SPE 93600
External Corrosion of Pipelines: What Risk?
M. Roche, Total S.A.
Copyright 2005, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 14th SPE Middle East Oil & Gas Show and
Conference held in Bahrain International Exhibition Centre, Bahrain, 12–15 March 2005.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any posi-
tion of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE
meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of Petroleum
Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for com-
mercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohib-
ited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300 words;
illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of
where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836,
Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
The paper gives a contribution to the problematic of external
corrosion of pipelines. The performance of plant and field
joint coatings is detailed and interference between coatings
performance and cathodic protection efficiency is evaluated.
Recent failures on a buried onshore 18” refinery pipeline
coated with FBE and a buried onshore 18” oil pipeline coated
with 3 layer low-density polyethylene and heat-shrinkable
sleeves applied over a liquid epoxy primer are presented and
commented. The so-called “cathodic protection shielding ef-
fect” prevents cathodic protection current to flow to areas
submitted to corrosion risk under disbonded coatings.
The most critical zone for offshore pipelines is the transi-
tion area between riser thick coatings and atmospheric paint
system where accelerated corrosion may occur.
Introduction
Pipelines represent a major part of surface facilities invest-
ments and require particular attention. They constitute the
safest method for transporting liquid and gaseous petroleum
products. However, it is of utmost importance to implement an
efficient Integrity Management programme in order to prevent
failures and control them when necessary. This applies espe-
cially to major transportation pipelines, but also to less strate-
gic assets constituted by flow-lines in the production fields.
Generally accepted requirements concerning corrosion
prevention of pipelines have been introduced in the ISO 13623
established by ISO TC67/SC2, devoted to design, construc-
tion, operation, inspection and maintenance of pipelines used
in Oil and Gas industry1.
Corrosion Management of pipelines consists of four com-
plementary steps:
• Evaluation of internal and external corrosion risks from
the preliminary study to the abandonment of the pipeline,
taking into account the best knowledge of corrosion as-
sessment methods and of data relative to the transported
fluid and the pipeline environment;
• Implementation of efficient and adapted corrosion preven-
tion systems, including material selection, cathodic protec-
tion, coatings, injection of chemicals, actions on the proc-
ess. All these actions are aimed at preventing or minimiz-
ing corrosion damage for the full design lifetime of the
pipeline;
• Corrosion Monitoring, aimed at ensuring that:
− Corrosion prevention is applied, when specified,
− Corrosion prevention is efficient, when applied,
− Corrosivity remains as low as expected, when no cor-
rosion prevention applied.
• Periodical Inspection and Re-qualification (e.g. pressure
tests), providing information on the physical condition of
the pipeline with respect to corrosion or mechanical dam-
age (due to various causes like fatigue, third-party im-
pacts).
Publications have been presented by Total S.A. on these
topics2-9 and the present lecture is aimed at updating major
aspects related to the external corrosion risks of pipelines. It
presents the cumulated experience acquired during 40 years
and includes recent case stories of failures with “modern coat-
ings”.
Major parameters determining corrosion risks
General. All external (and internal) corrosion processes af-
fecting pipelines used in the Oil & Gas industry are of electro-
chemical nature, hence necessitating presence of liquid water
in contact with steel. In addition, an oxidising species is nec-
essary for feeding corrosion cells: this is mainly dissolved
oxygen for external corrosion and H+ ion (acidic corrosion at
low pH) for internal corrosion. A specific cause of corrosion
failures is MIC (Microbiologically Induced Corrosion), en-
countered when growth of "sulfidogenic" bacteria (producing
H2S) is significant on steel surface (local anaerobiose, gener-
ally in moderate conditions of salinity, temperature and pH).
In addition to metal loss type corrosion damage, Environ-
mentally Induced Cracking failures may occur. These are
Stress Corrosion Cracking (SCC), Hydrogen Embritllement
and fatigue-corrosion. SCC is an anodic process where cracks
initiate from depassivated areas. For pipelines, stainless steels
in presence of chloride ions are mainly concerned, as well as
some forms of external cracking for carbon steel. Hydrogen
Embrittlement is a cathodic process and failures are consecu-
tive to the presence of H2S ("sour service") or due to cathodic
over-protection.
2 SPE93600
Soil or water exposure. Contact of steel pipeline with a con-
tinuous electrolyte makes possible the application of the theo-
retically most reliable corrosion prevention method: cathodic
protection.
As long as coatings remain bonded to steel and cathodic
protection is correctly applied, monitored and maintained, no
corrosion risk exists. All the (few) corrosion cases known by
the author were due to disbonding of coatings on buried on-
shore pipelines. Disbonding may prevent access of cathodic
protection current to steel exposed to a corrosive electrolyte
(renewal through "pumping effect", presence of sulfidogenic
bacteria): this constitute the so-called "cathodic protection
shielding effect". The same may occur when rocks or stones
make such a screen to the cathodic protection current.
In addition to the metal loss corrosion process, disbonded
coatings may lead to various forms of Environmentally In-
duced Cracking with carbon steel when a conjunction of det-
rimental mechanical and physico-chemical parameters occurs:
• “high pH SCC” at high temperature (local potential in-
termediate between the protection potential and the corro-
sion potential due to partial polarisation)
• “near neutral pH SCC” at ambient temperature (generally
explained by a lack of protection caused by the shielding
effect).
This risk is pernicious because not fully detectable using
the best cathodic protection inspection methods, the safest way
of detection being inline inspection using intelligent pigging.
Pipelines are most often made of carbon steels. However,
some of them are made of stainless steels when prevention of
internal corrosion of carbon steel through chemicals is not
efficient or reliable enough. For the external side, corrosion
risks of stainless steels by soils or waters due to localized cor-
rosion forms induced by chlorides (pitting, crevice corrosion,
SCC) are significant. Consequently, they have to be protected
in the same way that carbon steels, by coating and cathodic
protection.
Atmospheric exposure. This concerns small lengths close to
the ends of pipelines, but also a lot of flow-lines in their entire
length in desertic areas (e.g. Middle-East, North Africa, Ar-
gentina). Ideally, aerial flow-lines should be efficiently in-
stalled on supports to prevent contact with soil. Corrosion pre-
vention of air exposed surface should be adapted to the sever-
ity level of atmospheric corrosion. They can only be protected
by paint coatings. Their success depends on system selection,
quality of application, inspection and maintenance pro-
grammes. The use of efficient paint systems is systematic on
aerial sections of transport pipelines and flow-lines which are
buried or immersed on their major part. When local atmos-
pheric corrosivity is very low because air is always dry, flow-
lines are left bare without significant attack.
Corrosion prevention of pipelines
Onshore buried pipelines. Coatings and cathodic protection
are systematically used for protecting flow-lines as well as
transport buried or immersed pipelines external surface from
corrosion. Most often, ICCP (Impressed Current Cathodic
protection) is applied: cathodic protection is achieved using a
d.c. current supplied by transfo-rectifiers (technology to be
adapted to local environment) or solar cells powered stations,
to ensure a potential more negative than –0.85 V/sat.Cu-
CuSO4. Surface ground-beds are generally used, but deep
ground beds may be necessary when resistivity is lower in
depth. Fe-Si-Cr anodes are most often used; alternatively scrap
steel or titanium covered with mixed metal oxides (MMO)
may be used. Basic requirements and recommendations are
published in standards10-12.
As much as possible, pipelines and flow-lines should be
electrically insulated from foreign structures in order to ensure
optimization of cathodic protection and a better homogeneity
of potentials (even if resistors or shunts may be installed at
isolating joints to regulate the various systems). Electrical
isolation from treatment and storage facilities is the most im-
portant. Electrical isolation between flow-lines and wells is
especially important when cathodic protection of well casings
is not an objective. Isolating joints shall not be buried to pre-
vent external shortage and corrosion. When separated conduc-
tive water exists inside the line at the level of isolating joint,
factory manufactured isolating spools must be used, with an
internal coating (on the protected side).
Monitoring of cathodic protection functioning and effi-
ciency is carried out through routine checks of CP stations and
periodical measurements at representative locations along the
pipeline route (sometimes with a remote monitoring or control
device). A major question (not fully solved) is raised on the
exact signification of the values measured, because reference
electrodes cannot be at the close contact of steel at coating
defects. Correction of ohmic drop in soil is a difficult prob-
lematic, partially solved by the “ON/OFF method” (in absence
of stray currents) or by the use of coupons with ON/OFF
measurements carried out on these “artificial defects”. Stan-
dards give recommendations for these measurement tech-
niques13,14.
An optimisation of potential level (between –0.95 and –1.1
V/Sat.Cu-CuSO4) is necessary to prevent:
• SCC under disbonded coatings, mainly when other detri-
mental parameters exist (high mechanical stresses, princi-
pally when dynamic, high S content in steel)
• Hydrogen Embrittlement where dents and other mechani-
cal damage exist
• Coating disbonding of coatings.
Design of cathodic protection systems should be based on
a sufficient number of stations, electrical insulation from other
facilities, adapted stray current drainage and automatic ca-
thodic protection stations when necessary (stray currents).
Onshore pipelines laid on the ground. A number of flow-
lines are laid bare directly on the ground without supports on
purpose. To prevent corrosion on a long term, experience
shows that it is necessary to apply cathodic protection. This
also applies for badly supported flow-lines. Current output and
number of cathodic protection stations should be high enough
to take into account all surfaces of steel in contact with soil. In
some cases cathodic protection becomes practically unfeasible
due to a too high surface of steel in contact with corrosive soil.
Road crossings are always buried and should be protected
using coating and Mg anodes.
SPE93600 3

When the conventional protection criteria are difficult to
achieve locally, alternative criteria may be considered:
- in very low conductive soils : < -0,75 V between 100 and
1000 Ohm.m and < -0,65 V/sat.Cu-CuSO4 above 1000
Ohm.m (EN 12954, ISO 13623 and ISO 15589-1)11, 1, 12
- potential shift of 100 mV minimum at formation or decay
of polarisation (NACE RP 0169, ISO 15589-1)10, 12.
Offshore pipelines. Cathodic protection and coatings are sys-
tematically used for protecting offshore submerged flow-lines
and transport pipelines. Cathodic protection is most often
achieved by galvanic systems using sacrificial anode-bracelets
(generally made of aluminium alloy), sized for the whole de-
sign lifetime, using conservative hypothesis for CBF (coating
breakdown factor)15-18. More detailed values presently speci-
fied by the author’s company are given in Table 1, differenti-
ating between various kinds of plant-applied and field joint
coatings and taking into account eventual presence of concrete
weight coating and joint infill. Mean values are used for calcu-
lating the total weight of anodes, final values for verifying
their dimensions and number.
• HISC (Hydrogen Induced Stress Cracking) when sensitive
pipeline steels are used, especially Supermartensitic
stainless steels19
• Fatigue of SCR (Steel Catenary Risers) used in conjunc-
tion with deep water floating structures like TLP or
FPSO.
In these cases, the most electrically insulating coatings
should be selected. It may be heat-insulating multilayer thick
PP or PU foam coatings for the first case, or 3 layer PE or PP
coatings for the second one. For example, 3LPE was chosen
for Matterhorn SCR in Gulf of Mexico instead of FBE, used
for the pipeline itself. Modeling of CP using PROCOR (1)
software was carried out to demonstrate that anodes located on
the bottom side of 10” pipeline near SCR were able to protect
remote coating defects localized near the surface. Fig. 1 shows
how the potential at the surface of a 1m long coating defect
near surface side varies with time for a conventional polariza-
tion curve (100 mA/m2 at – 0.9 V/Ag-AgCl-seawater in initial
conditions). Initial value of CBF (0.2 %) was used during 15
days, then mean value (1%) between 15 and 155 days, and
final value (4%) between 155 and 305 days.

Table 1: Coating breakdown factors of pipeline coat- Potentie l sur le défaut

-965
ings for a lifetime of 20 years
-975

Coating Concrete Field joint coating Infill Mean Final

-985
Tapes No 9 13
Potentiel (mV)

Bituminous Yes Yes 7 10 -995

Heat-shrink sleeves No 8 11
Yes 6 9 -1005

Tapes NA 6 9
-1015
No Heat-shrink sleeves NA 4 7
PE reconstituted NA 3 5 -1025
Tapes No 4 6 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325
jours
3LPE Yes 3 4
Yes Heat-shrink sleeves No 3 5 Fig. 1: Modeling of evolution of potential on a large (1m ) defect
2

Yes 2 3 located near surface side end of SCR coated with 3LPE
PE reconstituted No 2 3
Yes 1 2 Simplified approaches for evaluating potential attenuation
Tapes NA 5 8 along a coated pipeline are proposed, e.g. by ISO 15589-2
No Heat-shrink sleeves NA 3 5 appendix A18. Another method to determine the maximum
PP reconstituted NA 2 4
distance between anodes consists in applying the following
Tapes No 4 6
3LPP Yes 2 3
formula19:
Yes Heat-shrink sleeves No 3 5 ∆E = L2.ρ.j.fc.D/ 4.d.(D-e) + Ra.j.π. D. fc.L/2
Yes 2 3
PP reconstituted No 2 3 where ∆E is the voltage drop midway between anodes, Ra the
Yes 1 2 anode resistance, j the current density, fc the coating break-
No Tapes NA 15 30 down factor, D the outer diameter, ρ the specific resistivity of
Heat-shrink sleeves NA 13 28
FBE FBE NA 12 26
pipe material, L the anode spacing and e the wall thickness.
Tapes No 8 12 To summarize the experience with offshore pipelines, it
Yes Yes 6 10 may be considered that the only external corrosion cases en-
Heat-shrink sleeves No 7 10 countered occurred in the splash or aerial zones of risers. No
Yes 5 8 corrosion problem under disbonded coatings has ever been
FBE No 6 8 recorded so far in the submerged zone because of the absence
Yes 4 7
of significant "cathodic protection shielding effect" in sea-
water probably due to its high conductivity. Coatings of these
Sacrificial anode-bracelets are typically installed about every pipelines have always been applied in a plant with field joint
150 m but in some specific cases it is of utmost importance to coating on the lay barge or the spool yard, which is another
increase as much as possible this spacing in order to reduce at
a minimum the number of weld connections of anode lugs
with pipeline to prevent cracks due to:
(1) CETIM (Centre Technique des Industries Mécaniques, France)
4 SPE93600
reason which explains this favorable situation as regard to
onshore case when coating was applied over-the-ditch.
Experience with coatings
General. For a better efficiency of cathodic protection and
often to ensure its feasibility, a coating is always applied on
the external steel surface of buried or immersed pipelines.
A key issue during construction of pipelines is to ensure
that enough care is taken for the selection and application of
coating to prevent their disbonding during the whole lifetime
of the pipeline. This means that the coating should be applied
in a plant on pipe lengths before pipeline construction in order
to ensure quality (surface preparation, hot application). It has
to resist to handling, transportation and laying operations and
to service conditions (especially maximum temperature). The
field joint coating applied on girth weld areas after welding
must be compatible with the plant coating and resist to service
conditions.
Asphalt and coal tar enamels. Over-the-ditch coatings were
used initially but abandoned more than 30 years ago due to the
frequent bad quality of application, depending on the weather
conditions. Plant applied coatings suffered from mechanical
brittleness, mainly coal tar enamels which are somewhat less
flexible than asphalt enamels. Field bending appeared to be
impossible in safe conditions. Corrosion under disbonded
coatings was experienced in various places such as France,
Tunisia, Iraq. However, these coatings are still used offshore
for concrete weight coated pipelines. No damage leading to
corrosion has been identified yet. This may be explained by a
combination of better adherence (plant-applied coatings on
abrasive blasted steel surface) and better efficiency of cathodic
protection in seawater. However, mechanical damage on the
lay barge due to heavy impacts during harsh weather has been
sometimes a problem.
High temperature resistance of asphalt and coal tar enam-
els is highly controversial. Experience was very bad on some
Lacq gas field (France) pipelines coated with a special type of
asphalt enamel designed for high temperature resistance (theo-
retically up to 100°C). Experience showed that it was bleeding
and no more bonded to steel after a few years at temperatures
as low as 60 to 70°C. Offshore, service temperatures up to 105
°C exist on some pipelines coated with such coatings without
identified corrosion but the exact state of enamel underneath
concrete is not known. Slippage of pipeline inside the concrete
coating due to thermal dilatation has been encountered due to
softening of the enamel. Presently, such coatings are no more
specified for new pipelines by the author’s company. In some
specific cases (local coating plant capacities), asphalt enamel
may be accepted, but coal tar is forbidden for health consid-
erations.
Cold applied tapes. When applied over-the-ditch, the same
problems that those encountered with enamels occurred due to
bad quality of application. Severe corrosion underneath dis-
bonded tapes was encountered, e.g. in Tunisia. Tapes are now
only used for some minor field joint coating projects or for
field repairs.
Mono or two-layer Polyethylene (PE). These coatings were
introduced in Europe 35 years ago. The first use by the au-
thor’s company was in 1968, offshore Italy in the Adriatic
Sea, applied by fusion of powder (monolayer): massive dis-
bonding appeared consecutive to damage by trawlers. Poten-
tial measurements carried out using a thread-like Ag-AgCl
reference electrode demonstrated that protection was achieved
underneath the disbonded coating. The first use of 2-layer ex-
truded PE was in 1975 onshore Gabon: adherence problems
were encountered during laying. PE application became ma-
ture afterwards and no major failure was then noticed but
monolayer was limited to short lengths (quality less good but
easier to apply in small quantities).
For offshore concrete coated pipelines, it is necessary to
improve shear strength to avoid slipping in the tensioners of
the lay barge between PE and concrete. Shear strength exceed-
ing 5 kg/cm2 is specified by the author’s company for PE and
PP coatings. A rough finish with PE powder is the most usual
solution. It leads to shear strength of 10 kg/cm2, to be com-
pared with values lower than 2 for a smooth surface.
Fusion Bonded Epoxy (FBE). FBE was developed in the
USA and introduced in Europe (mainly UK) in the 70's. First
use by the author’s company was in 1976 for a flare line of
Frigg field (North Sea) due to a low minimum design service
temperature. However, the first main reason for choosing FBE
instead of PE was high temperature (above 60°C). Examples
were Sahmah 10" 100 km long oil pipeline in Oman in 1979,
Lacq gas pipelines in 1980, offhore Angola in 1984. A good
behaviour of the powders selected by lab tests was generally
observed, but some problems appeared above 90°C: local blis-
ters on an onshore line operating at 95°C (Lacq), massive blis-
tering on the hottest side (100 to 110°C) of an offshore line
(Angola). Recent failures have been detected and investigated
on a FBE coated pipeline in France; this case story is detailed
in a specific paragraph.
The second main reason for selecting FBE was the use of
offshore reel barge, the aim being to avoid heat-shrinkable
sleeves or cold applied tapes for girth weld coating. Good re-
sults were provided except when thickness was too excessive
at overlaps between field and parent coatings (cracks). This
solution is no more as attractive now as reconstitution of PP
coating at field joints is easily carried out.
Three-layer Polyethylene (3LPE). An epoxy primer layer
has been introduced at the end of the 70's to improve peeling
strength of extruded PE coatings (> 600 N/50mm) and ca-
thodic disbonding. The first use for the author’s company was
in 1980 offshore Gabon for 6" and 8" lines. This coating be-
came the standard choice for PE coatings from the late 80's,
using powder epoxy and LDPE (branched structure). PEMD
or PEHD (linear structure) together with grafted adhesive are
now mandatory, because of higher mechanical and thermal
resistances.
A general good performance has been obtained, but some
problems of massive loss of adhesion between epoxy and steel
have been reported in various countries such as India20, South
America21, Pakistan or Iran. In 2003, Total has undertaken a
survey in their operating subsidiaries in order to identify and
explain such potential problems. A first case has been found in
SPE93600
Syria in 2000 (local disbonding without corrosion). More re-
cently, important failures have been detected and investigated
on the Rabi – Cap Lopez 18” pipeline system in Gabon; this
case story is detailed in a specific paragraph. No case of dis-
bonding has been identified on offshore pipelines.
Three-layer Polypropylene (3LPP). This coating was intro-
duced at the end of the 80's, mainly for high temperature resis-
tance, due to failures with FBE above 90°C and demand for
higher operating temperatures. It is also interesting for higher
mechanical resistance than 3LPE (selection for rough trans-
portation conditions or rocky soils). Adherence is higher than
3LPE and maintained at high temperature (> 250N/50mm at
100°C). The first use by the author’s company was in 1990
offshore Angola for temperature about 110°C. No failure has
been reported up to now.
Field joint coatings. ISO 13623 recommends that perform-
ance of field joint coatings should be as good as or even better
than the performance of plant-applied coatings of pipes.
Cold applied tapes. For offshore applications, tapes have
been the traditional choice for field joint coating of pipes
coated with asphalt or coal tar enamels and with concrete
weight coating, together with a marine mastic joint infill. They
are no more used by the author’s Company on new projects.
Heat shrinkable sleeves (HSS). PE based heat shrinkable
sleeves constitute the classical solution used by the author’s
company, especially for PE coated pipelines, onshore and off-
shore, with or without concrete weight coating and eventually
joint infill. Fast curing epoxy liquid primer is systematically
used to improve adherence for onshore applications as the
time necessary for this operation does not cause any problem
and because there is an important risk related to corrosion un-
der disbondments. Recently, important failures have been de-
tected and investigated on the Rabi – Cap Lopez 18” pipeline
system in Gabon; this case story is detailed in a specific para-
graph. Fast curing epoxy liquid primer is not generally used on
traditional lay barges. Some specific PE based heat shrinkable
sleeves are used with 3LPP pipe coatings up to a temperature
not yet fully established.
PP based heat shrinkable sleeves have been qualified to be
used with 3LPP coatings up to 110 °C operating temperature.
When fully qualified, heat shrinkable sleeves constitute the
simplest method for field joint coating on conventional lay
barge. At high temperatures, it is however necessary to per-
form the same first steps of operations than with “reconstituted
coatings”, i.e. abrasive blast cleaning, heating up to 200 °C
and application of a FBE primer.
Reconstitution of epoxy-polyolefin coatings. Various so-
lutions exist to reconstitute a complex coating at field joints
which is more or less similar to the 3 layer polyolefin plant
coating:
• Coatings from flame spray polypropylene: It consists of
the application of an epoxy resin primer, in the form of
powder by flocking or by electrostatic spray, or in liquid
form applied by spraying, covered with a coat of modified
polypropylene powder applied by spraying or flame
spraying and then the coating thickness is obtained apply-
ing modified polypropylene powder by flame spraying.
5
• Coatings from hot applied chemically modified polypro-
pylene tapes: It consists of the application of an epoxy
resin primer coat, in the form of powder by dusting or by
electrostatic spray, or in liquid form applied by spraying,
covered with a coat of chemically modified polypropyl-
ene powder applied by spraying and then the coating
thickness is obtained by wrapping hot polypropylene tape
either in a spiral way or in cigarette way.
• Coatings from injected polypropylene: It consists of the
application of an epoxy resin primer coat, in the form of
powder by dusting or by electrostatic spray, or in liquid
form applied by spraying, covered with a coat of modified
polypropylene powder applied by spraying and then the
coating thickness is obtained injecting polypropylene in a
proper mould.
The author’s company has experience with the two first
processes, with success provided that a strict prequalification
of the applicator is carried out in the precise conditions of the
project. Oxygen Induction Time (OIT) is a critical parameter
to be checked for ensuring acceptable oxidation level for
flame-spray applications.
Riser coatings. Specific coatings are applied on pipeline risers
supported by conventional platforms because they have to be
especially mechanically resistant for tidal and splash zone
offshore conditions. SCR suspended below water surface are
coated with more traditional coatings.
Glass Reinforced Plastic (GRP). 8mm thick Glass Rein-
forced Epoxy coatings has been developed in France 30 years
ago. These coatings may withstand temperatures higher than
100°C provided that the resin and the curing process are
adapted for these service conditions. For higher temperatures,
epoxy resin may be replaced by specific vinylester resin.
These coatings have been used with success mainly in Gulf
of Guinea and North Sea. However, some cases of disbond-
ments at the upper end have been noticed, sometimes leading
to corrosion in the air exposed area after 10 to 20 years of ex-
posure. In some cases corrosion was severe, leading occasion-
ally to leakage. This was due to specifically aggressive condi-
tions occurring at the transition zone between the thick riser
coating and paint system where protection continuity is diffi-
cult to achieve. Water from the atmosphere may introduce at
the end of the coating and disbond it, leading to undercutting
process due to swelling of corrosion products. Repairs have
been carried out using glass reinforced epoxy applied on site.
To prevent this risk, it may be decided to extend the riser coat-
ing up to at least 2m above the conventional splash zone upper
level (generally at + 4m) or even up to the first deck level for
allowing easy inspection and maintenance.
Elastomeric (rubber) coatings. Polychloroprene or EPDM
(for temperatures higher than 90°C) constitute the conven-
tional solution used worldwide, but several disbondments
were encountered (Heimdal, Indonesia): bonding to steel is
very critical. Both primer and bonding agent are mandatory to
reduce disbonding risk.
Important corrosion may occur in the splash and atmos-
pheric zones. Like for Glass Reinforced Epoxy coatings, cor-
rosion was sometimes severe and inspection helped to dis-
cover the problem before leakage. This is either due to espe-
6 SPE93600

cially aggressive conditions occurring at the transition zone
between the thick riser coating and the aerial paint system or
to direct massive disbondments of rubber coating. Transition
zone between rubber type riser coating and three layer poly-
olefin pipeline coating constitutes a critical point where it is
necessary to find a coating avoiding gap of protection and
allowing a good adherence between all the coatings. A good
solution consists in using a cast elastomeric polyurethane 10 to
20 mm thick.
Case stories of failures on modern pipeline coatings
The general behaviour of the “modern” coatings is good but
questing a minimum of 70 micrometers FBE and followed-up
by company inspectors. Field joint coating used heat-
shrinkable sleeves with hot-melt adhesive applied on fast-
curing liquid epoxy (nominal maximum operating temperature
80°C). Brush-cleaning was used for surface preparation, abra-
sive blast cleaning being only recommended by the supplier
and not mandatory. The application was fully surveyed by a
company inspector.
0
-0.5
-1

Heat Flow (mW)

some problems appeared in some specific cases on onshore -1.5
99.6°C
pipelines, sometimes after a short service life. Two recent case -2

stories are presented. -2.5

93.7°C
-3
FBE coated pipeline. Corrosion under blistered FBE oc- -3.5
curred on a 18", 7.9mm thick, 8.9 km long onshore buried -4
pipeline transporting alternatively hot (80°C) heavy fuels from 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

a refinery to storage facilities and crude oil (40°C) in the other température °C
direction. (a): DSC runs with conventional cells: “Dry Tg”
Corrosion was detected in 1998 through intelligent pigging -30
and DCVG inspection, after 10 years operation. Blistering of -30.5
-31
such a FBE coating (0.42mm thick, Tg =100°C) at tempera- Heat Flow (mW)
-31.5
89 °C
ture not exceeding 80°C is not usual and it is much more diffi- -32
cult to explain why corrosion occurred in spite of a good effi- -32.5 82 °C
-33
ciency of ICCP, a supposed advantage of FBE being not to -33.5
present the risk of “cathodic protection shielding effect”. A -34
study was carried out by IFP (French Institute of Petroleum) -34.5
-35
showing that blistering may be explained by decrease of me-
40 90 140
chanical characteristics and increase of ionic mobility at 80°C.
température (°C)
A “Wet Tg” or “plasticized Tg” of 80°C has been measured
using a closed cell for DSC, to be compared with the conven- (b): DSC runs with closed cells: “Wet Tg”
tionally measured “dry Tg” value of 100°C for this coating
(see Fig.2 a and b). This constitutes a promising new ap- Fig. 2 (a and b): Evidence of a “Wet Tg” on a failed FBE coating
proach for studying epoxy mechanical and electrical proper-
ties22. Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy (EIS) con- 1.E+10 1.E+14
module de Z
firmed a break in the impedance curve at 80°C, where barrier résistivité
1.E+13

properties of the coating decrease significantly (see Fig.3). On 1.E+09

1.E+12

résistivité (ohm.cm)
another hand, corrosion under blisters may be due to lack of 1.E+11
IZI 1 Hz (ohm)

80°C
permeability to CP current when the pipeline operates at lower 1.E+08
1.E+10

1.E+09
temperatures.
1.E+08
1.E+07
1.E+07
3LPE and HSS coated pipeline. A case of severe corrosion 1.E+06
associated with disbonding of coatings has been recently dis- 1.E+06 1.E+05
covered on a 234 km long 18’’ X60 pipeline system transport- 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
3883-jg.csv température (°C)
ing oil between Rabi field and Cap Lopez terminal in Gabon.
This pipeline is composed of 3 sections electrically discon-
Fig. 3: EIS on a failed FBE coating
nected at pig traps:
− Section 1: Rabi – Batanga, 105 km, laid in 1988/89 The failures. The entire pipeline system was inspected us-
− Section 2: Batanga – Tchengué, 100 km, laid in 1988/89 ing a MFL intelligent pig in January 2004. 13600 features
− Section 3: Tchengué – Cap Lopez, 29 km, laid in were reported, the majority of which being in the first 13 km
1993/94. (hottest side). All the signals were due to external corrosion,
Pipe inlet temperature is 60°C minimum, consecutive to the majority (12494) at less than 20% wt, 1168 between 20
heating above inversion point for prevention of wax deposi- and 40%, 11 greater than 40% wall thickness, and the maxi-
tion. Soil is wet compacted sand (pH of sample 5.4). 3LPE mum being 57%, close to section 1 pipe inlet. Excavations in
coatings using low density PE (nominal maximum operating this area confirmed the information of intelligent pig survey.
temperature 70°C) were applied on line pipes in France and The major part of corrosion is located under field joint
Germany in compliance with the company specification re- coatings at girth welds, massive disbonding of HSS leading to
corrosion caused by the “cathodic protection shielding effect”
SPE93600
(see Fig.4 and Fig.5). Excavations revealed that adhesive was
molten on the whole surface, but bonding on plant applied PE
coating failed due to brush abrasion limited to bevels of coat-
ing.
Fig. 4: Disbonding of HSS
Fig. 5: Corrosion underneath disbonding of HSS
3LPE plant applied coating generally appears externally
correct but was found fully disbonded (when cut with a tool)
between FBE and steel at the excavation locations near section
1 inlet. Except the presence of an important layer of magnetite
on the steel surface, no significant corrosion of the steel was
noticed (see Fig.6). However, the analysis of inspection pig
data showed that some corrosion was found under PE plant-
applied coating on some pipe lengths (46 tubes, all in the first
13 km, except one). Excavations showed that in this case PE
coating was longitudinally cracked and opened at 3 and 9
o’clock (see Fig.7). No correlation between cracking/opening
and bending during laying was found (4 pipes bent over 46).
Measurements on samples taken from disbonded coatings re-
vealed an important thermal aging of PE (loss of elongation at
break, increase of melt index and Shore D hardness and typi-
cal peaks of aged PE on surface IR spectrum).
As further excavations carried out at all the other inlets and
outlets of the 3 pipeline sections and on spare pipes did not
reveal any disbonding of coatings or aging of PE, it can be
concluded that the major parameter for disbonding and corro-
7
sion is temperature. No significant influence of cathodic over-
protection (alone) has been noticed: Section 1 was highly
overprotected (-6.4 V/sat.Cu-CuSO4) in 1991 during 2 months
due to dysfunctioning of an automatic solar cells powered CP
station caused by lightning damage.
Fig. 6: Disbonding of 3LPE
Fig. 7: Cracking of disbonded 3LPE
Analysis of problem. Possible explanation for disbonding
of 3LPE is:
− water and oxygen diffusion through PE (accelerated by
thermal aging and temperature);
− water saturation of FBE layer;
− superficial corrosion of steel surface forming magnetite;
− all steps being accelerated by temperature.
Corrosion under disbonded 3LPE only occurs when it is also
cracked due to thermal aging, which leads to an important gap
between disbonded coating and steel allowing renewal of ag-
gressive species.
Disbonding of HSS may be due to:
− temperature effect;
− surface preparation by brush cleaning;
− penetration of water at disbonded overlaps over 3LPE
plant coating.
Corrosion under disbonded HSS may be due to:
− penetration of water through disbonded overlaps;
− shielding effect preventing CP;
8 SPE93600

− acceleration of corrosion rate by temperature. adapted to achieve the best protection level (insulating
From now it has been decided that abrasive blast cleaning of joints, additional cathodic protection stations,…);
girth welds is mandatory when HSS is applied over a liquid • As long as coatings remain bonded to steel and cathodic
epoxy on onshore pipelines. protection is correctly applied, monitored and maintained,
Investigations in the field will be continued, especially no corrosion risk exists. Disbonding may prevent access
through excavations in different locations, for a better knowl- of cathodic protection current to steel exposed to a corro-
edge of the effect of temperature on coating disbonding and sive electrolyte ("cathodic shielding effect") and cause ex-
thermal aging and of the status of 3LPE where corrosion has ternal corrosion for onshore pipelines but this risk does
been detected. DCVG and CIPS measurements appeared to be not seem to be significant offshore;
somewhat efficient to detect the problem. Field tests will be • In addition to the metal loss corrosion process, disbonded
continued. coatings may lead to various forms of Environmentally
On another hand, lab programmes are launched to study PE Induced Cracking which should be assessed for onshore
thermal aging and to investigate the parameters which may be pipelines;
significant in coating disbonding such as surface preparation • For offshore pipelines, the major risk of corrosion con-
(chloride or grease contamination, rugosity profile or brush cerns the transition zone between the thick riser coatings
cleaning vs. abrasive cleaning for HSS), epoxy materials, and the atmospheric paint system, where water may dam-
thickness of FBE, effect of temperature, cathodic overprotec- age the bonding;
tion. Concerning epoxy materials, their precise chemistry (e.g. • In-line inspection using intelligent pigs constitutes the
the dicyandiamide content23) could explain various behaviours most efficient inspection method for a corrosion risk
due to their specific interaction with water. management programme applied to pipelines, including
for detection of external corrosion under disbonded coat-
Standardisation: a way for improvement ings;
Important efforts are currently produced in the field of Interna- • It is necessary to study the parameters which lead to dis-
tional Standardization (ISO) for specifying the best compro- bonding of 3LPE coatings;
mises for pipeline coatings and cathodic protection.
• Sharing experience feed-back is necessary to better un-
National24-30 and Regional (EN in Europe31-35, Austral-
derstand these parameters and modify specifications for
asia36-37) standards exist for specifying pipeline coatings, to-
improving reliability of coatings and reducing corrosion
gether with Recommended Practices, especially written by
risks.
NACE International38-40. Presently, significant efforts are pro-
duced to write ISO standards in the frame of ISO TC67 SC2 • Important efforts are currently produced in the field of
WG14 (Oil & Gas Industry – Pipelines – Coatings). A series International Standardization (ISO) for specifying the best
of parts of the future ISO 21809 on “Petroleum and natural gas compromises for pipeline coatings and cathodic protec-
industries - External coatings for buried and submerged pipe- tion.
lines used in pipeline transportation systems” will be issued
within a few years, the first ones being: Acknowledgements
• ISO 21809-1, Three layer polyolefin coatings The author wishes to thank his Company and affiliates for
• ISO 21809-2, Fusion-bonded epoxy powder coatings permitting the publication of this paper. He thanks also very
much his colleagues who supplied information and comments
• ISO 21809-3, Field joint coatings
for the preparation of the paper.
• ISO 21809-4, Two layer polyethylene coatings
The standard on field joint coatings will codify the various
Nomenclature
families of coatings, specify general requirements and detail
CBF Coating Breakdown Factor
specificities for each of the families.
CIPS Close Interval Potential Survey
The new ISO and CEN standards concerning cathodic pro-
CP Cathodic Protection
tection of pipelines have been mentioned hereabove.
DCVG Direct Current Voltage Gradient
DSC Differential Scanning Calorimetry
Conclusions
EIS Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy
• A comprehensive Corrosion Management system should EPDM Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer
be implemented for pipelines from the design stage to FBE Fusion Bonded Epoxy
abandonment in order to ensure the safest condition for FPSO Floating Production, Storage and Offloading
these strategic assets during the whole operation lifetime; GRP Glassfibre Reinforced Plastic
• It is highly recommended that onshore pipelines be buried HISC Hydrogen Induced Stress Cracking
or immersed, including flow-lines; HSS Heat Shrinkable Sleeve
• The best guaranty for ensuring external corrosion preven- ICCP Impressed Current Cathodic Protection
tion of buried or immersed pipelines is based on adequate 3LPE 3 Layer Polyethylene
cathodic protection and qualified and well applied and in- 3LPP 3 Layer Polypropylene
spected plant and field applied coatings; MFL Magnetic Flux Leakage
• For existing flow-lines laying above ground, when sup- MIC Microbiologically Induced Corrosion
porting is not possible, cathodic protection has to be MMO Mixed Metal oxides
OIT Oxidation Induction Time
SPE93600 9

PE Polyethylene 22. Sauvant-Moynot V., Schweitzer S., Grenier J., Duval J.: “Ep-
PP Polypropylene oxy coatings for anticorrosion challenges: a link between chem-
PU Polyurethane istry and performance?”, Eurocorr’2004, Nice, France, Sept. 13-
SCC Stress Corrosion Cracking 16, 2004
23. Tsuri S. et al.: “Effect of primer composition on cathodic dis-
SCR Steel Catenary Riser bonding resistance and adhesion durability of three layer poly-
Tg Temperature of glass transition ethylene coated steel pipe”, paper 497, NACE International cor-
TLP Tension Leg Platform rosion/98, San Diego, Cal., USA, March 22-27
24. NF A49-710, “Steel pipes: External coating with three layer
References polyethylene based coating : application by extrusion”
1. ISO 13623 - 2000, “Petroleum and Natural Gas pipelines - 25. NF A49-711, “Steel pipes: External coating with three layer
Pipeline transportation systems” polypropylene based coating : application by extrusion”
2. Roche M., Samaran J.P., “Pipeline coatings Performance: Field 26. NF A49-716, “Steel tubes – External constitution of tube and
experience of an operating petroleum company”, Corrosion/87 fitting coating for welded joints” (in french)
paper n° 28, NACE International, 1987, Materials Performance, 27. DIN 30670, “Polyethylene coating of steel pipes and compo-
Nov. 1987, p.28 nents”
3. Roche M., Auclair P., Couget P., “Progress in pipeline protec- 28. DIN 30678, “Polypropylene coating of steel pipes and compo-
tion and inspection – The experience of Elf Gabon”, 8th Interna- nents”
tional Conference on Internal and External Protection of Pipes, 29. CAN / CSA-Z245.20-02, “External Fusion Bond Epoxy coating
BHRA, 1990, Florence, Italy for steel pipe”
4. Roche M., “Corrosion hazards related to pipes: How to control 30. CAN / CSA-Z245.21-02, “External Polyethylene coating for
them”, Offshore Hazards and their Prevention, London, 30 April pipe”
– 1 May, 1990 31. EN 10288, “Steel pipes and fittings for onshore and offshore
5. Roche M., “Coating disbondment leads causes of external pipe- pipelines — External two-layer extruded polyethylene based
line corrosion”, Oil & Gas Journal, p.49, April 1st, 1991 coatings”
6. Roche M., “Systematic program and internal inspection keys to 32. EN 10289, “Steel pipes and fittings for onshore and offshore
corrosion control”, Oil & Gas Journal, p.72, April 8, 1991 pipelines — External liquid applied epoxy and epoxy-modified
7. Roche M., “TotalFinaElf experience in corrosion management coatings”
of pipelines”, 2nd Conference of Corrosion in Oil Industry, Te- 33. EN 10290, “Steel pipes and fittings for onshore and offshore
hran, Iran, 18-19 Feb., 2003 pipelines — External liquid applied polyurethane and polyure-
8. Roche M., “How Total manage pipeline corrosion control”, 15th thane-modified coatings”
International Conference on internal and External Pipeline Pro- 34. EN 12068, “Cathodic protection — External organic coatings
tection, BHR Group, Aachen, Germany, 29-31 Oct., 2003 for the corrosion protection of buried or immersed steel pipe-
9. Roche M., “An experience in offshore pipeline coatings”, Cor- lines used in conjunction with cathodic protection — Tapes and
rosion/2004 paper n° 04018, NACE International, 2004 shrinkable materials”
10. NACE RP 01-69, “Control of External Corrosion on Under- 35. EN 10329, “Steel tubes and fittings for onshore and offshore
ground or Submerged Metallic Piping Systems” pipelines – External field joint coatings”
11. EN 12954, “Cathodic Protection of buried or immersed metallic 36. AS/NZS 3862: 2002, Australian/New Zealand Standard, “Exter-
structures – General principles and application for pipelines” nal fusion-bonded epoxy coating for steel pipes”
12. ISO 15589-1, “Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Cathodic 37. AS/NZS 1518: 2002, Australian/New Zealand Standard, “Exter-
Protection of pipeline transportation systems – Part 2: Pipelines nal extruded high-density polyethylene coating system for
on land” pipes”
13. NACE TM 04-97, “Measurement Techniques Related to Criteria 38. NACE RP 0394, “Application, performance, and quality control
for Cathodic Protection on Underground or Submerged Metallic of plant-applied, fusion-bonded epoxy external pipe coating”
Piping Systems” 39. NACE RP 0402, “Field-applied fusion-bonded epoxy (FBE)
14. EN 13509, “Cathodic Protection measurement techniques” pipe coating systems for girth weld joints: Application, perform-
15. DNV RP B401, “Cathodic Protection Design”, 1993 ance, and quality control”
16. NACE RP 06-75, “Control of External Corrosion on Offshore 40. NACE RP 0303, “Field-applied Heat-shrinkable sleeves for
Steel Pipelines” pipelines: Application, performance, and quality control”
17. EN 12474, “Cathodic Protection of Submarine Pipelines”
18. ISO 15589-2, “Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Cathodic
Protection of pipeline transportation systems – Part 2: Offshore
Pipelines”
19. Eliassen S., “A new concept for cathodic protection of offshore
pipelines to reduce Hydrogen induced Stress Cracking (HISC) in
high strength stainless materials”, Eurocorr’2003, Budapest,
Hungary, Sept.28-Oct.2, 2003
20. Tandon K.K., Swamy G.V., Saha G., “Performance of three
layer polyethylene coating on a cross country pipeline – a case
study”, 14th International Conference on Pipeline Protection,
BHR Group, Barcelona, Spain, 29-31 October, 2001
21. Portesan G., Taves J., Guidetti G., “Cases of massive disbond-
ment with three layer PE pipeline coatings”, Cathodic protection
and associated coatings, CEFRACOR, EFC Event nr 254, Aix-
en-Provence, France, 6-7 June, 2002