Download pdf - PIPE GRADE DETERMINATION AND MAOP VALIDATION … · PIPE GRADE DETERMINATION AND MAOP VALIDATION USING SOPHISTICATED SCRAPER TECHNOLOGY ... Process 5. Process of MAOP Reconfirmation

PIPE GRADE DETERMINATION AND MAOP VALIDATION

USING SOPHISTICATED SCRAPER TECHNOLOGY

Thomas Eiken, Werner Thale, Mohammed Jaarah

7th MENDT Conference Bahrain · 09/15/2015

Slide 2

CONTENT

1. Pipe Grade in the Context of PIM

2. RoMat PGS - Development of an ILI

Solution for Pipe Grade

Determination

3. RoMat PGS - Field Experience with

the Sophisticated Technology

4. RoMat PGS – The Data Evaluation

Process

5. Process of MAOP Reconfirmation

6. Key Benefits and Conclusion

Pipe Grade Determination and MAOP validation using sophisticated scraper technology · © ROSEN Group · 09/15/2015

Slide 3

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

Inst

alle

d b

y D

eca

de

Cu

mu

lati

ve (

red

lin

e)

Inst

alle

db

yD

eca

de

(blu

eco

lum

s)

Percentage of gas transmission pipeline mileage installed in

the USA [1]

Ageing pipelines:

• E.G. approx. 50% of all

pipelines installed

between 1950 and 1970

in the US..

PIPE GRADE IN CONTEXT OF PIM

1) J. F. Kiefner, M. J. Rosenfeld, The Role of Pipeline Age in Pipeline Safety, Final Report

No. 2012.03, INGAA Foundation, October 2012


Slide 4


• Effective integrity management requires holistically pipeline data.

• The pipe grade is a critical input for defining allowable operating pressure.

• Pipe grade is also needed for the accurate assessment of anomalies found

in pipelines.

• Pipe grade is uncertain for some pipelines due perhaps to changes in

ownership or the accidental destruction of records.

• Historical emergency repairs or diversions may have resulted in pipe of

unknown grade being introduced.

• The complete and accurate determination of pipe grade will allow effective

integrity management in line with industry best practice.


Slide 5

Resulting Diagnostic Challenges:

• Validated In Situ NDT delivers no holistic survey.

• Until now, no economic, holistic method to measure yield strength of an

entire pipeline section has been available.

• Holistically inline inspection solutions are needed for decoding the pipeline

design of pipeline sections with insufficient records to reconfirm MAOP/MOP.



Slide 6

Proportional limit stress

Yield Strength (YS)

Fracture

(Ultimate Strain)

Ultimate Tensile

Stress (UTS)

xx x

Barlow Equation

MAOP: Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure

t: Nominal Wall Thickness

PY: Specified Minimum Yield Strength (SMYS)

D: Outer Pipe Diameter

SF: Safety Factor

Including according to ASME B 31.8 :

- Design Factor

- Joint Factor

- Temperature Derating

Factor



Slide 7

CONTENT


2. RoMat PGS - Development of an

ILI Solution for Pipe Grade

Determination




Process




Slide 8

ROMAT PGS - DEVELOPMENT OF AN ILI

SOLUTION FOR PIPE GRADE DETERMINATION

Destructive testing

• Our calibration data set are supported by destructive testing and mill test reports

• As of today we used 23 vintage pipe sample with unknown properties for destructive testing

• The properties of five modern grades are supported by mill test reports

Tensile Testing (ASTM A 370)

Charpy Testing (ASTM A 370)

Micro-sections


Slide 9



100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

350 400 450 500 550 600 650

Measu

rem

en

t [a

.u.]

Ultimate tensile strength [MPa, N/mm2]

st37, S235JR+AR

A516_Grade70

ST52, S355MC

X65, API 5L X65 PSL2

X70, SAWL 485 IFD

Results

Coefficient of determination:

UTS: r2 = 0.92

Laboratory tests:

Conjunction between mechanical

and electro-magnetic steel

properties


Slide 10

a.b

.

Schematic view

WT measurement

from MFL

Color scan of the

PGS response

PGS response

clearly

independent

from WTMedian in

circumferential

direction of

PGS response

Conducting performance pull tests at the

ROSEN Technology and Research

Center test field, Lingen/Germany




Slide 11

Color scans of pull tests with varying velocities

PGS response

independent

from tool velocity




Slide 12

Color scan of the PGS response



Unity plot of performance pull tests is within the tool performance


Slide 13

Development conclusion:

• Pipe Grade Sensor (PGS): Electro-Magnetic sensor technology

• High resolution approach, high circumferential resolution

• Vintage UTS and YS value are based on destructive testing according to

ASTM A 370

• Laboratory and full-scale testing proved the capabilities to quantify UTS and

YS values




Slide 14

CONTENT




Determination

3. RoMat PGS - Field Experience

with the Sophisticated

Technology


Process




Slide 15

Pipeline data:

• Natural gas transmission pipeline

• 16” pipeline, 70,000 ft.

• Nominal wall thickness 0.250”

• Pipe line was constructed and partial replaced with

new and used (refurnished) pipes

• Known pipe grades: X42, X52, X60

• Unknown pipe grades: X24 according to 49 CFR

• 1583 pipe segments and fittings

ROMAT PGS – FIELD EXPERIENCE WITH THE

SOPHISTICATED TECHNOLOGY

Performance test of the tool in the field


Slide 16

• The ILI survey was executed in January 2014

• 11 Inspection System Results verifications were carried out in fall 2014

• Validation Digs and NDE program has been completed in Q4 2014.

• Data comparison with mill test reports of known pipe properties were carried

out.

• Discrepancy analysis and case studies confirmed the technology.

ROMAT PGS – FIELD EXPERIENCE WITH THE

SOPHISTICATED TECHNOLOGY


Slide 17

CONTENT




Determination




Process




Slide 18

0

8

16

24

32

40

48

56

64

72

80

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0.000 10,000.000 20,000.000 30,000.000 40,000.000 50,000.000 60,000.000 70,000.000

Yie

ld S

tre

ng

th [k

si]

Yie

ld S

tren

gth

[M

PA

]

Log Distance

Determination per pipe joint

Sections with unknown grade

Sections with unknown grades – 165 MPa (X 24) in accordance with 49 CFR

ROMAT PGS – THE DATA EVALUATION PROCESS


Slide 19

Co

un

ts [

a.u

.]

[ft]


Color scan of the PGS response for 1583 pipe segments47 P

ipe S

egm

ents

282 P

ipe S

egm

ents


Slide 20

0

8

16

24

32

40

48

56

64

72

80

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

0.000 10,000.000 20,000.000 30,000.000 40,000.000 50,000.000 60,000.000 70,000.000

Yie

ld S

tren

gth

[k

si]

Yie

ld S

tren

gth

[M

PA

]

Log Distance


Yield strength per joint (ILI) Sections with unknown grade

RoMat PGS determines yield strength values



Slide 21

0

8

16

24

32

40

48

56

64

72

80

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

0.000 10,000.000 20,000.000 30,000.000 40,000.000 50,000.000 60,000.000 70,000.000

Yie

ld S

tre

ng

th [k

si]

Yie

ld S

tren

gth

[M

PA

]

Log Distance


Yield strength per joint (ILI) yield strength per joint (hardness testing) Sections with unknown grade

RoMat PGS determined yield strength values are compared with Inspection

System Results verification



Slide 22

Inspection System Result verification according to API 1163 - by the use of mobile

hardness testing

Unity plot: UTS determined by ILI versus UTS determined mobile hardness testing



Slide 23

0

8

16

24

32

40

48

56

64

72

80

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

0.000 10,000.000 20,000.000 30,000.000 40,000.000 50,000.000 60,000.000 70,000.000

Yie

ld S

tren

gth

[k

si]

Yie

ld S

tren

gth

[M

PA

]

Log Distance


Yield strength per joint (ILI) yield strength per joint (hardness testing)

Sections with pipeline records Sections with unknown grade

RoMat PGS determined Yield strength values are compared with existing pipeline

records



Slide 24

0

8

16

24

32

40

48

56

64

72

80

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

0.000 10,000.000 20,000.000 30,000.000 40,000.000 50,000.000 60,000.000 70,000.000

Yie

ld S

tre

ng

th [k

si]

Yie

ld S

tren

gth

[M

PA

]

Log Distance


Yield strength per joint (ILI) Sections with pipeline records Sections with unknown grade RoMat determined Pipe Grade

Yield strength values (ILI) complemented with determined SMYS (Pipe Grade)

Closing the gap in the pipelines DNA



Slide 25

0

8

16

24

32

40

48

56

64

72

80

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

0.000 10,000.000 20,000.000 30,000.000 40,000.000 50,000.000 60,000.000 70,000.000

Yie

ld S

tre

ng

th [k

si]

Yie

ld S

tren

gth

[M

PA

]

Log Distance


Sections with pipeline records Sections with unknown grade RoMat determined Pipe Grade

Pipeline DNA is complemented with pipe grade



Slide 26

0

8

16

24

32

40

48

56

64

72

80

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

0.000 10,000.000 20,000.000 30,000.000 40,000.000 50,000.000 60,000.000 70,000.000

Yie

ld S

tre

ng

th [k

si]

Yie

ld S

tren

gth

[M

PA

]

Log Distance


Sections with pipeline records RoMat determined Pipe Grade

Pipeline DNA is completed => process MAOP validation is starting



Slide 27

CONTENT




Determination




Process




Slide 28

PROCESS OF MAOP RECONFIRMATION

COMPLETION OF RECORDS

Incomplete

pipe tally (PT)

Pro

gre

ss

ILI

Segmentation

based on

measured YS

Determination

of outliers in

YS

Preliminary

data analysis YS per joint

Determination of

YS equivalent

SMYS

Final

data analysis

YS per joint

Completed

pipe tally

Determination

of verification

locations

Integrate YS

from mill

certificate

Field

verification

using NDE

Tensile tests

on pipe

samples

Mill

report?

no

yes

ILI & Data Analysis Data Integration Verification Testing


Slide 29

known

SF

WT

OD

MAOP

SMYS (RoMat)

SMYS (before) Partially unknown > As low as 24 ksi (as per CFR)

>=42>=46>=42known

Resulting MAOP segments further used for integrity assessments such as

• FFP/FFS Analysis

• Risk Assessments

• Pressure Uprating

• …

PROCESS OF MAOP RECONFIRMATION

COMPLETION OF RECORDS

known known


Slide 30

CONTENT




Determination




Process




Slide 31

KEY BENEFITS

• Deliverable is a holistically view of the pipeline design. All potential “rogue” pipes will be

located and part of a replacement program

• High availability and a wide range of proven tool configurations addressing

individual operational pipeline requirements

• RoMat PGS is the solution for pipe grade determination without costly excavations to

fulfil regulatory long or short term statistical material sampling programs

• A holistically ILI-service for pipe grade determination is a first step in an integrity

verification process to replace destructive testing, in the long run

• Holistically, the pipe grade determination service increases the accuracy of pipeline

integrity management, better understanding the presence of risks along the pipeline


Slide 32

CONCLUSION

• RoMat PGS complies a holistically high resolution pipe grade data gathering. Scatter

plots of the holistically recorded yield strength (for each joint) values divides the pipeline

in segments for MAOP calculation and MAOP reconfirmation

• The Inline inspection service is embedded within the API 1163. This standard identified

the need of field verifications and validates confidence


www.rosen-group.com

THANK YOU FOR JOINING

THIS PRESENTATION.

Slide 34

0

8

16

24

32

40

48

56

64

72

80

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000

Yie

ld S

tre

ng

th [k

si]

Yie

ld S

tren

gth

[M

PA

]

Log Distance

16” Pipeline – Pipe Grade Determination


CASE STUDIES – PIPE GRADE RESULTS

Case study one

Re-Allocation of pipeline at a gravel pit


Slide 35

Re-Allocation of pipe line at a gravel pit

Ordered pipe: X 42; API 5 L

Delivered pipe: X42/ X52; API 5L

Requirement for yield strength

X 42 Min./Max. Yield 42 ksi/72ksi

X 52 Min./Max. Yield 52 ksi/77ksi

Investigation on mill certs: yield strength between 58 ksi and 62 ksi

Tool measurements: yield strength between 60 ksi and 63 ksi

Inspection System Result Verification: verification joint = 63.02 ksi

CASE STUDY ONE


Slide 36

0

8

16

24

32

40

48

56

64

72

80

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000

Yie

ld S

tre

ng

th [k

si]

Yie

ld S

tren

gth

[M

PA

]

Log Distance

16” Pipeline – Pipe Grade Determination


Case study two

Re-Allocation at a river

crossing


CASE STUDIES – PIPE GRADE RESULTS

Slide 37

Re-Allocation of pipe line at a river crossing

Ordered pipe: X 52; API 5 L

Delivered pipe: X 52; API 5L

Requirement for yield strength

X 52 = Min./Max. yield 52 ksi/77ksi

Tool measurements: Section: 55 ksi until 58 ksi

Outlier 1 yield strength 47.94 ksi

Outlier 2 yield strength 47.09 ksi

Outliers were confirmed by subsequent visual inspection of existing

pipeline records by operator

CASE STUDY TWO
