0 valutazioniIl 0% ha trovato utile questo documento (0 voti)

125 visualizzazioni10 pagineA PIPELINE INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

Mar 30, 2015

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT o leggi online da Scribd

A PIPELINE INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

© All Rights Reserved

0 valutazioniIl 0% ha trovato utile questo documento (0 voti)

125 visualizzazioni10 pagineA PIPELINE INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

© All Rights Reserved

Sei sulla pagina 1di 10

CorrOcean ASA

Teglgaarden, Trondheim, Norway

ABSTRACT

An integrity management strategy has been developed for pipelines carrying gas,

condensate/oil and water. The strategy is based on identification of corrosion related failure

modes, risk assessment, and application of risk reducing methods in terms of corrosion control,

monitoring and inspection. Modeling of multiphase flow, CO2 corrosion and associated

probability distributions along the pipeline play key roles in the risk assessment. Examples of

applications are presented.

Key words:

C-Mn steel, oil and gas production, pipelines, CO2 corrosion model, limit state

design, integrity management.

INTRODUCTION

New pipelines are increasingly being designed to limit state criteria 1. The driving force

in this process is the potential cost savings obtained from reduced wall thickness. The

reduction in wall thickness, however, offer no latitude for deviations beyond the design

corrosion expectations. This increases the requirements to efficient corrosion management.

For old pipelines, based on traditional design methods, the excess wall thickness may offer

some additional safety within the design lifetime. The advances within the oil and gas

technology often favour continued production beyond the design lifetime, and extension of the

pipeline life may become relevant. Again, efficient corrosion management may become an

important issue.

In order to meet these challenges a strategy for pipeline integrity management is

proposed. The strategy is based on the development of an efficient tool for establishing a

pipeline corrosion model. This model then forms the basis for evaluations related to the need

for corrosion control, monitoring and inspection. An essential tool in these evaluations is risk

analysis. The present paper describes the ideas and the methods applied to develop the

pipeline integrity management strategy based on internal corrosion as the dominant failure

mode. Examples of applications are presented.

The approach for establishing a corrosion model for the entire pipeline is illustrated

schematically in figure 1. The model consists of multiphase flow module, a water property

module, a pH module and a point corrosion model.

Multiphase flow

Estimation of flow characteristics in three phase flow (gas, oil and water) is

today routinely simulated by the use of computer based simulation programs like OLGA 2. The

output from such calculations contains information of great value for corrosion evaluations

such as the total pressure profile, the temperature profile, the condensation rates of water and

hydrocarbons, the flow regime, and the velocity and holdup of each of the phases. The flow

regime and the phase velocities may change considerably with the pipeline inclination angle

and it is therefore very important to have a geometric model of the pipeline reflecting the true

variation of the pipeline inclination angle.

The water phase

In a three phase system of gas, liquid hydrocarbons and water, the water may

mix with the liquid hydrocarbon to form a dispersed phase or it may exist as a separate phase

at the bottom of the pipe. A figure for the probability of water being separated can be obtained

by analysing the results from the three phase numerical flow simulations, or from a two phase

flow calculation in combination with the method of Wicks & Fraser3.

pH

The pH is a complex function of several parameters, like the CO2 partial

pressure, the temperature and the content of ions in the water phase. The Fe 2+ content, which

is a result of the corrosion process itself, has a particular strong influence on the pH in

condensed water. The pH can be calculated from the ion concentrations using equations

describing the chemical equilibria involved4, but empirical relations between the pH and the

Fe 2+ content are also used when appropriate. Since the pH may change as a result of the

corrosion process, the corrosion rate has to be calculated in a forward stepping approach

down the pipeline.

The point corrosion model

Two corrosion models have been included in the corrosion analysis program. The first

one is the Shell model as it has been presented in its latest revision of 1995, jointly by Shell and

the Norwegian Institute of Energy Technology (IFE)5. The second one is the model

recommended by NORSOK.4 Both models are so-called point corrosion models, in the sense

that they provide a single value for the corrosion rate based on a set of values for the input

data such as the temperature, the CO2 partial pressure, the pH, the flow rate or wall shear

stress, the glycol content and the inhibitor performance. The corrosion profiles are obtained by

applying a point corrosion model to the various positions along the pipeline. In this process a

particular problem arises related to the flow conditions. Both models are largely based on onephase laboratory data, such that there is no obvious relation between the model flow

parameter and the multiphase flow data. Special routines have been designed to handle this

problem.

Design phase

A strategy for pipeline integrity management to be considered in the design phase may

include the following items:

Deterministic corrosion model for a pipeline, identification of critical locations

Establish a probability model for the different corrosion forms

Risk analysis related to the different failure modes

Evaluation of different means to reduce the risk, based on corrosion control,

monitoring and inspection

Recommended plan for corrosion control, monitoring and inspection

Identification of the failure modes for internal corrosion. Corrosion related failure

modes have to be identified based on the most likely corrosion forms that can occur in the

pipeline. Such corrosion forms comprise general corrosion, longitudinal grooving, pitting, weld

corrosion and mesa corrosion. For each corrosion form one may define a critical depth or

critical wall thickness reduction. Such critical depths are given in guidelines like the ASME

B31G6. Here, one may find equations relating the critical depth, the typical length of the attack

and the maximum allowable hoop stress.

Deterministic corrosion model for a pipeline, identification of critical locations.

Corrosion models are established for the entire pipeline, using the calculation approach as

described above, and shown in Figure 1. Based on the actual conditions, different models may

have to be established for the various corrosion forms. The result provides two important

pieces of information: The maximum deterministic corrosion rates, and the positions were they

occurs. The first information is taken further into the risk analysis, while the critical position

identification is important for corrosion monitoring evaluation.

Establish a probability model for the different corrosion forms. The deterministic

corrosion models form the basis for establishing a probabilistic description of the maximum

corrosion rates. Such a probabilistic description is illustrated in figure 2. In the probabilistic

approach the deterministic value corresponds to the mean value. The scatter around this value

is reflecting the model uncertainty as evident in the experimental data to which the corrosion

models have been fitted5. The probability distribution shown in figure 2 is the log-normal

distribution.

Risk analysis related to the different failure modes. Risk is defined from the formula:

Risk = probability of occurrence x consequence

Here, the probability of occurrence is defined as the probability related to corrosion

induced failure modes. This probability can be calculated from the probability models for the

various corrosion forms, as illustrated in figure 2. The approach is as follows. Assume that we

have a cumulative probability distribution F(CR) of the maximum corrosion rate CR. The

critical corrosion depth for a corrosion form is dcrit . Over a lifetime L we may then define a

critical corrosion rate CRcrit from the following expression:

CRcrit = dcrit/L

(1)

P(CR > CRcrit) = 1 - F(CRcrit)

(2)

environmental impact.

The presentation of probability distributions for the corrosion attacks allows the

application of limit state approaches, as presented in the following example:

For pipelines where hoop stress together with corrosion allowance are the

dimensioning criteria determining the necessary wall thickness, the hoop stress equation can be

combined with the formulae of ASME B31G /6/, the modified ASME B31G or the Shell-92

model /7/, to give a presentation of the hoop stress capacity as a function of; corrosion attack

depth, corrosion attack length, inhibitor efficiency, yield- or tensile strength, wall thickness, and

outer diameter.

The parameters are then treated as variables within their known probability

distributions, and by applying a probability simulation model e.g. MonteCarlo simulation, this

will give an expression of the probability distribution for the risk of exceeding the hoop stress

capacity of the pipeline. By applying this approach, the known conservatism in the traditional

pipeline design is avoided and a potential reduction in wall thickness results.

Evaluation of different means to reduce the risk, based on corrosion control,

monitoring and inspection. This activity describes the various methods available for corrosion

control by use of chemicals, like film forming inhibitors and pH stabilisers. The sensitivity to

variations in e.g. the inhibitor performance can be obtained from a sensitivity study in the risk

analysis, and a minimum performance requirements to the inhibitor can be defined. Methods or

combinations of methods for corrosion monitoring are evaluated. Monitoring can be based on

weight loss, ER- and LPR-probes, FSM8, ultrasonic equipment, Fe-counts, inhibitor residual

analysis etc. Inspection methods comprise intelligent pigging and spot NDT. Case studies can

be carried out using cost-benefit analysis to obtain combinations of corrosion control,

monitoring and inspection that reduces the risk to an acceptable level at the lowest possible

costs.

A recommended plan for corrosion control, monitoring and inspection. Based on the

case studies a recommended plan for corrosion control, monitoring and inspection can be

established. The elements of such a plan can be:

Requirements to field testing of inhibitors

The need for cleaning pigs

Monitoring equipment, types, numbers, locations

Frequency of intelligent pigging

Frequency and locations for spot NDT

Operational phase

The working strategy in the operational phase may to some extent resemble the

strategy in the design phase, but the practical performance has to be influenced by the

presence of actual operational experience, actual process data, monitoring data and eventually

inspection data.

The following issues have to be addressed:

Calculation of a pipeline corrosion model based on actual process data

Revision of risk analysis

Revision of plan for corrosion control, monitoring and inspection

EXAMPLES OF APPLICATION

Pipeline corrosion models have been worked out for quite a number of submarine

pipelines, covering a wide variety of operational conditions. The pipelines may be grouped in

three categories: Dry gas pipelines, wet gas pipelines and pipelines carrying a well fluid

composed of gas, oil and produced water. Dry gas pipelines do not carry a corrosive fluid, but

a corrosive fluid may form due to glycol condensing in the pipeline. The glycol absorbs some

water from the dry gas and then becomes a weakly corrosive fluid. Upsets in the drying

process may lead to temporary enhancements in the water content. For wet gas systems one

will normally have a variable pH down the pipeline due to condensation of water with low pH.

The water wetting is a second important factor. For gas/oil/water well fluids the water wetting

is the all important factor.

The example shown here is from a wet gas study of a long pipeline. Figure 3 shows

the corrosion profile of the C-Mn pipeline without a multiphase flow calculation. The pipeline

route is very uneven, and the pipeline inclination angle varies typically between -5 and +5

degrees.

The multiphase flow calculations, figure 4, show clearly that water is separating out at

upward angles larger than about 0.5 degrees. With the information from the multiphase flow

calculations the pipeline corrosion model becomes much more complex than shown in figure 3.

Figure 5 shows a typical result for the 30 - 31 Km section of the pipeline. The upper

curve is the corrosion rate profile including flow rate variations due to the pipeline profile, but

assuming 100 % water wetting at all locations. The lower curve shows the effect of assuming

100 % water wetting only for upward inclinations larger than 0.5 degrees and 10 % for other

inclinations. This has two major implications. Firstly, the maximum corrosion rates are reduced

by about a factor of two. Secondly, the critical locations are rather narrow, which is important

for a proper location of monitoring equipment.

The probability distributions for the case are shown in figure 6. The pit/weld

distribution is shifted to larger corrosion rates because it has been observed that such localised

attacks can grow faster than predicted by the corrosion models by a factor of 2-3. This may

be due to galvanic effects in the system or a more continuous water wetting in areas with

geometric disturbances. Based on these probability distributions the probability of failure

related to longitudinal grooving is shown as a function of the time in figure 7. With a corrosion

inhibitor performance of minimum 85 % the probability of failure is very low, but with a

reduced inhibitor performance (70 %) or no pH- adjusting chemicals, the probability of failure

may become significant.

CONCLUSIONS

An integrity management strategy has been developed for pipelines carrying gas,

condensate/oil and water.

The strategy is based on identification of corrosion related failure modes, risk

assessment, and application of risk reducing methods in terms of corrosion control, monitoring

and inspection.

Modelling of multiphase flow, CO2 corrosion and associated probability distributions

along the pipeline plays a key role in the risk assessment, and may be applied in limit state

design approaches.

Examples of application show that a pipeline corrosion model that includes multiphase

flow calculations and a true pipeline profile offer much better insight into the corrosivity of the

pipeline than a simple point corrosion model.

REFERENCES

1. DNV (1996) Rules for Submarine Pipeline Systems Det Norske Veritas 1996

2. Fuchs, P. and Nuland, S.: "Three Phase Modelling is a Must", Multiphase Transportation

III, Arranged by Norwegian Petroleum Society, Rrros 20-22 September, 1992,

3. Wicks, M. and Fraser, J. P.: "Entrainment of Water by Flowing Oil", Materials

Performance, May 1975, pp 9-12.

4. NORSOK Standard M-506, Jan. 98.

5. de Waard, C., Lotz, U. and Dugstad, A.: "Influence of Liquid Flow Velocity on CO2

Corrosion: A Semi-empirical Model", Paper no. 128 at NACE CORROSION '95.

6. ASME B31G (1993) Manual for Determining the Remaining Strength of Corroded

Pipes American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1993.

7. D Richie, C.W.M. Voermans, M.H. Larsen, W.R. Vranckx, Planning repair and

inspection of ageing corroded lines using probabilistic methods Risk Based & Limit State

Design & Operation of Pipelines 20th & 21th October 1998, Aberdeen

8. Strommen, R. D., Horn, H. and Wold, K.R.: Paper no 7, NACE Corrosion/92.

CORPOS Flowchart

Input

Parameters

T(x), P(x)

and

pCO2(x)

Multiphase

Fluid

Flow

Water

Phase

Corrosion Rate

CR(x)

Corrosion

Model

pH

Distance m

1.

Figure 1. Flowchart showing the process of establishing a pipeline corrosion model

log-Normal probability

1

0,9

Probability density

Cumulative probability

0,8

0,7

0,6

0,5

0,4

0,3

0,2

0,1

0

0

0,5

1,5

2,5

3,5

Figure 2. The lognormal probability distribution with a mean at x=1, and standard deviation of

0.3.

1,0

Corrosion rate(mm/year)

pHinit = 5.7

pHinit = 3.6

0,5

0,0

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Figure 3. Corrosion rate profile of the wet gas study without a multiphase flow calculation

0,35

0,3

Holdup (-)

0,25

0,2

HOLHL

HOLWT

0,15

0,1

0,05

0

-6

-4

-2

10

Inclination (Degrees)

Figure 4. Multiphase flow calculations of the wet gas study showing water holdup (HOLWT)

and hydrocarbon liquid holdup (HOLHL) as a function of the pipeline inclination angle.

10

True pipeline profile

0,5

Inhibitor efficiency = 85 %

0,4

100 % water wetting at all pipe positions

0,3

0,2

0,1

0,0

30

30,1

30,2

30,3

30,4

30,5

30,6

30,7

30,8

30,9

31

Position (km)

Figure 5. Corrosion rate profiles for the wet gas study. Upper curve asssumes 100 % water

wetting while lower curve assumes 100 % water wetting only for inclination angles larger than

0.5 degrees and 10 % otherwise.

pH = 3.5 and 85 % inhibitor efficiency

4

Probability density

3,5

Longitudinal grooves

3

2,5

2

1,5

Pits

1

0,5

0

0

0,5

1,5

2,5

11

30 - 31 km

0,300

low pH 85%inhib

high pH 85%inhib

high pH 70%inhib

Probability

0,250

0,200

0,150

0,100

0,050

0,000

0

10

15

20

25

Time (years)

12

## Molto più che documenti.

Scopri tutto ciò che Scribd ha da offrire, inclusi libri e audiolibri dei maggiori editori.

Annulla in qualsiasi momento.