Status of U.S. In-Line Inspection Standards

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryce Brown ◽  
David Culbertson ◽  
Bryan Melan ◽  
Jerry Rau ◽  
Bernie Selig ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Department Of Transportation ◽  
Primary Method ◽  
Gas Pipelines ◽  
Inspection Systems ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Management Effort ◽  
Inspection Data ◽  
Pipeline Safety ◽  
The U.S

The U.S. gas and liquid pipeline industry and its regulators have been working to improve pipeline safety and integrity through a pipeline integrity management effort since 1999. The Office of Pipeline Safety of the U.S. Department of Transportation issued integrity management regulations for liquid pipelines in 2001 and issued similar regulations for gas pipelines at the end of 2003. The Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), also issued regulations for Operator Qualification in 1999 requiring personnel that perform certain tasks to be qualified to perform those tasks. The Integrity Management Programs require extensive inspections of pipelines and the primary method for these inspections is of course In-Line Inspection (ILI). These inspections are critical to the safety and integrity of pipelines and the requriements are reflected in ASME B31.8S Integrity Management for Gas Pipelines. However, neither the inspection systems nor the personnel operating the systems and analyzing and reducing the data have to be qualified under existing standards or regulations. Industry and the Regulators agreed to embark on the development of consensus standards that would address the qualifications of both the ILI Systems and the ILI Personnel that run the systems and evaluate the inspection data. This paper describes the 3 standards that have been developed to obtain “qualified” In-Line Inspection results: API 1163: In-Line Inspection Systems Qualification; ASNT ILI-PQ-2003: In-Line Inspection Personnel Qualification; NACE RP0102-2002: Standard Recommended Practice, In-Line Inspection of Pipelines. The interrelationship of the 3 standards and how to utilize them will be discussed. (See figure 1). The latest changes to the standards and their acceptance by industry will also be described.

Balancing Pipeline Safety and Cost Integrity Management Through Performance Validation of In-Line Inspection Data

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rick McNealy ◽  
Sergio Limon-Tapia ◽  
Richard Kania ◽  
Martin Fingerhut ◽  
Harvey Haines
Keyword(s):  
Failure Criteria ◽  
Actual Condition ◽  
Metal Loss ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Multiple Case ◽  
Multiple Case Studies ◽  
Inspection Data ◽  
Performance Validation ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Pipeline Safety

In-Line Inspection (ILI) surveys are widely employed to identify potential threats by capturing changes in pipe condition such as metal loss, caused by corrosion. The better the performance and interpretation of these survey data, the higher the reliability of being able to predict the actual condition of the pipe and required remediation. Each ILI survey has a certain level of conservatism from the assessment equations such as B31G and sensitivity to ILI performance for measurement uncertainty. Multiple levels of conservatism intended to limit the possibility of a non-conservative assessment can result in a significant economic penalty and excessive digs without improving safety. A study was undertaken to evaluate the reliability of responses to ILI corrosion features through multiple case studies examining the effects of failure criteria and data analysis parameters. This paper discusses the effect of validated ILI performance on safety, and addresses the risk of false acceptance of corrosion indications at a prescribed safety factor. The cost of unnecessary excavations due to falsely rejecting ILI predictions is also discussed.

A RISK-BASED DRILL CANDIDATE SELECTION SYSTEM FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, OFFICE OF PIPELINE SAFETY1

2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (2) ◽  
pp. 1147-1151
Author(s):  
John Chang ◽  
James S. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Crude Oil ◽  
Oil Pollution ◽  
Selection Process ◽  
Candidate Selection ◽  
Professional Judgment ◽  
Selection System ◽  
Department Of Transportation ◽  
Pipeline Safety ◽  
The U.S

ABSTRACT The Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), U.S. Department of Transportation plans and conducts about 20 government-led tabletop exercises and two area exercises annually under its Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90) drill program. Until recently, one of the main objectives in the drill candidate selection process each year was to select a mixture of operators whose pipeline facility spill response plans represented the range of plans required under the agency's OPA 90 regulation. The annual list of drill candidates represented large to small operators transporting crude oil and refined products in various regions of the country. While this approach has worked well, OPS wanted to ensure that the selection process was not inadvertently missing operators whose pipeline facility spills pose the greatest threats to safety and the environment. As a result, OPS developed a quantitative-based process to identify drill candidates. The process uses weighted factors, including input from the Regional Pipeline Safety Offices combined with professional judgment to produce a risk-based approach to help OPS select the operators to drill.

DEVELOPMENT OF A SYSTEM TO VALIDATE AND CERTIFY EQUIPMENT AND TECHNICIANS FOR UNDERGROUND PIPE INSPECTION

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Edward Minchin ◽  
Lourdes R. Ptschelinzew ◽  
Raja R. A. Issa ◽  
Yuanxin Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Construction Projects ◽  
Department Of Transportation ◽  
Pipe Inspection ◽  
Operator Training ◽  
Underground Pipe ◽  
Florida Department ◽  
Inspection Systems ◽  
Laser Profiling ◽  
Departments Of Transportation ◽  
The U.S

Storm water delivery systems are an integral part of transportation construction projects. Pipe placement is costly and time consuming, and when a system fails, the costs associated with repairing and replacing the system are significantly greater because of the existing infrastructure often built above the pipe. Several state departments of transportation in the U.S. have standard specifications for the inspection of newly-installed pipe, but no Department of Transportation has standardized operator training for laser profiling or closed-circuit television (CCTV) pipe inspection. This is significant because state-of-the-art systems for underground pipe inspection currently utilizes these two technologies. Likewise, standards do not exist for the certification of systems or operators for CCTV, laser profiling, or other technologies. Within this report are the findings of an ongoing project funded by the Florida Department of Transportation. This paper reports on pipe inspection in the U.S., the development of a field test for laser-and CCTV-based inspection systems, and practical exams for prospective operators of certified systems used in the inspection of underground pipe construction.

Regulatory Process Changes at the Office of Pipeline Safety

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff Wiese ◽  
James von Herrmann ◽  
Paul Wood
Keyword(s):  
Management Practices ◽  
Department Of Transportation ◽  
New Approach ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Us ◽  
Special Programs ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Improved Performance ◽  
Pipeline Safety ◽  
Measures Of Performance

Over the past several years the Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) in the Research and Special Programs Administration of the US Department of Transportation has begun to develop and implement a different approach to structuring its regulations and to carrying out the inspections it uses to evaluate operator conformance with the provisions of these regulations. Several new Rules have been promulgated incorporating provisions that are a combination of prescriptive, performance-based, and management-based. These rules include the hazardous liquid integrity management rules for large and small operators, the operator qualification rule, and the gas integrity management rule. The new rules have been designed to allow operators flexibility in their approach to addressing the objectives of the regulations. Such flexibility is needed because of the significant differences in the pipeline infrastructure operated by each company, and the corresponding need to acknowledge these differences to assure the objectives of regulation are achieved without imposing a needless and costly burden on the operators. Promulgation of highly prescriptive “one-size-fits-all” regulations is inconsistent with the variations present in the infrastructure operated by the US pipeline industry. One ingredient in the approach OPS has chosen is the imposition of “management-based” requirements. These requirements are so-called because they prescribe implementation of a program that includes the need for several management practices. The new rules allow some flexibility in which management practices are selected and exactly how they are implemented. Inspection against management-based provisions is different from inspection of purely prescriptive requirements. Management-based requirements provide flexibility in how operators evaluate, justify and change their practices to satisfy the intent of the rule within their unique operating environment. While such changes are designed to lead to improved performance, they will not immediately manifest themselves in recognizable changes in performance, so finely tuned measures of performance are needed to help evaluate the effectiveness of the new requirements. OPS has adopted several mechanisms to aid in the consistent inspection of the management-based provisions of the new rules. These mechanisms are discussed in the paper, as is the OPS approach to answering the question of how it will know if the new approach is working.

An Industry Consensus Standard for Pipeline Personnel Qualification: ASME B31Q

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daron Moore ◽  
Bernd J. Selig
Keyword(s):  
Development Process ◽  
Major Elements ◽  
Process Industry ◽  
Department Of Transportation ◽  
Reliable Operation ◽  
Consensus Standard ◽  
Pipeline Safety ◽  
The U.S

The pipeline industry and its regulators have been collectively working on the qualification of pipeline personnel for more than 20 years. The U.S. Pipeline Safety Act of ’02 required the U.S. Office of Pipeline Safety of the Department of Transportation to develop standards (protocols) for Operator Qualification to properly inspect pipeline companies’ Operator Qualification programs. During the first half of 2003, OPS developed protocols as inspection standards for use by OPS field inspectors to audit existing OQ programs that must conform to existing regulations. The pipeline industry supported the development of the protocols. During this process, industry and the regulators developed a longer term strategy for Operator Qualification that would resolve outstanding issues that had not yet been resolved. The strategy will be described in this presentation. Part of that strategy included the development, on an expedited basis, of an industry consensus standard for Operator Qualification. ASME agreed to sponsor and develop this standard. This paper will discuss ASME B31Q – Pipeline Personnel Qualification, its development process, issues the team had to address and how they resolved these issues. It will describe the major elements of the standard. The path the industry and the regulator are taking to address personnel qualification to ensure safe, reliable operation of gas and liquid pipelines will be described. B31Q development started in August of 2003 and is expected to be completed by the end of 2004. The latest update on the standard and its implementation will be presented at the Conference.

A Hybrid Topside Structural Approach to the Management of Aging Fleet

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Biramarta Isnadi ◽  
Luong Ann Lee ◽  
Sok Mooi Ng ◽  
Ave Suhendra Suhaili ◽  
Quailid Rezza M Nasir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Metal Loss ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Strong Basis ◽  
Asset Risk ◽  
Risk Ranking ◽  
Design Life ◽  
Industry Standards ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Inspection Data

Abstract The objective of this paper is to demonstrate the best practices of Topside Structural Integrity Management for an aging fleet of more than 200 platforms with about 60% of which has exceeded the design life. PETRONAS as the operator, has established a Topside Structural Integrity Management (SIM) strategy to demonstrate fitness of the offshore topside structures through a hybrid philosophy of time-based inspection with risk-based maintenance, which is in compliance to API RP2SIM (2014) inspection requirements. This paper shares the data management, methodology, challenges and value creation of this strategy. The SIM process adopted in this work is in compliance with industry standards API RP2SIM, focusing on Data-Evaluation-Strategy-Program processes. The operator HSE Risk Matrix is adopted in risk ranking of the topside structures. The main elements considered in developing the risk ranking of the topside structures are the design and assessment compliance, inspection compliance and maintenance compliance. Effective methodology to register asset and inspection data capture was developed to expedite the readiness of Topside SIM for a large aging fleet. The Topside SIM is being codified in the operator web-based tool, Structural Integrity Compliance System (SICS). Identifying major hazards for topside structures were primarily achieved via data trending post implementation of Topside SIM. It was then concluded that metal loss as the major threat. Further study on effect of metal loss provides a strong basis to move from time-based maintenance towards risk-based maintenance. Risk ranking of the assets allow the operator to prioritize resources while managing the risk within ALARP level. Current technologies such as drone and mobile inspection tools are deployed to expedite inspection findings and reporting processes. The data from the mobile inspection tool is directly fed into the web based SICS to allow reclassification of asset risk and anomalies management.

The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Workplace Testing Program

2007 ◽  
pp. 21-35
Author(s):  
Kenneth Edgell
Keyword(s):  
Department Of Transportation ◽  
Testing Program ◽  
The U.S

scholarly journals Utilizing Effective Technology In High-Standard Road Defects Inventory System In Estonia

2021 ◽  
Vol 1202 (1) ◽  
pp. 012009
Author(s):  
Marek Truu ◽  
Romet Raun ◽  
Maret Jentson
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Visual Inspection ◽  
High Standard ◽  
Inventory System ◽  
Inventory Systems ◽  
Full Detail ◽  
Cloud Data ◽  
Road Pavement ◽  
Inspection Systems ◽  
Inspection Data

Abstract Road pavement is expected to withstand enormous traffic loads for long time but sooner or later the deterioration reaches levels when its optimal to apply treatment. While easy to measure roughness or rutting in normal traffic speed, defects are in most countries still collected by means of time-consuming visual inspection in low traffic speeds or expensive and difficult- to-use equipment. Also, most visual inspection systems only operate with aggregated inspection data. That makes data-collection expensive and defects-based decision-making inefficient. In Estonia, defects inventory system utilizes high quality panoramic and orthogonal images to enable data collection in traffic speeds and detailed mapping of pavement defects in 10 classes. Defects mapped in full detail means, that location, shape and size of each defect is known and classified data can be effectively used twice in pavement maintenance planning: for section selection planning in road network level when aggregated and for work method selection in design process when analyzed in detail. Combined with measured lidar-based point-cloud data, detailed 3d-basemap saves both road-owner's and road designer’s valuable time in design phase. In period of 2016-2020, around 35000km of state roads were analyzed with one of the most efficient road defects inventory systems in the world. Also, around 25000 km of municipal and forest roads have been captured with same technology covering several pavement types from bicycle paths to multilane streets and motorways. Current presentation discusses outcomes of Estonian defects inventory study in 2020.

Composite Sleeve Repair in the North American Regulatory Environment

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xavier Ortiz ◽  
Dan Jungwirth ◽  
Yashar Behnamian ◽  
Hossein Jiryaei Sharahi
Keyword(s):  
Maximum Stress ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Hazardous Materials ◽  
Regulatory Environment ◽  
Department Of Transportation ◽  
Regulatory Requirements ◽  
The North ◽  
Industry Standards ◽  
American Society ◽  
The U.S

Abstract Composite sleeve repairs have been used in the pipeline industry for the last 25+ years. Fiberglass sleeves (e.g., Clock Spring®) were initially introduced in the market and are still being used as a proven pipeline repair method. For the last 15+ years, new composite materials have been introduced in the industry to provide a wider variety of repair options depending on the type of imperfections being repaired. Regulations in the U.S.A. and Canada share some requirements regarding design, installation, testing, and assessment of composite sleeve repairs. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) through the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) recommends the use of repair methods consistent with industry standards. The 2019 version of the Canadian CSA Z662 Oil and Gas Pipeline Standard includes requirements for testing and qualification according to the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) regulation PCC-2 or ISO/TS 24817, and requirements for conducting an engineering assessment to determine the subsequent maximum stress on the pipe sleeve. This paper compares the regulatory requirements for pipeline composite sleeve repairs in the U.S.A. and Canada; it describes some of the options for composite sleeve repair, and reviews engineering assessments of methodologies for composite sleeve repair.

Mooring Integrity Management through Digital Twin and Standardized Inspection Data

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shunsaku Matsumoto ◽  
Vivek Jaiswal ◽  
Tadashi Sugimura ◽  
Shintaro Honjo ◽  
Piotr Szalewski
Keyword(s):  
Simulation Models ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Maintenance Cost ◽  
Digital Twin ◽  
Diagnosis And Prognosis ◽  
Twin System ◽  
Physics Simulation ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Risk Visualization ◽  
Inspection Data

Abstract This paper presents a concept of a mooring digital twin frameworkand a standardized inspection datatemplate to enable digital twin. The mooring digital twin framework supports real-time and/or on-demand decision making in mooring integrity management, which minimizes the failure risk while reducing operation and maintenance cost by efficient inspection, monitoring, repair, and strengthening. An industry survey conducted through the DeepStar project 18403 identified a standard template for recording inspection data as a high priority item to enable application of the digital twins for integrity management. Further, mooring chain was selected as a critical mooring component for which a standard inspection template was needed. The characteristics of damage/performance prediction with the proposed mooring digital twin framework are (i) to utilize surrogates and/or reduced-order models trained by high-fidelity physics simulation models, (ii) to combine all available lifecycle data about the mooring system, (iii) to evaluate current and future asset conditions in a systematic way based on the concept of uncertainty quantification (UQ). The general and mooring-specific digital twin development workflows are described with the identified essential data, physics models, and several UQ methodologies such as surrogate modeling, local and global sensitivity analyses, Bayesian prediction etc. Also, the proposed digital twin system architecture is summarized to illustrate the dataflow in digital twin development andutilization. The prototype of mooring digital twin dashboard, web-based risk visualization and advisory system, is developed to demonstrate the capability to visualize the system health diagnosis and prognosis and suggest possible measures/solutions for the high-risk components as a digital twin's insight.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document