Server maintenance is scheduled for Saturday, December 21st between 6am-10am CST.

During that time, parts of our website will be affected until maintenance is completed. Thank you for your patience.

Menu
Search
Filters
Close
Menu

Pipeline And Subsea Integrity Assessment Using Corrosion Direct Assessment And Local Area Inspection

Picture for Pipeline And Subsea Integrity Assessment Using Corrosion Direct Assessment And Local Area Inspection
Available for download
Product Number: 51321-16732-SG
Author: Y. Zheng; M. Mateer; W. J. R. Nisbet; J. Sonke; J.T. Martin; P. B. J. van de Camp
Publication Date: 2021
$0.00
$20.00
$20.00

In the oil and gas industry, the management of the integrity of all pipelines and associated equipment ensures safe operation and availability for production during their intended life. Pipeline integrity assessment is usually executed in three separate steps:
1. threats (e.g., corrosion) analysis including effectiveness and efficiency of mitigation;
2. verification by monitoring and inspection;
3. fitness for service analysis to determine integrity status, estimate remaining life, and identify
required follow up actions.
Typically, in-line inspection by intelligent pigs is used to inspect for corrosion covering the entire pipeline. However, this approach is not always practical for more remote non-piggable pipelines, where verification can be a challenge and monitoring at topsides is often not sufficient to provide reliable data on the corrosion threat and effective mitigation of the full pipeline length. Therefore, alternative approaches are sometimes necessary.
This paper describes a practical engineering approach that leverages the available expertise, consisting of the following steps.

1. This method starts with the corrosion analysis to determine a worst-case scenario of maximum expected wall loss. The analysis uses corrosion prediction software (that includes multiphase flow model, a verified oil-water wetting model) as well as an analysis of the mitigation measures by operations (including corrosion inhibitor injection availability) and the data available that supports the corrosion inhibitor performance. This analysis results in a flow and corrosion profile and identification and prioritization of critical locations for local area inspection. Wall loss at a different scenario with different confidence is also estimated based on both model and data limitations.
2. An inspection plan, including identification of the minimum required scope and inspection method, is developed and implemented. Fitness for purpose analysis is performed based on different limit states.
3. Local inspection results are extrapolated to the whole system using different statistical methods to give an updated corrosion profile. The confidence of the overall integrity assessment is established based on both corrosion confidence and inspection confidence.
4. The inspection results are analyzed, resulting in a pipeline integrity status determination, which includes remaining life/extension and next inspection due date. A case study illustrates the implementation of the approach for the analysis of multiphase flowlines in the Gulf of Mexico.

In the oil and gas industry, the management of the integrity of all pipelines and associated equipment ensures safe operation and availability for production during their intended life. Pipeline integrity assessment is usually executed in three separate steps:
1. threats (e.g., corrosion) analysis including effectiveness and efficiency of mitigation;
2. verification by monitoring and inspection;
3. fitness for service analysis to determine integrity status, estimate remaining life, and identify
required follow up actions.
Typically, in-line inspection by intelligent pigs is used to inspect for corrosion covering the entire pipeline. However, this approach is not always practical for more remote non-piggable pipelines, where verification can be a challenge and monitoring at topsides is often not sufficient to provide reliable data on the corrosion threat and effective mitigation of the full pipeline length. Therefore, alternative approaches are sometimes necessary.
This paper describes a practical engineering approach that leverages the available expertise, consisting of the following steps.

1. This method starts with the corrosion analysis to determine a worst-case scenario of maximum expected wall loss. The analysis uses corrosion prediction software (that includes multiphase flow model, a verified oil-water wetting model) as well as an analysis of the mitigation measures by operations (including corrosion inhibitor injection availability) and the data available that supports the corrosion inhibitor performance. This analysis results in a flow and corrosion profile and identification and prioritization of critical locations for local area inspection. Wall loss at a different scenario with different confidence is also estimated based on both model and data limitations.
2. An inspection plan, including identification of the minimum required scope and inspection method, is developed and implemented. Fitness for purpose analysis is performed based on different limit states.
3. Local inspection results are extrapolated to the whole system using different statistical methods to give an updated corrosion profile. The confidence of the overall integrity assessment is established based on both corrosion confidence and inspection confidence.
4. The inspection results are analyzed, resulting in a pipeline integrity status determination, which includes remaining life/extension and next inspection due date. A case study illustrates the implementation of the approach for the analysis of multiphase flowlines in the Gulf of Mexico.

Product tags
Also Purchased
Picture for 03191 Pipeline Integrity & Direct Assessment
Available for download

03191 Pipeline Integrity & Direct Assessment

Product Number: 51300-03191-SG
ISBN: 03191 2003 CP
Author: K. G Leewis
$20.00
Picture for CORROSION RISK ASSESSMENT MODEL OF SUBSEA PIPELINES NETWORK
Available for download

51318-11049-CORROSION RISK ASSESSMENT MODEL OF SUBSEA PIPELINES NETWORK

Product Number: 51318-11049-SG
Author: Faisal M. Al-Abbas / Gusai H. Al-Aithan / Saad Muaili / Qasim Saleem / Balasubramani Bakthavatchalu / Ebadul Haque / Mohammed Barout
Publication Date: 2018
$20.00

A risk assessment model developed as part of a holistic study conducted to evaluate the condition of subsea pipelines. A systematic semi-quantitative risk-based model was developed to identify, analyze and evaluate risk associated with each subsea pipeline.
Picture for Risk Based Subsea Inspection Planning and Corrosion Management.
Available for download

51318-11152-Risk Based Subsea Inspection Planning and Corrosion Management.

Product Number: 51318-11152-SG
Author: S. Haarberg / G. Ø. Lauvstad / J. C. Werenskiold
Publication Date: 2018
$20.00

A new field gradient (FG) measurement tool has been developed for cathodic protection (CP) inspection of subsea facilities. The paper presents a case where FG data and CP modelling have been used to optimize CP retrofit design, cutting costs by 50%.
Categories
Industry
Recently viewed
Popular tags
View all

Association for Materials Protection and Performance

© AMPP All Rights Reserved.
Membership Terms of Content Use
Contact Customer Support