Asset Integrity Management Overview - API Singapore 2012 Asset... · Asset Integrity Management...

Philip A. Henry, P.E. RBI Technical Advisor and Principal Engineer

The Equity Engineering Group, Inc. Shaker Heights, OH USA

Tuesday 6 March 2012 API Singapore 2012

Singapore Marina Bay Sands Resort

Asset Integrity Management Overview

Life-Cycle Management of Pressurized Fixed Equipment

2

Presentation Overview

• Introduction – Life-Cycle Management (LCM)

• Regulatory Viewpoints

• Refining & Petrochemical Industry Goals

• Owner-User Goals

• Cooperative Achievement of Goals

• The Life-Cycle Management Process

• LCM Case Study

• Benefits of the LCM Process

• Conclusions

3

Introduction – Life-Cycle Management • Many process plants continue to operate pressurized

equipment well beyond its intended design life

• Owner-users of pressurized fixed equipment, including pressure vessels, piping, and tankage, are becoming increasingly interested in Life-Cycle Management (LCM) of equipment to enhance reliability and availability

• LCM is the process of managing the entire life-cycle of fixed pressurized equipment from initial design, through construction and in-service use, and to retirement

• Questions – How do you get a LCM process started? – How do you incorporate codes and standards that are not

developed by ASME or API? – Is there a process that can be used as a model?

4

Regulatory Viewpoints

• A US Regulator’s View

“Safety and production are inextricably linked….good safety performance makes good business sense….stable production means reduced risks….if integrity management is sacrificed for production, production will eventually suffer and lives may be lost….”

“Actively manage your operations to achieve safety and environmental objectives….participate in standards development….conduct research and develop technology….share important safety information….”

• UK Health and Safety Commission

“……asset integrity will continue to be one of the main priorities ….. it is for the industry itself to show leadership and face up to its responsibility….”

5

Refining & Petrochemical Industry Goals

• Public and workforce safety; good safety performance is a key element of good business practice

• Global acceptance of industry codes and standards

– Ensure safety and reduce losses through the sharing of technology and best practices that are “promoted” to a code or standard status

– Maximize efficiency through standardization; promoting the use of industry standards wherever possible to replace in-house corporate standards

– Regulatory Acceptance

6

Owner-User Goals

• Industry and Owner-User goals are in alignment

• Additionally, want to achieve Optimized LCM costs, a balance between construction and in-service maintenance costs

7

Cooperative Achievement of Goals

• The proposal:

A LCM process can be instituted that promotes public and workforce safety and utilizes international industry codes and standards while permitting optimization of life-cycle costs for fixed pressurized equipment

• The proposed LCM process – Utilizes existing codes, standards and recommended

practices; international documents may be substituted based on regulatory requirements

– Emphasizes proper use of these codes, standards, and recommended practices through industry committee participation and/or training

– Risk management techniques may be used

8

The Life-Cycle Management Process • Life-Cycle Management

(LCM) for Pressurized Fixed Equipment: Key Elements – Damage Mechanism

Identification – Construction Codes &

Standards – In-Service Inspection Codes – FFS Standard – Post Construction & Repair

Guidelines

• Important Aspects – Standards development

including input from industry experts, owner-users and group sponsored JIPs

– Proper use of standards to address safety & reliability

– User training

Construction CodeASME VIII-1, VIII-2, VIII-3, B31.3

API 530, 620, 650

Commissioning (Baseline Inspection)

In-Service Inspection(Establish Inspection Interval)

• Prescriptive (API 510/570/653,NBIC)• Risk-Based (API 580/581,PCC3)

InspectionResults

Fitness-For-ServiceAPI 579/ASME FFS-1

Run/Rerate ReplaceRepair

ASME PCC2

Continue Service

Tech

nolo

gy In

tegr

atio

n

Anticipated Damage

Specify Design Conditions and Identify Damage Mechanisms(API 571 & WRC 489)

Select Materials of Construction

Identify Damage Mechanisms (API 571, WRC 488, WRC 489, WRC 490)

UnanticipatedDamage

9

The Life-Cycle Management Process Calibration to Industry Segments

• The LCM process shown on the previous slide is calibrated to the down-stream segment in refining and petrochemical in North America – Calibration of the LCM Process starts with Damage

Mechanism Identification; API 571 and WRC 489 were specifically written to address damage mechanisms affecting fixed equipment in the refining industry

– ASME Construction codes are used in the down-stream segment for pressure vessels and piping and API Design and Construction codes are used for tankage and fired heater tubes

– In-service inspection standards are API and NBIC – Fitness-For-Service (FFS) is API/ASME – Post Construction & Repair Guidelines are ASME – Note that the calibration also includes location, i.e. North

America, to address regulatory requirements

10

The Life-Cycle Management Process Damage Mechanism Identification

• Damage mechanisms identification is an important part of the Life-Cycle Management Process – Required during the design phase, influences materials

selection – Required for inspection planning – Required for FFS if un-anticipated damage occurs (i.e.

damage found during inspection was not accounted for in design phase)

• Understanding of damage mechanisms is also important for developing models with associated material properties for life assessment determination

• These models form the basis of FFS and RBI, but can also be used in construction codes with an appropriate design margin

11

The Life-Cycle Management Process Damage Mechanism Identification

• Documents covering damage mechanism identification – WRC Bulletin 488 Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed

Equipment in The Pulp And Paper Industry

– WRC Bulletin 489 & API 571 Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in The Refining Industry

– WRC Bulletin 490 Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in Fossil Electric Power Industry

– ASME PCC-3 Inspection Planning Using Risk-Based Methods (Appendices B & C)

12

The Life-Cycle Management Process Construction Codes & Standards

• API Codes, Standards and Recommended Practices – API produced codes, standards, recommended practices,

and technical publications cover all segment of the industry Upstream Mid-stream Downstream Pipelines

– Benefits Promote the use of safe, interchangeable equipment and

operations Reduce regulatory compliance costs through standardization Form the basis of API certification programs in conjunction with

API’s Quality Program – The API standards program is global, through active

involvement with the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and other international bodies

13


• API Design & Construction Standards

– API Std 530/ISO 13704 Calculation of Heater-Tube Thickness in Petroleum Refineries

– API Std 620 Design and Construction of Large, Welded, Low-Pressure Storage Tanks

– API Std 650 Welded Tanks for Oil Storage

• Note the co-branding on API Std 530 with ISO

14


• ASME Codes and Standards – ASME codes and standards are primarily used for

construction of new equipment, some of the rules in these codes are referenced by the API in-service inspection codes

– ASME codes and standards are also provided for Guidelines for assembly of bolted flange joints

Repair of pressure equipment and piping

Risk-Based Inspection, harmonized with API Standard 580/581

– ASME has also produced a guideline document to provide a summary of the codes, standards and regulations that are used to assist manufacturers, users, regulators and other stakeholders in maintaining the integrity of fixed pressure equipment in general industrial use

15


• ASME Codes and Standards

– Pressure Vessels

ASME B&PV Code, Section VIII – Division 1 Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels

ASME B&PV Code, Section VIII - Division 2 Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels – Alternative Rules

ASME B&PV Code Section VIII – Division 3 Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels – Alternative Rules for Construction of High Pressure Vessels (VIII-3)

– Piping

ASME B31.1 Power Piping

ASME B31.3 Process Piping

16

The Life-Cycle Management Process In-Service Inspection Codes

• In-Service Inspection Codes – API 510 Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: Maintenance

Inspection, Rerating, Repair and Alteration – API 570 Piping Inspection Code: Inspection, Repair Alteration

and Rerating of In-Service Piping Systems – API 653 Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and

Reconstruction – NB-23 National Board Inspection Code

• Inspection codes listed above use half-life inspection interval; also permit use of Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) planning as provided in: – API RP 580 Risk-Based Inspection, 2nd Edition, 2009 – API RP 581 Risk-Based Inspection Technology, 2nd Edition,

2008 – ASME PCC-3 Inspection Planning Using Risk-Based Methods

17

The Life-Cycle Management Process Other Inspection Resources

• Other Inspection Resources – API RP 572 Inspection Practices for Pressure Vessels – API RP 574 Inspection Practices for Piping Components – API RP 576 Inspection of Pressure Relieving Devices

• Development of the following new references is under way: – API RP 583 Corrosion Under Insulation – API RP 584 Integrity Operating Windows – API RP 585 Pressure Equipment Investigation – API RP 681 Risk-Based Inspection of Rotating Equipment

18

The Life-Cycle Management Process FFS Standard

• ASME and API jointly produce a co-branded Fitness-For-Service document, API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 2007 Fitness-For-Service – Incorporates planned technical enhancements to the 2000

Edition of API 579 – Organized into 13 Parts that address various damage

mechanisms; 11 Annexes provide additional information and guidance on conducting stress analysis for FFS

– Provides three assessment levels of increasing complexity; Level 3 permits use of alternate FFS procedures such as BS 7910 and FITNET

– Includes modifications to address the needs of fossil electric power, and the pulp and paper industries

• May be applied to pressure containing equipment constructed to international recognized standards

19

The Life-Cycle Management Process Post Construction Standards & Repair Guidelines

• ASME Post Construction Publications – ASME PCC-1 Guidelines for Pressure Boundary Bolted

Flange Joint Assembly – ASME PCC-2 Standard for the Repair of Pressure Equipment

and Piping – ASME PCC-3 Inspection Planning Using Risk-Based Methods – ASME PTB-3 Guide to Life-Cycle Management of Pressure

Equipment Integrity Provides a roadmap to identify the codes, standards, and other

documents that apply to the LCM of pressure equipment integrity

Does not address pressure equipment in; Oil and gas exploration and production, LNG, and LPG transport and storage, Pipeline and transport service, Nuclear industry

Mainly references ASME & API Codes and Standards

20

The Life-Cycle Management Process Important Aspects

• The LCM process is dependent on the existence of effective industry codes, standards, and recommended practices that is dependent on input from – Owner-Users – Industry Experts – Regulatory Bodies – Group Sponsored Joint Industry Project (JIPs)

• Note that Owner-User input is critical for the successful development of industry codes and standards; this is recognized by standards writing bodies and most have active recruitment and indoctrination programs in place

• Input from regulatory bodies provides the safety expectations for both the public and workforce employees

23

The Life-Cycle Management Process Technology Integration

• A key aspect of the successful implementation of LCM process is consistency in the technology used for design and in-service codes and standards

• Consistency in the technology avoids ambiguities that typically arise when rules for construction are used for in-service inspection, FFS, and repair

• Standards writing organizations need to develop consistency in approach not only in development of construction codes, but also in the development of in-service codes such as FFS and inspection standards – ASME launching common rules effort; rules in codes will be

published once and appropriately referenced – Benefit to end-users, simplifies training and easier to use – Owner-Users need to be involved!

24

The Life-Cycle Management Process Best Practices

• The LCM Process described thus far relies on industry codes and standards

• What about Best Practices instituted by corporations that do not reside in industry codes, standards or recommended practices?

• Definition: For purposes of the LCM process, a Best Practice is

a technique or methodology that upon rigorous evaluation through experience and research, demonstrates success, has had an impact, and can be replicated

• Many corporations document their Best Practices in internal engineering standards; these internal standards address both construction and in-service equipment issues such as inspection, FFS, and repair guidelines.

25

The Life-Cycle Management Process Best Practices

• In the proposed Life-Cycle Management (LCM) for pressurized fixed equipment, a best practice is an overlay in the process based on the corporate knowledge

• Best Practices in pressurized fixed-equipment technology are becoming more difficult to cultivate because of lack of expertise; owner-users must rely on industry forums and/or codes, standards and recommended practices


API 530, 620, 650




InspectionResults



ASME PCC2

Continue Service

Tech

nolo

gy In

tegr

atio

n

Anticipated Damage




UnanticipatedDamage

Bes

t Pra

ctic

e

26

LCM Case Study Analysis of Tubesheet Corrosion

• TEMA Class R Shell & Tube Heat Exchanger

• Hydrocarbon Service • Shellside Design conditions

– DP: 300 psig – DT: 150 °F

• Tubeside Design conditions – DP: 800 psig – DT: 550 °F

• Materials of Construction – Shell: CS – Tubesheet: CS

• Design Corrosion Allowance – SS: 0.125 in – TS: 0.125 in


API 530, 620, 650




InspectionResults



ASME PCC2

Continue Service

Tech

nolo

gy In

tegr

atio

n

Anticipated Damage




UnanticipatedDamage

Bes

t Pra

ctic

e

27



API 530, 620, 650




InspectionResults



ASME PCC2

Continue Service

Tech

nolo

gy In

tegr

atio

n

Anticipated Damage




UnanticipatedDamage

Bes

t Pra

ctic

e


• Construction Codes – ASME B&PV Code, Section

VIII, Division 1 – TEMA Class R

28



API 530, 620, 650




InspectionResults



ASME PCC2

Continue Service

Tech

nolo

gy In

tegr

atio

n

Anticipated Damage




UnanticipatedDamage

Bes

t Pra

ctic

e


• Corrosion Monitoring Locations (CML) assigned

• Initial thickness readings taken at commissioning

29



API 530, 620, 650




InspectionResults



ASME PCC2

Continue Service

Tech

nolo

gy In

tegr

atio

n

Anticipated Damage




UnanticipatedDamage

Bes

t Pra

ctic

e


• Local corrosion on the shellside of a tubesheet found during a shutdown

• Unanticipated damage based on operating conditions, fluids, and materials of construction

30


31



API 530, 620, 650




InspectionResults



ASME PCC2

Continue Service

Tech

nolo

gy In

tegr

atio

n

Anticipated Damage




UnanticipatedDamage

Bes

t Pra

ctic

e


• Damage Mechanism, accelerated corrosion from carbonic acid corrosion

32



API 530, 620, 650




InspectionResults



ASME PCC2

Continue Service

Tech

nolo

gy In

tegr

atio

n

Anticipated Damage




UnanticipatedDamage

Bes

t Pra

ctic

e

• FFS Assessment performed per API 579-1/ASME FFS-1,

• Part 5, Level 3

• 3D FEA model constructed to simulate metal loss profile, worst case metal profile modeled

• Comparative analysis performed between corroded and un-corroded cases

• FFS assessment indicated the vessel is acceptable for continued operation based on assumptions made for the future corrosion allowance

33


34


35


• Recommendations – Pressure boundary and

tubesheet were suitable for four years of operation

– Tubesheet corrosion did not significantly increase likelihood of flange joint leakage at channel/shell joint

– Limits were placed on bolt assembly stress for any future joint assembly or re-tightening

• Benefits – Allowed for 4 years of

additional service until planned bundle replacement

– $200K saving identified for not having to expedite bundle

– No additional plant shutdowns required


API 530, 620, 650




InspectionResults



ASME PCC2

Continue Service

Tech

nolo

gy In

tegr

atio

n

Anticipated Damage




UnanticipatedDamage

Bes

t Pra

ctic

e

36

Benefits of the LCM Process

• The proposed LCM Process is based on the use of industry codes, standards, and recommended practices as well as corporate best practices to construct and maintain in-service equipment; the inherent benefits include – Improved Safety & Risk Reduction – Maximizing Equipment Availability

Fewer Incidents Extended Lifetimes Shorter Turnarounds Predictable Outcomes Enhanced Plant Performance

– Optimization of Maintenance and Inspection Costs – Regulatory Compliance

37

Conclusions

• The LCM Process for fixed pressurized equipment has been defined for the refining and petrochemical industry

• Key elements parts of the LCM Process are – Damage Mechanism Identification

– Construction Codes & Standards

– In-Service Inspection Codes

– FFS Standard

– Post Construction & Repair Guidelines

• The LCM Process can be calibrated to other industry segments and international locations by substituting appropriate documents for the key elements described above

38

20600 Chagrin Blvd. • Suite 1200 Shaker Heights, OH 44122 USA

Phone: 216-283-9519 • Fax: 216-283-6022 www.equityeng.com

Philip A. Henry email: [email protected]

Asset Integrity Management Overview - API Singapore 2012 Asset... · Asset Integrity Management...

Documents

Transcript of Asset Integrity Management Overview - API Singapore 2012 Asset... · Asset Integrity Management...