Enhanced Use of ILI Data to Improve Integrity Decisions

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Collin Taylor ◽  
Renkang Rain Zhu
Keyword(s):  
Metal Loss ◽  
Pipeline System ◽  
Precision Data ◽  
Data Alignment ◽  
Joint Characteristics ◽  
Tool Performance ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Data Improvement ◽  
Longitudinal Seam ◽  
Flux Leakage

With the current generation of in-line inspection (ILI) tools capable of recording terabytes of data per inspection and obtaining millimeter resolution on features, integrity sciences are becoming awash in a sea of data. However, without proper alignment and relationships, all this data can be at best noise and at worst lead to erroneous assumptions regarding the integrity of a pipeline system. This paper will explore the benefits of a statistical alignment method utilizing joint characteristics, such as length, long seam orientation (LSO), wall thickness (WT) and girth weld (GW) counts to ensure precision data alignment between ILI inspections. By leveraging the “fingerprint” like morphology of a pipeline system many improvements to data and records systems become possible including but not limited to: • Random ILI Tool performance errors can be detected and compensated for. • Repair history and other records become rapidly searchable. • New statistically accurate descriptions are created by leveraging the sensitivities of various ILI technologies. One area of material data improvement focused on within this paper relates to long seam type detection through ILI tools. Due to the differing threat susceptibility of various weld types, it is accordingly important to identify the long seam weld types for integrity management purposes. Construction records of older vintage lines do not always contain information down to the joint level; therefore, ILI tools may be leveraged to increase the accuracy of construction records down to this level. In this paper, the possibility of ILI tools, such as magnet flux leakage tools, ultrasonic crack tools, and ultrasonic metal loss tools, to distinguish different types of longitudinal seam welds is also discussed.

Development of Pinhole Corrosion Management Using MFL

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guy Desjardins ◽  
Joel Falk ◽  
Vitaly Vorontsov
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Flux Leakage ◽  
Metal Loss ◽  
Physical Measurement ◽  
Reporting Accuracy ◽  
Magnetic Modeling ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
Modeling Software ◽  
Measurement Methodology ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Flux Leakage

While In-line Inspection Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL) tools have been used for many years to successfully manage corrosion related threats, small pinhole-sized metal-loss anomalies remain a significant concern to pipeline operators. These anomalies can grow undetected to develop leaks and cause significant consequences. The physical dimensions of these anomalies, their proximity to and/or interaction with other nearby anomalies can challenge MFL’s detection and sizing capabilities. Other factors such as tool speed, cleanliness of the line and incorrect assumptions have an impact as well. For pipeline operators to develop effective and efficient mitigation programs and to estimate risks to an asset, the underlying uncertainties in detection and sizing of pinholes need to be well understood. By using magnetic modeling software, the MFL response of metal-loss anomalies can be determined, and the effect of a number of factors such as radial position, wall thickness, depth profile, pipe cleanliness and tool speed on MFL response and reporting accuracy can be determined. This paper investigates these factors to determine the leading causes of uncertainties involved in the detection and sizing of pinhole corrosion. The understanding of these uncertainties should lead to improvements in integrity management of pinhole for pipeline operators. This paper first investigates the physical measurement methodology of MFL tools to understand the limitations of MFL technology. Then, comparisons of actual MFL data with field excavation results were studied, to understand the limitations of specific MFL technologies. Finally, recommendations are made on how to better use and assess MFL results.

Learnings From Data Management and Integration Efforts on the Enbridge Pipeline System

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Garry L. Sommer ◽  
Brad S. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Pipeline System ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Data Alignment ◽  
Commercial Market ◽  
History Of ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Management Effort ◽  
Analysis System

Enbridge Pipelines Inc. operates one of the longest and most complex pipeline systems in the world. A key aspect of the Enbridge Integrity Management Program (IMP) is the trending, analysis, and management of data collected from over 50 years of pipeline operations. This paper/presentation describes Enbridge’s challenges, learnings, processes, and innovations for meeting today’s increased data management/integration demands. While much has been written around the premise of data management/integration, and many software solutions are available in the commercial market, the greatest data management challenge for mature pipeline operators arises from the variability of data (variety of technologies, data capture methods, and data accuracy levels) collected over the operating history of the system. Ability to bring this variable data set together is substantially the most difficult aspect of a coordinated data management effort and is critical to the success of any such project. Failure to do this will result in lack of user confidence and inability to gain “buy-in” to new data management processes. In 2001 Enbridge began a series of initiatives to enhance data management and analysis. Central to this was the commitment to accurate geospatial alignment of integrity data. This paper/presentation describes Enbridge’s experience with development of custom software (Integrated Spatial Analysis System – ISAS) including critical learnings around a.) Data alignment efforts and b.) Significant efforts involved in development of an accurate pipe centreline. The paper/presentation will also describe co-incident data management programs that link to ISAS. This includes enhanced database functionality for excavation data and development of software to enable electronic transfer of data to this database. These tools were built to enable rapid transfer of field data and “real time” tool validation through automated unity plots of tool defect data vs. that measured in the field.

Management of Pipeline Dents and Mechanical Damage in Gas Pipelines

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Warman ◽  
Dennis Johnston ◽  
John D. Mackenzie ◽  
Steve Rapp ◽  
Bob Travers
Keyword(s):  
High Resolution ◽  
Magnetic Flux ◽  
Mechanical Damage ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
Magnetic Flux Leakage ◽  
Pipeline System ◽  
Channel Geometry ◽  
Channel Deformation ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Flux Leakage

This paper describes an approach used by Duke Energy Gas Transmission (DEGT) to manage dents and mechanical damage as part of its overall Integrity Management Plan (IMP). The approach provides guidance in the process for evaluating deformation anomalies that are detected by high resolution magnetic flux leakage (HR-MFL) and multi-channel geometry in-line inspection tools, the process to determine which deformations will be selected for excavation, the process to conduct pipeline field excavations, assessments, and repairs for pipeline integrity purposes. This approach was developed, tested and fully implemented during pipeline integrity work over a two year program involving over 1,100 miles of HR-MFL and 900 miles of geometry in-line inspection. Integration of data from high resolution ILI tools (HR-MFL and multi-channel deformation tools) was used to identify and characterize dents and mechanical damage in the pipeline system. From subsequent field assessments and correlation with ILI results, the processes were refined and field procedures developed. The new guidance provided in the 2003 edition of ASME B31.8 was used as the governing assessment criteria.

Assessment of In-Line Inspection Performance and Interpretation of Field Measurements for Characterization of Complex Dents

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis A. Torres ◽  
Matthew J. Fowler ◽  
Jordan G. Stenerson
Keyword(s):  
Management Strategies ◽  
Mechanical Damage ◽  
Field Measurements ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Metal Loss ◽  
Tool Performance ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Technical Specifications ◽  
Shape Complexity

Integrity management of dents on pipelines is currently performed through the interpretation of In-Line Inspection (ILI) data; this includes Caliper, Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL), and Ultrasonic Testing (UT) tools. Based on the available ILI data, dent features that are recognized as threats from a mechanical damage perspective are excavated and remediated. Federal codes and regulations provide rules and allow inference on what types of dent features may be a result of mechanical damage; nonetheless, there are challenges associated with identifying dents resulting from mechanical damage. One of the difficulties when managing the mechanical damage threat is the lack of information on how MFL and UT ILI tool performance is affected by dented areas in the pipe. ILI vendors do not offer any technical specifications for characterizing and sizing metal loss features in dents. It is generally expected that metal loss tool performance will be affected in dented areas of the pipe, but it is not known to what degree. It is likely that degradation will vary based on feature shape, sensor design, and sensor placement. Because metal loss tool performance is unknown within the limits of the dented pipe, other methods for recognizing mechanical damage have been incorporated into the management strategies of mechanical damage. Some of these methods include strain based assessments and characterization of shape complexity. In order to build a more effective integrity management program for mechanical damage, it is of critical importance to understand how tool technology performance is affected by dented areas in the pipe and what steps can be taken to use ILI information more effectively. In this paper, the effectiveness of MFL and UT wall measurement tools in characterizing and sizing metal loss features within dents is studied by evaluating against field results from non-destructive examinations of mechanical damage indications. In addition, the effectiveness of using shape complexity indicators to identify mechanical damage is evaluated, introducing concepts such as dents in close proximity and multi-apex dents. Finally, the effectiveness of ILI tools in predicting dent association with girth welds is also explored by comparing ILI and field results.

A Midstream Pipeline Operator’s Perspective on the Implementation of API 1183

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremiah Konell ◽  
Brian Dedeke ◽  
Chris Hurst ◽  
Shanshan Wu ◽  
Joseph Bratton
Keyword(s):  
Selection Process ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Operating Conditions ◽  
Metal Loss ◽  
Pipeline System ◽  
Stress Risers ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Primary Focus ◽  
Condition Assessments ◽  
The Impact

Abstract In preparation for the upcoming (currently in draft form) Recommended Practice (RP) on Dent Assessment and Management (API 1183) [1], Explorer Pipeline Company, Inc. (Explorer) has performed an internal procedural review to determine how to effectively implement the methodologies into their Integrity Management Program (IMP). Explorer’s pipeline system transports hazardous liquids and is comprised of over 1,800 miles of pipeline ranging in diameter from 3 to 28 inches. The majority of the system was installed in the 1970s, but parts of the system were also installed as early as the 1940s. The primary focus of this review and implementation into the IMP is in regard to performing and responding to in-line inspection (ILI) based integrity assessments. Prior to the development of API 1183, dent assessment and management consisted of following a set of prescriptive condition assessments outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 49, Part 195.452. In order to do this, pipeline operators required basic information, such as dent depth, orientation, and interaction with potential stress risers such as metal loss, cracks, gouges, welds, etc. However, in order to fully implement API 1183, additional parameters are needed to define the dent shape, restraint condition, defect interaction, and pipeline operating conditions. Many new and necessary parameters were identified throughout the IMP, from the very initial pre-assessment stage (new ILI vendor requirements as part of the tool/vendor selection process) all the way to defining an appropriate reassessment interval (new process of analyzing dent fatigue life). This paper summarizes the parameters of API 1183 that were not part of Explorer’s current IMP. The parameters are identified, and comments are provided to rank the level of necessity from “must have” to “beneficial” (e.g. can sound and conservative assumptions be made when a parameter is not available). Comments are also provided to explain the impact of applying assumptions in place of parameters. The table of identified parameters should provide a useful tool for other pipeline operators who are considering implementing API 1183 as part of their overall IMP.

Inline Inspection Decisions and Results Using an Integrated Technology for a Baseline Inspection Program on a Large Diameter High Pressure Gas Transmission and Interconnect System

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Westwood ◽  
Arti Bhatia
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Large Diameter ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Metal Loss ◽  
Pipeline System ◽  
Pressure System ◽  
Integrated Technology ◽  
Pressure Transmission ◽  
Transmission Pipeline ◽  
Integrity Management

The Alliance Pipeline System consists of 2664 Km of NPS 36 high pressure transmission pipeline and 339 Km of NPS 42 high pressure transmission pipeline. The mainline systems are connected by lateral and interconnect pipeline sections ranging in diameter from NPS 4 to NPS 24. The pipeline system extends from northeast British Columbia to Illinois. The Trans border nature of the pipeline means that it needs to satisfy both the Canadian and US regulatory requirements related to pipeline integrity management. Part of the approval process for the pipeline system was that it had to be inspected on a regular basis with a baseline inspection program to be initiated upon start-up of the pipeline system in 2000. This paper outlines some of the unique challenges the high pressure transmission pipeline presented to both the operator and the inline inspection (ILI) vendor in developing a successful in line inspection program. It discusses the vendor selection criteria used by the pipeline operator and the design process undertaken by the ILI Vendor to meet the requirements of this unique pipeline system. By the end of 2004, the mainline sections in Canada and the US will have been inspected as well as most of the smaller diameter interconnect and lateral system. Results are presented from the ILI inspection of both the high pressure system and the smaller diameter system. While the inspections have used Magnetic Flux leakage (MFL) Technology to detect metal loss features, the use of integrated technology in particular the inertial navigation system aboard the vendor’s inspections tools has allowed geometric features to be detected as well. Lessons learned from both the operator and the ILI Vendor will be presented on the execution of the inline inspection program as well as discussion on ways of ensuring that the ILI process goes smoothly and if not how to address these concerns.

Integration of Data From Multiple In-Line Inspection Systems to Improve Crack Detection and Characterization

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Piazza ◽  
Justin Harkrader ◽  
Rogelio Guajardo ◽  
Thomas Henning ◽  
Miguel Urrea ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Integration ◽  
Crack Detection ◽  
Detailed Examination ◽  
Metal Loss ◽  
Recent Experience ◽  
Destructive Testing ◽  
Tool Performance ◽  
Inspection Systems ◽  
Integrity Management

In-line inspection (ILI) systems continue to improve in the detection and characterization of cracks in pipelines, and are relied on substantially by pipeline operators to support Integrity Management Programs for continual assessment of conditions on operating pipelines that are susceptible to cracking as an integrity threat. Recent experience for some forms of cracking have shown that integration of data from multiple ILI systems can improve detection and characterization (depth sizing, crack orientation, and crack feature profile) performance. This paper will describe the approach taken by a liquids pipeline operator to integrate data from multiple ILI systems, namely Ultrasonic axial (UC) and circumferential (UCc) crack detection and Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL) technologies, to improve detection and characterization of cracks and crack fields on a 42 miles long, 12-inch OD liquid pipeline with a 38-year operating history. ILI data has indicated a large number of crack features, including 4000+ crack features reported by UC, 1000+ crack features by UCc, and 2500+ metal loss features reported by MFL. Initial excavations demonstrated a unique pattern of blended circumferential-, oblique- and axial-orientated cracks along the entire extent of the 42-mile pipeline, requiring advanced methods of data integration and analysis. Applying individual technologies and their analysis approaches showed limitations in performance for identification and characterization of these blended features. The outcome of the study was the development of a feature classification approach to classify the cracks with respect to their orientation, and rank them based on the depth sizing by using multiple datasets. Several sections of the 42-mile pipeline were cut-out and subjected to detailed examination using multiple non-destructive examination (NDE) methods and destructive testing to confirm the crack depths and profiles. These data were used as the basis for confirming the ILI tool performance and providing confirmation on the improvements made to crack detection and sizing through the data integration process.

Advances in Feature Identification Using Tri-Axial MFL Sensor Technology

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Miller ◽  
Frank Sander
Keyword(s):  
Testing Procedure ◽  
Sensor Technology ◽  
Metal Loss ◽  
Feature Identification ◽  
Accurate Identification ◽  
Technology And Innovation ◽  
The Past ◽  
Data Analyst ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
Flux Leakage

Pipeline operators have been using intelligent in-line inspection (ILI) tools as part of their pipeline integrity management systems for several decades now. A wide variety of ILI tools have been developed to serve a multitude of uses. Most notable is the detection, locating, and sizing of metal loss corrosion. Magnetic Flux Leakage Technology (MFL) was developed for that exact purpose, however over the years technology and innovation has vastly improved the capabilities of MFL tools. This paper contains a comparison of historical and current pipeline feature identification/classification capabilities for axial magnetizing MFL tools with Tri-Axial sensor technology. The pipeline features discussed include corrosion, mechanical defects, structural pipeline components, as well as the physical and magnetic parameters that affect accurate identification, location, and/or sizing. Some of these features have never been detected, identified, or reported in the past, and now constitute a significant portion of the training and testing procedure that occurs in the certification of a new MFL data analyst.

Optimizing Preventative and Mitigative Measure Selection

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Lachey ◽  
Keith Vanderlee ◽  
Robert Jewell ◽  
Tony Alfano
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Risk Management ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Pipeline System ◽  
Subject Matter Experts ◽  
Data Alignment ◽  
Risk Management Program ◽  
Integrity Management ◽  
A Company

As risk assessment methodologies, tools, and processes continue to evolve in the industry, utilizing risk outputs to not only identify high risk locations, but to also understand the driver(s) behind the elevated risks for those locations is paramount. The ideal scenario for reducing pipeline risk is utilizing a risk-driven mitigation plan as this ensures the optimal use of company dollars, but also inherently means that a company has a firm understanding of their data and pipeline system. When the company understands their data and the implications for its inaccuracies, whether it be improper data alignment or incorrect application of data, they can effectively employ a campaign for preventative and mitigative measures (P&MM). However, if suspect data is used during a risk assessment, P&MM cannot accurately target risk drivers and high risk locations, making it challenging for the company to maximize their resources. For well over a year, an on-going partnership between AGL Resources Inc. (AGL) and Det Norske Veritas (U.S.A.), Inc. (DNV GL) has ensued to tailor a GIS-based risk management software solution for AGL. Through this collaboration among Integrity Management, Risk Management, IT, GIS, and Operations & Maintenance subject matter experts (SMEs) on both sides, one central hub of cross-functional pipeline knowledge was created. As a result, countless opportunities were exploited to identify supplementary data sources to employ new data manipulation techniques and processes, providing AGL with the foundation for such a risk-based Preventative & Mitigative Measure program. With the foundation laid and the proper risk elements present, AGL can now execute optimized risk-informed responses to identified high risk locations, pipeline segments, or pipeline systems. These optimized responses require an understanding of the types of P&MM available to reduce the threats and consequences, the costs involved for each P&MM implemented, and the utilization of a tool to allow various ‘what-if’ risk analyses to be conducted. Adopting and integrating this process as part of AGL’s risk management program allows them to capitalize on the maintenance dollars they spend while also reducing the potential hazards to the surrounding people, places and environment.

Utilizing Circumferential MFL for the Detection of Linear and Axially Oriented Metal Loss Anomalies in Pipelines

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Grimes ◽  
Alberto Nunez de Alvarez
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Flux ◽  
Flaw Detection ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Magnetic Flux Leakage ◽  
Metal Loss ◽  
Pipeline System ◽  
Efficient System ◽  
Pipeline Systems ◽  
Technological Developments ◽  
Flux Leakage

In-line inspection (ILI) technologies have advanced quite significantly since their first usage over 30 years ago. This has been even more evident over the last 5–10 years. Technological developments in electronics, computing power, combined with an increased and better understanding of complex physical applications have lead to the latest generation of in-line inspection technologies which have been commercially available over this same time period. The owner / operators of the liquid and gas pipeline systems are faced with an increased awareness of their aging infrastructures and they are looking to the experts and providers of the latest technological developments to assist them in their efforts to manage and maintain pipeline integrity. ILI has proven time- and time again to be the most useful and cost effective tool that pipeline operators have to ensure safe, reliable and economic operation of their pipeline system(s). One of the main challenges that the industry is currently facing is the early detection of long narrow, axially oriented defects in pipelines. There have been various efforts within the industry to accomplish the goal of producing an efficient system that is economically feasible as well as reliable. In an effort to meet the demand for an in-line inspection tool that can meet the challenge, ILI companies have developed different applications. Ultra-sonic tools have been researched, developed, and used commercially in an effort to detect axially oriented anomalies affecting both pipe body and longitudinal weld seam. However, a tool utilizing UT technology is highly dependant upon the pipe’s functionality and medium (gas / liquid), and thus, is prone to incomplete and/or unacceptable survey data. Taking this into account, the utilization of UT technology for these purposes can be very costly with limited results. Because of the limitations and issues that UT tools experiences, ILI providers also researched the feasibility of utilizing proven MFL technology in this application. After proper development and testing, Circumferential Magnetic Flux Leakage technology was released for the inspection of pipelines — specifically, pipeline systems that were in need of longitudinal seam weld inspection. ROSEN’s solution to this challenge is the Axial Flaw Detection (AFD) tool. The AFD tool utilizes Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL) technology by applying a circumferential magnetic field (CMFL), as opposed to the traditional axial oriented application of the field, to the pipe wall in order to detect and characterize anomalies which are linear and/or axially oriented that a typical MFL tool would under grade or not even detect. This article is meant to give the reader a better understanding of the technology as well as the development process of complex in-line inspection in today’s comprehensive and demanding pipeline industry. It will also provide historical findings within controlled environments and statistics from dig verifications from actual surveys.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document