the prediction information. This trend chart information is provided from the server 104 to the terminal device 102. The terminal device 102 is equipped with an information display unit 30, which displays the lifespan prediction diagnosis, the lifespan prediction diagnosis results, the trend chart, etc. The terminal device 102 corresponds to an information display unit that displays diagnostic information or lifespan prediction information indicating the lifespan of a component.

[0176] In this embodiment, the life prediction system 100 collects 3D data from a flange, which is an example of a component, and performs a life prediction diagnosis of the flange. This life prediction system 100 collects three-dimensional point cloud data as state data. A 3D scanner 22 is used to collect this three-dimensional point cloud data, and the terminal device 102 acquires the three-dimensional point cloud data representing the state of the sealing surface 17 from the 3D scanner 22 and transmits it to the server 104. The sealing surface 17 corresponds to the flange surface 16 (B in Figure 1) described above, and when a pair of flanges are fastened together, it is the surface that presses against the gasket 8 shown in Figure 1 to create a seal.

[0177] Server 104 stores three-dimensional point cloud data acquired from terminal device 102. In this embodiment, server 104 stores the three-dimensional point cloud data as a storage device, for example, in the cloud. Server 104 acquires three-dimensional point cloud data from terminal device 102 at predetermined time intervals. This allows server 104 to accumulate multiple sets of three-dimensional point cloud data acquired at different times. Therefore, three-dimensional point cloud data is collected in the cloud. This cloud may be a database located on server 104.

[0178] This life prediction system 100 stores three-dimensional point cloud data of the sealing surface 17 on the cloud, and stores condition data of the flange surface including the sealing surface 17, such as the condition of the sealing surface 17 8 years ago, the condition of the sealing surface 17 4 years ago, the condition of the sealing surface 17 1 year ago, etc. Therefore, this life prediction system 100 stores condition data from the past to the present on the cloud at predetermined time intervals, performs a life prediction diagnosis of the flange using the three-dimensional point cloud data collected over multiple years at predetermined time intervals, and provides life prediction diagnosis information as a result. In this embodiment, the server 104 corresponds to a condition data acquisition unit that acquires condition data two or more times at specific time intervals. In this embodiment, the server 104 corresponds to a prediction unit that predicts the condition changes of the flange, which is a component.

[0179] <Condition data of the sealing surface 17> Figure 17B shows a magnified view of a portion of the sealing surface 17 of the flange (part 17B of A in Figure 17). Multiple deposits 108 and scratches 110 are present on the sealing surface 17 of this flange, and these deposits 108 and scratches 110 are reflected in the condition data of the sealing surface 17.

[0180] <Processing Procedure for Life Prediction Diagnosis> Figure 18 shows the processing procedure for life prediction diagnosis. This processing procedure is an example of the life prediction method and life prediction program of this disclosure.

[0181] This processing procedure includes monitoring maintenance timing (S801), acquiring condition data (S802), evaluating the amount of damage (S803), acquiring information on the progression of condition data (S804), predictive processing such as damage prediction (S805), creating a trend chart (S806), and presenting trend data TD (S807). Step S802 corresponds to a condition data acquisition process in which condition data of the flange, which is a component, is acquired two or more times at predetermined time intervals. Step S805 corresponds to a prediction process in which the progression of the flange's condition is predicted based on the condition data. Step S807 corresponds to an information presentation process in which diagnostic information or life prediction information indicating the lifespan of the flange is presented based on the prediction. Note that the above processing procedure is performed when condition data acquired at different times has been accumulated, and if sufficient condition data has not yet been accumulated, the process may be stopped at step 802. Furthermore, the processing procedure may be configured so that monitoring maintenance timing (S801) is not included.

[0182] Server 104 monitors the timing of maintenance for the flange fastener 2 based on the equipment installation date, etc. (S810). When the maintenance time arrives (YES in S801), the server acquires condition data from the sealing surface 17 of the flange using the 3D scanner 22 based on the maintenance of the flange fastener 2 (S802). This condition data is provided to the terminal device 102, and transmitted from the terminal device 102 to the server 104. The condition data acquired by the server 104 is stored in a database and accumulated for each maintenance period.

[0183] The server 104 evaluates the deposits 108, scratches 110, and the amount of scratches on the sealing surface 17 based on the acquired state data (S803).

[0184] The server 104 acquires transition information representing the state of the sealing surface 17 using state data acquired at least twice at regular time intervals (S804), and based on this transition information, performs calculations such as predicting damage to the sealing surface 17, predicting the optimal timing for repairs, predicting the amount of cutting, predicting maintenance / repair costs, predicting the sealing surface pressure value, and predicting the optimal timing for equipment replacement (S805).

[0185] Server 104 creates trend charts (such as trend chart T-11 in Figure 19, trend chart T-12 in Figure 29, trend chart T-21 in Figure 30, and trend chart T-22 in Figure 31) (S806) and presents trend data TD including the trend charts (T-11, T-12, T-21, T-22, etc.) (S807). The trend data TD is provided from Server 104 to Terminal Device 102 and displayed on the Information Display Unit 30 of Terminal Device 102. This trend data TD includes diagnostic information such as the flange medical record described later.

[0186] <Trend Chart T-11> Figure 19 is an example of a trend chart T-11, which shows the change in parameter values ​​over time, with the horizontal axis representing elapsed time (years) t (t1, t2, ...) and the vertical axis representing parameter values ​​(measured values). The parameter values ​​are data that represent the deterioration or repair of the flange and represent the damage to the flange. As an example, they include parameter value D1, which represents the flange strain amount and the maximum depth of the scratch amount / scratch 110, and parameter value D2, which represents the range in which cutting repair is possible. Dmax is the damage limit of the sealing surface 17, Dmin is the repairable limit of the sealing surface 17, and tf is the optimal repair timing for the sealing surface 17. Elapsed time t = tf represents the optimal repair timing for the flange.

[0187] The parameter value D1 is determined based on three-dimensional point cloud data. Server 104 uses the accumulated three-dimensional point cloud data to determine the long-term trend of change for various parameter values ​​D1 and D2 related to the flange lifespan.

[0188] <Flange Strain Amount> The flange strain amount, which is an example of the parameter value D1, is determined by the difference between the acquired value and the allowable value, which is obtained based on the three-dimensional point cloud data acquired by the 3D scanner 22. For example, the difference with the allowable value at each measurement angle is identified, and the trend of deterioration over time for the one with the largest difference is checked. Specifically, in this embodiment, the flange strain amount in the radial direction of the flange is determined at a total of eight locations at 45-degree intervals. To determine the flange strain amount, the server 104 determines the height of the eight sealing surfaces 17 shown by the dashed lines 17-1 and 17-2 in Figure 1B, for example, based on the three-dimensional point cloud data. Figure 20A is an example of a graph showing the height of the sealing surface 17 in the radial direction of the flange. The angle in the upper left of each graph is the measurement angle representing the measurement position in the radial direction of the flange. At each measurement angle, the server 104 calculates the height of the sealing surface 17, i.e., the maximum value h1 to h8 and the minimum value l1 to l8 of the measured value.

[0189] The server 104 then determines the parameter value D1 based on the maximum and minimum values ​​of each measurement. The server 104 may also determine the parameter value D1 based on the maximum, minimum, and tolerance values ​​of each measurement. For example, the server 104 may use the parameter value D1 as a comparison between the maximum or minimum value of each measurement and the tolerance value, or as the difference between the maximum or minimum value of each measurement and the tolerance value. In this case, two tolerance values ​​are required: one to compare with the maximum value of the measurement and another to compare with the minimum value of the measurement.

[0190] Furthermore, the damage limit Dmax shown in the trend chart T-11 in Figure 19 has two parameters: one corresponding to the difference between the maximum measured value and the allowable value, and another corresponding to the difference between the minimum measured value and the allowable value. Server 104 calculates the maximum measured values ​​h1 to h8 and minimum measured values ​​l1 to l8 for each three-dimensional point cloud data acquired at different times. As an example, the maximum measured values ​​h1, h2, h1', h2' and minimum measured values ​​l1, l2, l1', l2' obtained from three-dimensional point cloud data acquired in year A and year B (after year A) are as shown in Figures 20B to 20C. In the prediction of the parameter value D1, which will be described later, the changes in the maximum and minimum measured values ​​are predicted based on the change over time of the predicted radial strain value of the flange, as shown in Figure 20D.

[0191] In this embodiment, the server 104 determines the amount of flange strain in the circumferential direction of the flange for the outer diameter, central, and inner diameter portions of the sealing surface 17. To determine the amount of flange strain, the server 104 determines the height of the sealing surface 17 at the location indicated by the dashed line 17-2 in Figure 1B, for example, based on three-dimensional point cloud data. Figure 21A is an example of a graph showing the height of the sealing surface 17 in the circumferential direction of the flange. Next, the server 104 calculates the height of the sealing surface 17, i.e., the maximum values ​​h9 to h11 and minimum values ​​l9 to l11, for the outer diameter, central, and inner diameter portions of the sealing surface 17. Then, the server 104 takes the difference between the maximum or minimum value of each measurement and the allowable value as the parameter value D1. In this case, two allowable values ​​are required: one to be compared with the maximum value of the measurement and another to be compared with the minimum value of the measurement.

[0192] Furthermore, the damage limit Dmax shown in the trend chart T-11 in Figure 19 has two parameters: one corresponding to the difference between the maximum measured value and the allowable value, and another corresponding to the difference between the minimum measured value and the allowable value. Server 104 calculates the maximum measured values ​​h9 to h11 and the minimum measured values ​​l9 to l11 for each three-dimensional point cloud data acquired at different times. As an example, the maximum measured values ​​h11, h11' and minimum measured values ​​l11, l11' obtained from three-dimensional point cloud data acquired in year A and year B (after year A) are shown in Figures 21B to 21C. In the prediction of the parameter value D1, which will be described later, the changes in the maximum and minimum measured values ​​are predicted based on the change over time of the predicted strain value in the circumferential direction of the flange, as shown in Figure 21D. The reference point for radial strain shown in Figure 20A is set on the reference plane, the reference point for circumferential strain shown in Figure 21A is set from the average of the acquired circumferential strain graph, and the tolerance value indicates the allowable range from the reference plane.

[0193] <Damage 110 and Damage Amount> Damage 110 indicates a damage judged to be abnormal. Damage amount, which represents the amount of damage 110, may be simply evaluated by identifying the damage 110 judged to be abnormal and evaluating it based solely on its amount. This damage amount is related to the length and depth D of the detected damage 110.

[0194] Figure 22A shows an example of a method for calculating the length of the detected scratch 110, and Figure 22B shows another example of a method for calculating the length of the scratch 110.

[0195] Assuming that a gasket 8 (Figure 1) is installed on the sealing surface 17, the influence of scratches 110 on fluid leakage is greater for scratches 110 extending radially than for scratches 110 extending circumferentially on the sealing surface 17. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the length of the scratches 110. To this end, when evaluating the length of the scratches 110, the apparent length L of the scratches 110, which corresponds to the radial length of the flange, is calculated.

[0196] Therefore, the server 104 calculates the apparent length L of the scratch 110 detected from the sealing surface 17. Referring to A in Figure 22, the apparent length L of the scratch 110 corresponds to the radial length of the flange in the scratch 110. In the scratch 110, one end is P1, the other end is P2, and the flange center is O. A line segment is drawn connecting the flange center O and one end P1 of the scratch 110, and a perpendicular line is drawn from the other end P2 to this line segment, and the intersection point of this line segment and the perpendicular line is Q. Let θ be the angle between the line segment (P1-P2) representing the scratch 110 and the line segment (P1-Q). Using the length of the line segment (P1-P2), the angle θ, and trigonometric functions, the length of the line segment (P1-Q) can be calculated by equation (11).

[0197] Length of line segment (P1-Q) = Length of line segment (P1-P2) × cosθ ... (11)

[0198] The portion of the line segment (P1-Q) that is contained within the sealing surface 17 represents the apparent length L. In the line segment (P1-Q), the distance Lx between the intersection point Q and the inner circumference 112 of the sealing surface 17 is not considered part of the apparent length of the scratch 110. Therefore, the apparent length L of the scratch 110 can be calculated from equation (12).

[0199] Apparent length L = length of line segment (P1-P2) × cosθ - Lx ... (12)

[0200] Furthermore, regarding another method for determining the apparent length L of the scratch 110, referring to Figure 22B, the length L1 of the line segment connecting the flange center O and one end P1 of the scratch 110, and the length L2 of the line segment connecting the flange center O and the other end P2 of the scratch 110 are calculated. The server 104 can calculate the difference between length L1 and length L2 as the apparent length L of the scratch 110 using equation (13).

[0201] Apparent length L = length L2 - length L1 ... (13)

[0202] The depth D of the scratch 110 is calculated as the maximum depth of the scratch 110 using three-dimensional point cloud data. The server 104 makes a pass / fail judgment based on the apparent length L and the maximum depth, and the number of defective (NG) scratches 110 may be used as the scratch quantity, which is an example of the parameter value D1 shown in the trend chart T-11 (Figure 19). The server 104 makes a pass / fail judgment of the scratches 110 based on the judgment criteria shown in Figure 23, for example. The judgment criteria include the ratio of the scratch width to the seal surface width, as shown in A of Figure 23. The seal surface width is the length of the seal surface 17 in the radial direction of the flange. The scratch width is the apparent length L of the scratch obtained as described above. The judgment criteria are set for each type of gasket, such as soft gaskets and metal gaskets. The judgment criteria for the scratch width ratio are defined for scratch width ratios up to 1 / 4, 1 / 4 to 1 / 2, 1 / 2 to 3 / 4, and 3 / 4 to the entire scratch. When a soft gasket is used, the server 104 determines that a defect is defective if the defect width is between 3 / 4 and the entire length L, and if the defect depth exceeds the set limits for up to 1 / 4, 1 / 4 to 1 / 2, and 1 / 2 to 3 / 4. When a metal gasket is used, the management server determines that a defect is defective if the defect width is between 1 / 2 and 3 / 4 of the length L, and if the defect width is between 3 / 4 and the entire length L, and if the defect depth exceeds the set limits for up to 1 / 4 and 1 / 4 to 1 / 2. The server 104 may also make a pass / fail determination using the criteria shown in Figure 23B.

[0203] Based on the criteria shown in Figure 23B, server 104 determines that a soft gasket needs repair if the scratch width is up to 1 / 4 and the scratch depth is 1.27 mm or more, if the scratch width is between 1 / 4 and 1 / 2 and the scratch depth is 0.76 mm or more, if the scratch width is between 1 / 2 and 3 / 4 and the scratch depth is 0.13 mm or more, or if the scratch width is between 3 / 4 and the entire gasket. Server 104 also determines that a semi-metallic or metal gasket needs repair if the scratch width is up to 1 / 4 and the scratch depth is 0.76 mm or more, if the scratch width is between 1 / 4 and 1 / 2 and the scratch depth is 0.25 mm or more, or if the scratch width is between 1 / 2 and 3 / 4 or 3 / 4 and the entire gasket.

[0204] The amount of damage may be determined by measuring the area of ​​the damage 110, or by the ratio of the damage area to the area of ​​the sealing surface 17 obtained by drawing tangents to the left and right sides of the damage from the flange center O. In this case, the evaluation is performed by summing the damage area relative to the gasket sealing area. Damage 110 is not detected at each measurement angle, and the quality is judged based on the length L and depth D of each individual damage 110.

[0205] As shown in Figure 24A, the area Sm of the sector-shaped portion 116, which is formed by the intersection points a, b, c, and d of the inner circumference 112 and outer circumference 114 of the sealing surface 17, and the ratio of the scratch area Sn to the sector-shaped portion 116 (= scratch area ratio η) from the scratch area Sn of the scratch 110 can be calculated and determined using formula (14).

[0206] Damage area ratio η = (Sn / Sm) x 100 (%) ... (14)

[0207] The calculation of the scratch area ratio η involves determining the degree of leakage impact by comparing the area of ​​gasket scratches on the sealing surface 17. In other words, the determination should be made based on the total area of ​​scratches 110 relative to the total area of ​​the sealing surface 17. For this determination, specific scratches 110 may be identified using the previously described fan-shaped section 116 (A in Figure 24).

[0208] Then, as shown in Figure 24B, the type of gasket, such as a soft gasket or a metal gasket, is identified, and the ratio of the scratch area Sn to the fan-shaped portion 116 is determined. As a criterion for determining the length L and depth D of the scratch 110, four sections are set on the sealing surface 17, for example, a 1 / 4 section, a 1 / 4 to 1 / 2 section, a 1 / 2 to 3 / 4 section, and the entire section. Based on the criteria for determining whether the scratch is good or bad, the evaluation may be performed using the maximum scratch area ratio η for each section. In this case, the scratch area ratio η can be used as the scratch amount. Then, the progression of large scratches 110 that are expected to affect fluid leakage is checked for each of the four sections.

[0209] <Integrated Judgment of Scratches 110> The area occupied by scratches 110 relative to the sealing surface 17 is uncertain, and if the area is small, the small scratches 110 may be underestimated, which will affect the accuracy of the flange life diagnosis. To avoid this, adjacent scratches 110 are integrated to avoid the influence of differences in area.

[0210] Therefore, when there are multiple adjacent scratches 110, an integration region is defined as a method for integrating the multiple scratches 110. This integration region is an area for recognizing multiple adjacent scratches 110 as a single scratch 110 through integration. In the life prediction diagnosis, the proportion of the integrated scratches 110 to the sealing surface 17, including the integration region, is evaluated. Specifically, when multiple scratches 110 are close to each other, the server 104 performs information processing to integrate or combine the multiple scratches 110 as a single scratch 110.

[0211] Referring to Figure 25A, the server 104 detects multiple scratches 110 = scratches A1, A2, and A3 present on the sealing surface 17. Subsequently, the server 104 calculates integration regions B1, B2, and B3 that correspond individually to each scratch A1, A2, and A3. Each integration region B1, B2, and B3 is set up to determine whether multiple scratches 110 can be integrated into a single scratch 110. Integration region B1 is defined by a distance of region width X from scratch A1, integration region B2 is defined by a distance of region width X from scratch A2, and similarly, integration region B3 is defined by a distance of region width X from scratch A3.

[0212] Server 104 determines whether the multiple integration regions B1 to B3 overlap each other. In the integration regions B1 to B3 shown in Figure 25A, they overlap each other. Therefore, Server 104 integrates the multiple scratches A1 to A3 into a single scratch 110 and recognizes it as a single scratch 110.

[0213] Even when the damage 110 exhibits a complex shape such as bending, as shown in Figure 25B, the integration process is performed. Regardless of the shape of the damage 110, the server 104 similarly detects multiple damages A1 and A2 and calculates integration regions B1 and B2 that correspond individually to each damage A1 and A2. If the shapes of damages A1 and A2 are complex, the integration regions B1 and B2 cannot be calculated with the simple setting of the region width X described above.

[0214] Therefore, as shown in Figure 25B, the server 104 draws a reference line indicating the maximum length of the scratch A1, and determines line segments C1 and C2 that are at a distance of region width X from two ends or inflection points outside the scratch A1 on the reference line. Next, the server 104 identifies the end of the scratch A1 that is furthest from the reference line in the left and right directions perpendicular to the reference line. It determines line segments C3 and C4 that are at a distance of region width X from the identified ends in each direction. The integrated region B1 is the region enclosed by line segments C1 to C4. Integrated region B2 is determined using the same calculation method. The server 104 determines whether each integrated region B1 and B2 overlap. In Figure 25B, integrated regions B1 and B2 overlap each other, so the server 104 integrates the multiple scratches A1 and A2 and recognizes them as a single scratch 110.

[0215] The same integration process is also performed when the damage 110 is in the form of multiple points, as shown in Figure 25C. Integrated regions B1, B2, and B3 are formed by orbiting the centers p of the multiple damages A1, A2, and A3 with a region width X. Similarly, the integrated regions B1 to B3, which are simplified by the overlapping of integrated regions B1, B2, and B3, may be recognized as a simple damage 110 formed by the aggregation or combination of the multiple damages 110.

[0216] <Apparent Length L of the Integrated Scratch 110> Referring to Figure 26, let's assume that the server 104 integrates multiple scratches A1, A2, and A3 and treats them as a single scratch 110. In this case, the maximum length of the integrated scratch 110 is defined by the distance between R1 and R2 (length of line segment R1-R2), where R1 is the point closest to the flange center O among the positions of scratches A1, A2, and A3, and R2 is the point furthest from the flange center O among the positions of scratches A1, A2, and A3. Therefore, the apparent length L of the integrated scratch 110 can be calculated using the length of this line segment R1-R2. The depth D of the integrated scratch 110 corresponds to the depth D of the deepest scratch A1 to A3 among scratches A1, A2, and A3.

[0217] Thus, the integrated region is defined as the sum of a perpendicular line from the end of the scratch 110 to a line based on the entire circumference or maximum length of the scratch 110, and a constant (for example, 1 mm) width X of the region. The length of the scratch 110 is measured not by the integrated region, but by the apparent length L where the width W between the endpoints of the integrated scratches 110 is the longest, and the measurement method is as described above. Furthermore, the depth D is taken as the maximum value of the depth D of the integrated scratches.

[0218] Furthermore, as shown in Figure 27A, the types of scratches 110 vary, including localized indentations 109 such as dents and linear scratches 110 caused by tools, etc. Also, protrusions such as deposits 108 may occur on the flange surface. For example, if two scratches 110 are merged, the aforementioned criteria may be used to determine whether they are good or bad based on their maximum scratch height h1 and the merged scratch length L. To estimate the impact more broadly, if the merged scratches 110 and deposits 108 are adjacent and can be merged, as shown in Figure 27B, the difference between the height h3 of the deposits 108 and the maximum scratch height h1, i.e., the scratch height h2 considering the deposits 108, may be used as the scratch depth for determining whether they are good or bad. This takes into account the gap that may occur between the sealing surface 17 and the gasket contact surface when the flange is tightened due to the deposits 108, resulting in a judgment that more accurately considers the impact of leakage.

[0219] In this way, deposits and scratches 110 recognized as flange abnormalities may be considered as connected regardless of their shape (lines, points, etc.). Connected scratches 110 can be judged as good or bad based on the maximum value h1 of the height of each connected scratch. If deposits 108 are adjacent, the judgment of good or bad can also be made based on the scratch height h2, which is the gap between the height h3 of the deposit 108 and the maximum scratch height h2, taking the deposit 108 into account.

[0220] Furthermore, if the sealing surface 17 is corroded or abraded by fluids from equipment operation, it is possible to observe surface irregularities as shown in Figure 27, C. In such cases, as described above, multiple irregularities can be integrated and judged as a single scratch 110 or scratch area.

[0221] <Judgment of the changes in parameter values ​​D1 and D2> As shown in the trend chart T-11 (Figure 19), the parameter value D1 asymptotically approaches a predetermined damage limit Dmax as time (= elapsed time t) progresses. The flange is restored when repairs such as cutting are performed at the optimal repair time tf, which is before the damage limit Dmax is reached, and then it approaches the damage limit Dmax again.

[0222] Trend chart T-11 also shows parameter value D2. Parameter value D2 is the range of repairable areas where machining is possible. Trend chart T-11 is generated by combining parameter value D1 and parameter value D2, with one parameter being the amount of flange strain, amount of damage, or maximum depth of damage that can be recovered by machining, and the other parameter being the range of repairable areas that affects whether machining can be performed. Note that parameter value D1 is not displayed as a single line selected from each parameter such as flange strain, amount of damage, or maximum depth, but rather lines for various parameters are displayed, and if any of them exceed the permissible damage limit, server 104 determines that repair is necessary.

[0223] <Repairable Range of Seal Surface 17 by Cutting> The repairable range of the seal surface 17 by cutting is the height to which the seal surface 17 can be cut for repair. If the flange has a shape in which the seal surface 17 protrudes like an RF (Raised Face) seat, as shown in Figure 1, the height of the seat portion of the seal surface 17 will decrease by cutting, so the cutting limit will be the range in which the seat of the seal surface 17 disappears. In other words, the repairable range by cutting is the height of the flat surface of the seal surface 17 that protrudes from the flange.

[0224] Furthermore, if the sealing surface 17 is an FF (Flat Face) seat, for example, the flange thickness considering the flange strength from the gasket clamping force may be calculated in reverse and set as the cutting limit. In this case, the range of repairable cutting is the flange thickness that can ensure flange strength capable of withstanding the gasket clamping force. In this case, the repairable limit is the lower limit of the flange thickness that can ensure flange strength capable of withstanding the gasket clamping force. This is because FF seats tend to have very high gasket clamping forces, and repair may involve cutting the entire flange surface, which is expected to result in the clamping force required to enable the gasket to perform its sealing function exceeding the flange strength.

[0225] Flanges come in various forms. For example, grooved flanges like the tongue-and-groove seat shown in Figure 28A, and snap-in flanges like the one shown in Figure 28B, have a recessed seal surface 17. In this case, the seal surface 17 can be repaired by machining, but depending on the amount of machining (i.e., machining depth) of the seal surface 17, it is expected that the compression amount will be such that the gasket will not be able to perform its sealing function even when tightened until metal-to-metal contact occurs. In this case, it is necessary to determine the machining limit based on the relationship between the compression amount and surface pressure of the gasket used.

[0226] The repairable range of the sealing surface 17 approaches the repairable limit through cutting. Therefore, the height of the cut sealing surface 17 may be detected from three-dimensional point cloud data, or it may be measured using a measuring instrument such as a dial gauge. In other words, the repairable range of the sealing surface 17 can be calculated from the actual cut length or the height before and after cutting, or by measuring the height of the repaired flange again using methods such as 3D measurement or a dial gauge. If a flange is used after cutting beyond the repairable range, the flange thickness will be reduced by cutting beyond the seat, which may cause the flange to be more prone to deflection when fastened, or, if the seat is removed, may prevent proper compression of the gasket, leading to a risk of leakage.

[0227] Furthermore, if a flange is used after machining beyond the repairable range, the flange thickness will decrease due to machining beyond the seat, resulting in increased susceptibility to deformation such as deflection under bolt fastening stress, which could further accelerate flange deformation. In this case, flange replacement will be necessary.

[0228] Depending on the usage of the equipment, flange repairs are generally carried out every few decades. Even with flange replacement, some parts are easy to replace while others are not. For example, if there is a machine side and a cover side, the machine side is difficult to repair because the equipment is already installed, while the cover side is easy to repair because it can be removed. On-site machining costs are generally high, and since the cover side can be transported to a machining plant for processing, it is relatively easy to repair or replace, while the machine side, as mentioned above, may be difficult to repair even after several decades. In short, repair costs become a challenge.

[0229] <Trend Chart T-12 Including Predicted Parameter Values> Figure 29 is an example of a trend chart T-12 that includes predicted parameter values ​​over time, with the horizontal axis representing elapsed time t (t1, t2, ...) and the vertical axis representing parameter values ​​(measured values). The same parts as in Figure 19 are denoted by the same reference numerals.

[0230] Server 104 predicts parameter values ​​based on the trend of measured parameter values. In this case, server 104 acquires various parameter values ​​during each periodic maintenance and calculates the parameter values ​​by approximating, for example, three or more points. In this case, multiple parameters may be listed together, similar to regression analysis, and their influences may be evaluated based on their degree of correlation.

[0231] In trend chart T-12, the parameter value D1 approaches the damage limit over time, reaching a point just before the damage limit (= optimal repair timing tf). If machining repair is performed again at this optimal repair timing tf, the range of machining repairable will reach the repairable limit. Therefore, trend chart T-12 indicates that timing T1 is the optimal time for equipment replacement based on flange strain, damage amount, or maximum damage depth.

[0232] <Trend Chart T-21> Figure 30 is an example of another trend chart T-21 that uses measured parameter values ​​over time, with the horizontal axis representing elapsed time t (t1, t2, ...) and the vertical axis representing parameter values ​​(measured values). In this trend chart T-21, the other parameter value Sp represents the smallest surface pressure value at the seal surface 17. The surface pressure value decreases as the outer diameter of the flange deflects due to the aging deterioration of the flange. For example, analysis using the Finite Element Method (FEM) can be used for the analysis of such three-dimensional point cloud data. The trend of the parameter value Sp approaches a predetermined seal surface pressure limit Spmin over time, and the seal surface 17 recovers when cutting repair is performed just before reaching the seal surface pressure limit Spmin, after which the seal surface approaches the damage limit again.

[0233] In trend chart T-21, the parameter value Maintenance / Repair Cost M represents the cost incurred for repairing the flange. Trend chart T-21 is generated by combining one parameter value, Sp, with the amount of seal pressure reduction (Sp) that can be restored by cutting repair, and the other parameter value, Maintenance / Repair Cost M, which affects whether or not cutting repair can be performed. Maintenance / Repair Cost M asymptotically approaches the cumulative maintenance and repair cost limit Mmax as cutting repair is performed. The cumulative maintenance and repair cost limit Mmax is the upper limit of the cumulative maintenance and repair costs that can be paid for a given piece of equipment.

[0234] <Trend Chart T-22 Including Predicted Parameter Values> Figure 31 is an example of a trend chart T-22 that includes predicted parameter values ​​based on the number of years elapsed, with the horizontal axis representing elapsed time t (t1, t2, ...) and the vertical axis representing parameter values ​​(measured values). In trend chart T-22, the amount of surface pressure reduction is predicted to reach the seal surface pressure limit at the optimal repair time tf. If cutting repair is performed again at this optimal repair time tf, the maintenance / repair cost M is predicted to exceed the cumulative maintenance / repair cost limit Mmax. Therefore, trend chart T-22 indicates that timing T2 is the optimal time for equipment replacement based on the surface pressure value.

[0235] Server 104 generates trend charts T-12 and T-22 for the flange based on multiple different parameter values. If the optimal equipment replacement timings in the respective trend charts T-12 and T-22 are different, Server 104 determines the earlier timing as the optimal equipment replacement timing for the flange. For example, if the optimal equipment replacement timing and the timing T2 which is the optimal equipment replacement timing are different, Server 104 predicts the earlier optimal equipment replacement timing as the flange's lifespan. In this way, Server 104 can obtain diagnostic information indicating the flange's lifespan. Based on the trend charts T-21 and T-22, Server 104 can then predict the future state of the flange.

[0236] The lifespan prediction system 100 may be configured to provide diagnostic information to, for example, equipment managers such as flange owners. Hereafter, the diagnostic information or diagnostic information sheet provided to customers will also be referred to as the flange medical record. The flange medical record indicates the lifespan of the flange. The flange medical record includes trend charts T-11, T-12, T-21, and T-22 that include predicted parameter values. Customers, including flange managers such as flange owners, can take proactive measures such as budgeting for repairs or flange replacement based on the predicted flange lifespan.

[0237] <Effects of the Fifth Embodiment> According to this fifth embodiment, one of the following effects can be obtained: (1) Condition data of the flange sealing surface can be acquired in synchronization with the maintenance period, the amount of damage to the flange and sealing surface 17 can be evaluated from two or more condition data, and information on the progression of the condition data can be acquired.

[0238] (2) From the changes in condition data, it is possible to predict damage to the flange and sealing surface 17, predict the optimal timing for repairs, predict the amount of material removed from the sealing surface 17, predict maintenance / repair costs, predict the sealing surface pressure value, predict the optimal timing for equipment replacement, etc. A trend chart can be created and provided to the user as a flange medical record including the trend data.

[0239] (3) This enables the optimization of the timing of repairs to flange fasteners, as well as the optimal timing for replacing equipment, thereby enabling the construction of a highly reliable flange fastener management system.

[0240] <Note> Examples of features extracted from the matters disclosed in this fifth embodiment are described below as Notes 1 to 8, in accordance with the claims. This disclosure is not limited to such descriptions.

[0241] (Note 1) A life prediction system characterized by comprising: a state data acquisition unit that acquires state data indicating the state of a component two or more times at specific time intervals; a prediction unit that predicts the state progression of a component based on the acquired state data; and an information presentation unit that presents diagnostic information or life prediction information indicating the lifespan of the component based on the prediction.

[0242] (Note 2) The lifespan prediction system according to Note 1, characterized in that it predicts the lifespan of a component based on a limit condition representing the limit of repair of the component and a trend (for example, a long-term change trend) of predetermined parameter values ​​indicating a specific state of the component.

[0243] (Note 3) The life prediction system described in Note 2, which predicts the timing of the end of life as the time when the parameter value reaches or approaches the limit condition after repeated repairs of the component.

[0244] (Note 4) The life prediction system according to Note 2, characterized in that the parameter value represents the amount of distortion, damage, or maximum depth of the flange, and the limit condition represents the range within which cutting repair is possible.

[0245] (Note 5) The life prediction system according to Note 2, characterized in that the parameter value is the sealing surface pressure and the limit condition represents the cumulative maintenance and repair costs.

[0246] (Appendix 6) The life prediction system described in Appendix 1, characterized in that it obtains multiple trends (long-term change trends) of different types of parameter values ​​for a single component, and predicts the year in which the limit will occur earliest among them as the life of the component.

[0247] (Note 7) The lifespan prediction system according to Note 1, characterized in that the information display unit displays a trend chart along with the lifespan of the component.

[0248] (Note 8) A life prediction method characterized by comprising: a state data acquisition step of acquiring state data indicating the state of a component two or more times at specific time intervals; a prediction step of predicting the state progression of a component based on the acquired state data; and an information presentation step of presenting diagnostic information or life prediction information indicating the lifespan of the component based on the prediction.

[0249] [Other Embodiments] Embodiments of the present disclosure include the following modifications: (1) A database is presented that stores one or more of the repair details, repair timing, or repair costs of a flange related to the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction. However, a database may be used that stores one or more of the repair details, repair timing, or repair costs of a flange related to one or more of the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction.

[0250] (2) A database storing one or more of the details of flange repair, the timing of repair, or the cost of repair may be related to two or more of the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction, and one or more of the details of flange repair, the timing of repair, or the cost of repair may be selected from the database based on these two or more of the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction.

[0251] As described above, the most preferred embodiments of the diagnostic method, diagnostic system, and program of this disclosure have been described. However, this disclosure is not limited to the above, and various modifications and changes are possible for those skilled in the art based on the gist of the invention as described in the claims or disclosed in forms for carrying out the invention. It goes without saying that such modifications and changes are within the scope of this disclosure.

[0252] According to this disclosure, a diagnostic method, diagnostic system, and program can be provided that can suggest repair content in accordance with the deterioration state of the flange surface without depending on the technical knowledge or experience of the worker. Beneficial effects can be obtained, such as calculating one or more of the surface pressure reduction amount, surface pressure reduction width, surface pressure reduction rate, or surface pressure reduction rate from the surface pressure range obtained from the flange, and then selecting one or more of the repair content, repair timing, or repair cost related to one or more of the surface pressure reduction amount, surface pressure reduction width, surface pressure reduction rate, or surface pressure reduction rate to implement the maintenance content.

[0253] Furthermore, according to this disclosure, the lifespan of the flange surface can be predicted from condition data representing the deterioration state of the flange surface, and trend data including a trend chart of the sealing surface can be provided, thereby enabling proper flange fastening management.

[0254] 2 Flange fasteners 4-1, 4-2 Pipelines 6-1, 6-2 Flanges 8 Gaskets 10 Bolts 12 Nuts 14 Fluid 16 Flange surface 17 Seal surface 18 Diagnostic system 20 Bolt through holes 22 3D scanner 24 Diagnostic device 26 Operator 28 Diagnostic processing unit 30 Information presentation unit 32 Processor 34 Memory 36 Input / output unit (I / O) 38 First database 40, 54 Date and time unit 42 Flange unit 44, 64 Surface pressure range unit 46 Repair details unit 48 Repair time unit 50 Cost unit 52 Second database 56 Equipment / plant information unit 58 Design information unit 60 Operation information unit 62 Flange fastener unit 66 Diagnostic results unit 68 Overall evaluation unit 70, 72 Welding unit 74, 74-1, 74-2 Surface pressure range 76-1, 76-2 Uneven area 100 Life prediction system 102 Terminal device 104 Server 106 Network 108 Adhered material 110 Scratch 112 Inner circumference 114 Outer circumference 116 Sector-shaped area

Claims

A diagnostic method for diagnosing the flange of a flange fastening, A process to measure the surface pressure range with the gasket using three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface, A step of comparing the surface pressure range before and after deterioration and calculating one or more of the surface pressure reduction amount, surface pressure reduction width, surface pressure reduction rate, or surface pressure reduction rate, A step of selecting from a database storing repair details, repair timing, or repair costs of a flange related to any or more of the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction, the repair details, repair timing, or repair costs that are specified by any or more of the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction, the repair details, repair timing, or repair costs that are specified by any or more of the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction, A step of presenting a diagnostic result that includes one or more of the aforementioned repair details, the aforementioned repair timing, or the aforementioned repair costs, Diagnostic methods, including those mentioned above. 　 A step of measuring the radial surface pressure width of the flange surface from the aforementioned surface pressure range, A step of comparing the surface pressure width before and after deterioration and calculating the reduction in surface pressure, The diagnostic method according to claim 1, including the method described in claim 1. 　 Furthermore, the process includes measuring the surface pressure width at at least one location within the surface pressure range before deterioration and at least two locations in the radial direction within the surface pressure range after deterioration, A step of comparing the surface pressure width before and after deterioration and calculating the reduction in surface pressure, The diagnostic method according to claim 2, including the method described in claim 2. 　 The diagnostic method according to claim 1, wherein the repair work includes any or more of the following: adjustment of the flange surface in relation to the amount of surface pressure reduction, resetting of the tightening axial force, or replacement of the flange. 　 Furthermore, the diagnostic method according to claim 4 includes a cost calculation step for calculating the aforementioned repair costs, wherein the cost calculation step calculates the costs necessary for resetting the tightening axial force, increasing or decreasing the tightening axial force, adjusting the flange surface, or replacing the flange. 　 A diagnostic system for diagnosing the flange of a flange fastening, A surface pressure range measuring unit that measures the surface pressure range with the gasket from three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface, A diagnostic unit that compares the surface pressure range before and after deterioration to calculate the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction, and selects from a database that stores repair details, repair timing, or repair costs of the flange related to any or more of the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction, any or more of the repair details, repair timing, or repair costs specified by any or more of the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction, and A display unit that presents a diagnostic result including one or more of the repair details, the repair timing, or the repair costs, A diagnostic system including a diagnostic system. 　 A program to be executed by a computer, A function to measure the surface pressure range with the gasket from three-dimensional point cloud data of the flange surface, A function to calculate the amount of surface pressure reduction, the width of the surface pressure reduction, the rate of surface pressure reduction, or the rate of surface pressure reduction by comparing the surface pressure range before and after deterioration, A function to select from a database storing repair details, repair timing, or repair costs of a flange related to any or more of the surface pressure reduction amount, surface pressure reduction width, surface pressure reduction rate, or surface pressure reduction rate, the repair details, repair timing, or repair costs specified by any or more of the surface pressure reduction amount, surface pressure reduction width, surface pressure reduction rate, or surface pressure reduction rate, A function to output presentation information representing the diagnostic results, which includes one or more of the repair details, the repair timing, or the repair costs. A program to cause the aforementioned computer to execute.

Images