Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Management
Module 4
Inspection Methods
Pipeline Operations
Pipeline Maintenance
Where are we? Pipeline Integrity management
Pipeline repairs
Emergency Response Planning.
Internal
ILI Pressure Specific Plans Pigging Monitoring
Corrosion Assessment Quality
Time
Test
Stress Cathodic Discharge Field Inspections
Pressure Direct
Corrosion ILI Protection Temperature
Test Assessment
Cracking
Long Seam Defects Pipe Inspection during
Manufacturing Pipe Defects
Pressure Test
Specification Manufacturing
Girth Weld
Construction/ Coupled/Pressure Welds Construction
ILI Pressure Test Patrolling
Threats
Stable
Third Party One Call System Damage Prevention & Patrolling Marking and Excavation
Independent
Operations Procedures
Continuing Emergency
Weather and Patrolling
Surveillance Preparedness
Outside Forces
Procedures
7
Images from www.uncc.org, Columbia Gas, USA and Transco, UK
Pipeline
Data Data
Battery
Storage Processing
High Resolution
Axial MFL
Transverse MFL
EMAT
Geometry Tool -
Disks to +/- > 1% d/D
Deformation Tool -
to +/- 0.5% d/D
High Resolution
Direct Assessment
Pressure Test
Inertial Navigation
Direct Examination
(includes NDE for threat)
Notes This matrix is to help those less familiar with the range of integrity assessment technologies, ILI tools, and their capabilities.
Technology improvements may allow color changes in the future.
Direct Assessment requires following all the NACE Standard requirements of EC, IC, or SCC.
Axial & Circumferential Cracking represents surface breaking and partially open cracks unlike tight fatigue.
Credit:
Alan Murray 2017 World Pipelines Aug 2012 25
Types of Smart Pigs
• Geometry - Caliper, Deformation, Gauge
– Detecting changes in ovality (dents, deformations)
• Inertial Navigation (Mapping)
– 3D mapping, route surveying, bend and strain
measurements
• Metal Loss (MFL & UT) UT = EMAT
– Detection and sizing of metal loss corrosion, pits, etc.)
• Crack Detection (UT & MFL)
– Detection and sizing of cracks and crack-like defects
Statistics help
Feedback to ILI
Vendor Critical
Church Complex
Anomaly
Ball Field
Church Complex
Anomaly
Ball Field
• Test Pressure
– Determined based on the desired results of the test.
– Can range from below SMYS to above SMYS.
– Higher test pressures needed for strength testing.
– Lower test pressures are more appropriate for leak testing.
b)Deadweight Testers
(Accuracy & Calibration)
a) Pressure and Temperature
Pen Recorder
Ground Surface
a) Fill (Centrifugal)Test
andSection
Squeeze (Reciprocating) Pump
Planning and Conducting Pressure
Tests
• Minimum pressure test requirements are given in the regulations,
as well as in industry standards and recommended practices.
– International Standard
– API 1110 “Pressure Testing of Liquid Petroleum
Pipelines”
– United States
– ASME B31.4 Section 437 “Testing” (liquid)
– 49 CFR 195 Subpart E (liquid)
– ASME B31.8 Section 841.31 “Testing after
Construction” (gas)
– 49 CFR 192 Subpart J (gas)
– Canada
– CSA Z662-07 Section 8
600
30,000
400
20,000
10,000 200
66 0 0
Alan Murray 2017
0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.010
Strain (in./in.)
Test Procedures - Acceptance
Criteria
• Leak tightness
– 49 CFR 195.300 requires a four hour hold
– No unaccounted for pressure drop
– Pressure variations due temperature can cause small increases
and decreases in pressure
• Double stroke rule
– The pressure test should be stopped when it take twice the number of
strokes of the pump to attain the same pressure increase
OFFSET LINE
P vs. V
PLOT
0.2% VOLUME
TEST
SECTION
VOLUME
Stabilization
Strength Test
Leak Test
Defects that
Remain in Pipe
125 % MOP
Defects removed
Hydro-test
100 % MOP
Normal
Operating
ACVG Technique
ACVG Technique
7
• induction of an
alternating current
onto the pipeline,
which produces a
corresponding
Electric Current flowing in a
electromagnetic conductor creates a magnetic field
that radiates out from the center
field around the of the conductor in concentric
circles.
pipeline
AC Current
Current
Electromagnetic Field
Current
Perfect Coating
6 90
80
5
Attenuation (mB/m)
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Attenuation (mB/m) Distance (m)
Current (mA)
Electromagnetic Survey
3
Theory
• Lengths of the pipeline with coating faults will allow
larger amounts of the electromagnetic field to return
to ground, causing increased attenuations in the field
AC
Current Current
Electromagnetic
Field
Current
84
85