PSI - Issue 38

B. Depale et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 38 (2022) 317–330 B. Depale – M. Bennebach/ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2021) 000 – 000

328 12

During Phase 3.2 (Detailed inspection of structure/equipment) after its complete visual inspection (of structures and mechanisms), the equipment has been reported as globally healthy in spite of some corroded areas, no other damage (yielding, fatigue cracks) was reported. However, some settings were required for the mechanisms (e.g., springs of the winches) and many wire ropes were reported corroded.

Fig. 4: Corroded parts in the bridge and in the portal structure

Phase 4 (Complementary local investigations) was not required in the present case with no fatigue cracking identified on the structures during our detailed inspection, in the previous phase. At final, the evaluation of residual life ( Phase 5 ) was done using the factor f 1 from ISO 12482 (see Table 1 above) set equal to 1,10 for a scenario 2007-2020 because of the conservatism of the fatigue load combination established in Phase 2 . Analytical calculations were done for the hoisting mechanisms components, including the wire ropes and using load spectra resulting from the model files of Phase 3.1 . Phase 6 (Lifetime extension) as a result of the assessment, service life extension has been granted with the following conditions: some tighter inspection periods defined for the three most critical areas of the structures (see red circles in Fig.3) not proofed in fatigue, complete renewal of the anti-corrosive paint after blasting, lorries no more allowed, replacement of all hoisting ropes and associated sheaves and a more severe maintenance program for several mechanism components. 7 EN 45550 series of standards and recyclability Our methodology may be considered as a particular application of the generic standard EN 45552 « General method for the assessment of the durability of energy-related products » which one of the topics covered is « extending product lifetime ». According to EN 45552, durability can be limited by fatigue of a part, which can cause a limiting event. All the above-mentioned Phases, either mandatory or optional, allow the documentation of the evaluation of the durability of equipment (EN 45552, clause 8). The assessment of load cases in Phase 2 may also be a precious input data for the evaluation of the equipment (EN 45552, clause 7.3) and identification of critical components in Phase 4 may be done by a FMECA analysis, as suggested in EN 45552 (clause 5.3). In Phase 6 , the impact assessment of potential repairs or strengthening on the operational life can be supported by EN 45554 that provides generic methods allowing the evaluation of capacity of products to be: a) repaired, b) reused, c) improved. The final report delivered at the end of this Phase 6 is consistent with the requirements of clause 8 of EN 45552 “Documenting assessment of durability and reliability”. In the Phase 6 “Extension or not of Service life” of our