PIPE GRADE DETERMINATION AND MAOP VALIDATION USING SOPHISTICATED SCRAPER TECHNOLOGY

Transcription

1 PIPE GRADE DETERMINATION AND MAOP VALIDATION USING SOPHISTICATED SCRAPER TECHNOLOGY Thomas Eiken, Werner Thale, Mohammed Jaarah 7 th MENDT Conference Bahrain 09/15/2015

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 Slide 2

3 Installed by Decade (blue colums) Installed by Decade Cumulative (red line) PIPE GRADE IN CONTEXT OF PIM Ageing pipelines: 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 100.0% 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% E.G. approx. 50% of all pipelines installed between 1950 and 1970 in the US.. 5.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% Percentage of gas transmission pipeline mileage installed in the USA [1] 1) J. F. Kiefner, M. J. Rosenfeld, The Role of Pipeline Age in Pipeline Safety, Final Report No , INGAA Foundation, October 2012 Slide 3

4 PIPE GRADE IN CONTEXT OF PIM 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 4

5 PIPE GRADE IN CONTEXT OF PIM 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 5

6 PIPE GRADE IN CONTEXT OF PIM x x Ultimate Tensile Stress (UTS) Yield Strength (YS) Proportional limit stress x Fracture (Ultimate Strain) Barlow Equation MAOP: Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure t: Nominal Wall Thickness P Y : 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 6

7 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 Slide 7

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 8

9 Measurement [a.u.] ROMAT PGS - DEVELOPMENT OF AN ILI SOLUTION FOR PIPE GRADE DETERMINATION st37, S235JR+AR A516_Grade70 ST52, S355MC X65, API 5L X65 PSL2 X70, SAWL 485 IFD Ultimate tensile strength [MPa, N/mm 2 ] Laboratory tests: Conjunction between mechanical and electro-magnetic steel properties Results Coefficient of determination: UTS: r 2 = 0.92 Slide 9

10 a.b. ROMAT PGS - DEVELOPMENT OF AN ILI SOLUTION FOR PIPE GRADE DETERMINATION Schematic view WT measurement from MFL Color scan of the PGS response Conducting performance pull tests at the ROSEN Technology and Research Center test field, Lingen/Germany Median in circumferential direction of PGS response PGS response clearly independent from WT Slide 10

11 ROMAT PGS - DEVELOPMENT OF AN ILI SOLUTION FOR PIPE GRADE DETERMINATION Color scans of pull tests with varying velocities PGS response independent from tool velocity Slide 11

12 ROMAT PGS - DEVELOPMENT OF AN ILI SOLUTION FOR PIPE GRADE DETERMINATION Unity plot of performance pull tests is within the tool performance Color scan of the PGS response Slide 12

13 ROMAT PGS - DEVELOPMENT OF AN ILI SOLUTION FOR PIPE GRADE DETERMINATION 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 13

14 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 Slide 14

15 ROMAT PGS FIELD EXPERIENCE WITH THE SOPHISTICATED TECHNOLOGY Performance test of the tool in the field Pipeline data: Natural gas transmission pipeline 16 pipeline, 70,000 ft. Nominal wall thickness 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 Slide 15

16 ROMAT PGS FIELD EXPERIENCE WITH THE SOPHISTICATED TECHNOLOGY The ILI survey was executed in January Inspection System Results verifications were carried out in fall 2014 Validation Digs and NDE program has been completed in Q Data comparison with mill test reports of known pipe properties were carried out. Discrepancy analysis and case studies confirmed the technology. Slide 16

17 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 Slide 17

18 Yield Strength [MPA] Yield Strength [ksi] ROMAT PGS THE DATA EVALUATION PROCESS 600 Determination per pipe joint Sections with unknown grade Sections with unknown grades 165 MPa (X 24) in accordance with 49 CFR , , , , , , , Log Distance Slide 18

19 47 Pipe Segments 282 Pipe Segments Counts [a.u.] ROMAT PGS THE DATA EVALUATION PROCESS Color scan of the PGS response for 1583 pipe segments [ft] Slide 19

20 Yield Strength [MPA] Yield Strength [ksi] ROMAT PGS THE DATA EVALUATION PROCESS Determination per pipe joint Yield strength per joint (ILI) Sections with unknown grade RoMat PGS determines yield strength values , , , , Log Distance 50, , , Slide 20

21 Yield Strength [MPA] Yield Strength [ksi] ROMAT PGS THE DATA EVALUATION PROCESS Determination per pipe joint 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 , , , , , , , Log Distance Slide 21

22 ROMAT PGS THE DATA EVALUATION PROCESS Inspection System Result verification according to API by the use of mobile hardness testing Unity plot: UTS determined by ILI versus UTS determined mobile hardness testing Slide 22

23 Yield Strength [MPA] Yield Strength [ksi] ROMAT PGS THE DATA EVALUATION PROCESS Determination per pipe joint Yield strength per joint (ILI) Sections with pipeline records yield strength per joint (hardness testing) Sections with unknown grade RoMat PGS determined Yield strength values are compared with existing pipeline records , , , , , , , Log Distance Slide 23

24 Yield Strength [MPA] Yield Strength [ksi] ROMAT PGS THE DATA EVALUATION PROCESS Determination per pipe joint 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 , , , , , , , Log Distance Slide 24

25 Yield Strength [MPA] Yield Strength [ksi] ROMAT PGS THE DATA EVALUATION PROCESS Determination per pipe joint Sections with pipeline records Sections with unknown grade RoMat determined Pipe Grade Pipeline DNA is complemented with pipe grade , , , , , , , Log Distance Slide 25

26 Yield Strength [MPA] Yield Strength [ksi] ROMAT PGS THE DATA EVALUATION PROCESS Determination per pipe joint Sections with pipeline records RoMat determined Pipe Grade Pipeline DNA is completed => process MAOP validation is starting , , , , , , , Log Distance Slide 26

27 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 Slide 27

28 PROCESS OF MAOP RECONFIRMATION COMPLETION OF RECORDS ILI & Data Analysis Data Integration Verification Testing ILI Incomplete pipe tally (PT) Preliminary data analysis YS per joint Segmentation based on measured YS Determination of outliers in YS Integrate YS from mill certificate yes Mill report? no Progress Determination of verification locations Field verification using NDE Tensile tests on pipe samples Final data analysis YS per joint Determination of YS equivalent SMYS Completed pipe tally Slide 28

29 PROCESS OF MAOP RECONFIRMATION COMPLETION OF RECORDS SMYS (before) known Partially unknown > As low as 24 ksi (as per CFR) known OD SF WT SMYS (RoMat) known >=42 >=46 >=42 known MAOP Resulting MAOP segments further used for integrity assessments such as FFP/FFS Analysis Risk Assessments Pressure Uprating Slide 29

30 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 Slide 30

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 31

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 This standard identified the need of field verifications and validates confidence Slide 32

33 THANK YOU FOR JOINING THIS PRESENTATION.

34 Yield Strength [MPA] Yield Strength [ksi] CASE STUDIES PIPE GRADE RESULTS Pipeline Pipe Grade Determination Yield strength per joint (ILI) Sections with pipeline records Sections with unknown grade RoMat determined Pipe Grade Case study one Re-Allocation of pipeline at a gravel pit ,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 0 Log Distance Slide 34

35 CASE STUDY ONE Re-Allocation of pipe line at a gravel pit Ordered pipe: Delivered pipe: Investigation on mill certs: X 42; API 5 L X42/ X52; API 5L Requirement for yield strength X 42 Min./Max. Yield 42 ksi/72ksi X 52 Min./Max. Yield 52 ksi/77ksi yield strength between 58 ksi and 62 ksi Tool measurements: yield strength between 60 ksi and 63 ksi Inspection System Result Verification: verification joint = ksi Slide 35

36 Yield Strength [MPA] Yield Strength [ksi] CASE STUDIES PIPE GRADE RESULTS Pipeline Pipe Grade Determination Yield strength per joint (ILI) Sections with pipeline records Sections with unknown grade RoMat determined Pipe Grade Case study two Re-Allocation at a river crossing 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 Log Distance Slide 36

37 CASE STUDY TWO Re-Allocation of pipe line at a river crossing Ordered pipe: Delivered pipe: X 52; API 5 L 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 ksi Outlier 2 yield strength ksi Outliers were confirmed by subsequent visual inspection of existing pipeline records by operator Slide 37