A
Agenda
American Petroleum Institute
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INSPECTION
TASK GROUP ON SCI CODES AND STANDARDS
8:30 am – 4:30 pm
Monday
April 23, 2012
Hyatt Regency Dallas
Dallas, Texas
D. Wang, Chairman
J. Krynicki, Vice Chair
1.
OPENING/INTRODUCTIONS/ATTENDANCE SHEET/ROSTER
D. Wang
2.
ANNOUNCEMENTS OF OTHER INSPECTION RELATED MEETINGS
D. Wang
API 941 High Temperature Hydrogen Attack
NDE Task Group / NDE Qualification
Welcome Reception
RP 585 Pressure Equipment Incident Investigation
RP 581 Risk Based Inspection
RP 583 Base Resource on CUI
SCAST Fabrication SG – 653/620 Ballots
RP 584 Integrity Operating Windows
Manufacturers an Contractors
Task Group on API 570 and RP 574
RP 581 Risk Based Inspection - Tank Ballot
RP 576 Inspection of PRDs
Individual Certification Task Group
Task Group on RP 580
SCI Joint Meeting
Inspector Certification Exam Construction
Inspector Certification Exam Construction
Mon, 1:30 pm – 5:30 pm
Mon, 4:30 pm – 6:00 pm
Mon, 6:00 pm – 7:00 pm
Tue, 7:30 am – 10:00 am
Tue, 7:30 pm – 11:00 pm
Tue, 10:00 am – 1:30 pm
Tue, 1:00 pm
Tue, 1:30 pm – 3:30 pm
Tue, 4:00 pm – 6:00 pm
Wed, 7:30 am – 9:00 am
Wed, 7:30 pm – 10:30 pm
Wed, 9:00 am – 10:30 am
Wed, 10:00 am – 12:00 pm
Wed, 10:30 am – 12:00 pm
Wed, 1:00 pm – 5:00 pm
Thur, 7:00 am – 5:00 pm
Fri, 7:00 am – 5:00 pm
3.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
D. Wang
4.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM NOVE 2011
D. Wang
5.
BALLOT 570-11-01: EXTERNAL VISUAL INSPECTION PERSONNEL
D. Wang
-1-
6.
BALLOT 570-2012-01: API 570 SECTION 8.3d, REQUEST TO MODIFY
FOR CONSISTENCY WITH API 510
7.
API 510 BALLOT RESOLUTION
8.
OLD BUSINESS
M. Geisenhoff
A. 570 Draft Ballot: Alteration of Verbiage Around Inspection Intervals
9.
J. Krynicki
R. Sitton
NEW BUSINESS
A. 570 Draft Ballot: Addition of alternatives to PWHT to API 570
B. Technical Inquiry – 2012-510-01, Rerating Requirement for Inspector to
Witness Attachment of Nameplate
J. Monroe
R. Konet
10. NEXT MEETING
Los Angeles, California, November 12, 2012
11. ADJOURN
-2-
D. Wang
-3-
Ballot 570-2012-XX
Title:
Alteration of Verbiage Around Inspection Intervals
Date:
May 16, 2011
Contact:
Name:
Ryan Sitton
Company: PinnacleAIS
Phone:
281-598-1330
E-mail:
ryan.sitton@pinnacleais.com
Purpose:
Improve verbiage to be more clear around requirements for UT intervals related to use of RBI.
Source:
Generated from Codes Task Group, Scorecard item 570-068
Revision:
0
Rationale: The current structure of section 6.3.2 and 6.3.3 around intervals for inspection is not completely
clear.
Notes:
The following is the applicable sections from API 570, with tracked proposed changes.
6.3.2 Scheduling Inspections
The owner/user or the inspector shall establish schedule for inspection activities such as thickness
measurements and external visual inspections and, where applicable, for internal and supplemental
inspections. The interval between inspections shall be based on a standard set of rules for inspection
intervals or utilizing RBI. This interval shall be reviewed and adjusted as necessary after each inspection
or significant change in operating conditions. General corrosion, localized corrosion, pitting,
environmental cracking, and other applicable forms of deterioration mentioned in Section 5 shall be
considered when establishing the various inspection intervals.
6.3.2.1 Rule Based Inspection Scheduling
When the inspections are based on a set of rules, the interval between piping inspections shall be
established and maintained using the following criteria:
a) corrosion rate and remaining life calculations;
b) piping service classification (see 6.3.4);
c) applicable jurisdictional requirements;
d) judgment of the inspector, the piping engineer, the piping engineer supervisor, or a materials specialist,
based on operating conditions, previous inspection history, current inspection results, and conditions that
may warrant supplemental inspections covered in 5.5.6.
Thickness measurements should be scheduled at intervals that do not exceed the lesser of one half the
remaining life determined from corrosion rates indicated in 7.1.1.1 or the maximum intervals
recommended in Table 2. Shorter intervals may be appropriate under certain circumstances. Prior to
using Table 2, corrosion rates shall be calculated in accordance with 7.1.1.1.
Table 2 contains recommended maximum inspection intervals for Classes 1, 2 and 3 of piping services
described in 6.3.4, as well as recommended intervals for injection points and S/A interfaces. Maximum
-4-
intervals for Class 4 piping are left to the determination of the owner/user depending upon reliability and
business needs.
6.3.2.2 Inspection Scheduling Based on RBI
An RBI assessment may be used to establish the appropriate timing of inspections, and increase or
decrease the inspection limits described in Table 2. Similarly, the extent of inspection may be increased
or decreased beyond the targets in Table 3, by an RBI assessment. When used to increase inspection
interval limits or the extent of inspection, RBI assessments shall be conducted at intervals not to exceed
the respective limits in Table 2, or more often if warranted by process, equipment, or consequence
changes. These RBI assessments shall be reviewed and approved by a piping engineer and authorized
piping inspector at intervals not to exceed the respective limits in Table 2, or more often if warranted by
process, equipment, or consequence changes.
-5-
Ballot 570-2012-xx
Title:
Addition of alternatives to PWHT to API 570
Date:
January 14, 2012
Contact:
Name:
Justin Monroe
Company: Chevron
Phone:
(832)-790-9026
E-mail:
justin.monroe@chevron.com
Purpose:
Currently API 570 does not allow for alternatives to PWHT. Both API 510 section 8.1.6.4.2 and
API 653 section 11.3 provide similar alternatives of preheat and CDW.
Source:
Scorecard item 570-041
Revision:
0
Impact:
This agenda item broadens the scope of API 570 by providing guidance on use of preheat and
CDW as alteratives to PWHT, making API 570 more useful.
Rationale: Since both API 510 and API 653 allow alternatives to PWHT, API 570 should be adjusted to
align these documents.
Proposal: The proposed change is shown below.
8.2.3.2 Preheating
Preheat temperature used in making welding repairs shall be in accordance with the applicable code and
qualified welding procedure. Exceptions for temporary repairs shall be approved by the piping engineer.
Preheating to not less than 300 °F (150 °C) may be considered as an alternative to PWHT for alterations or
repairs of piping systems initially PWHT as a code requirement (see note). This applies to piping constructed
of the P-1 steels listed in ASME B31.3. P-3 steels, with the exception of Mn-Mo steels, also may receive the
300 °F (150 °C) minimum preheat alternative when the piping system operating temperature is high enough
to provide reasonable toughness and when there is no identifiable hazard associated with pressure testing,
shutdown, and startup. The inspector should determine that the minimum preheat temperature is measured
and maintained. After welding, the joint should immediately be covered with insulation to slow the cooling
rate.
NOTE Preheating may not be considered as an alternative to environmental cracking prevention.
Piping systems constructed of other steels initially requiring PWHT normally are postweld heat treated if
alterations or repairs involving pressure retaining welding are performed. The use of the preheat alternative
requires consultation with the piping engineer who should consider the potential for environmental cracking
and whether the welding procedure will provide adequate toughness. Examples of situations where this
alternative could be considered include seal welds, weld metal buildup of thin areas, and welding support
clips.
8.2.4 Preheat or Controlled Deposition Welding Methods as Alternatives to Postweld Heat Treatment
Preheat and controlled deposition welding, as described in 8.2.4.1 and 8.2.4.2, may be used in lieu of PWHT where
PWHT is required by API 570 or was performed in the original construction but is inadvisable or mechanically
unnecessary for the repair. Prior to using any alternative method, a metallurgical review conducted by an engineer shall
be performed to assure the proposed alternative is suitable for the application. That review shall consider factors such as
the reason for the original PWHT of the equipment, susceptibility to stress corrosion cracking, stresses in the location of
the weld, susceptibility to high temperature hydrogen attack, susceptibility to creep, etc.
-6-
Selection of the welding method used shall be based on the rules of the construction code applicable to the work planned
along with technical consideration of the adequacy of the weld in the as-welded condition at operating and pressure test
conditions.
When reference is made in this section to materials by the ASME designation, P-Number and Group Number, the
requirements of this section apply to the applicable materials of the original code of construction, either ASME or other,
which conform by chemical composition and mechanical properties to the ASME P-Number and Group Number
designations.
Process piping constructed of steels other than those listed in 8.2.4.1 and 8.2.4.2, that initially required PWHT, shall be
postweld heat treated if alterations or repairs involving pressure boundary welding are performed. When one of the
following methods is used as an alternative to PWHT, the PWHT joint efficiency factor may be continued if the factor
has been used in the currently rated design.
8.2.4.1 Preheating Method (Notch Toughness Testing Not Required)
The preheating method, when performed in lieu of PWHT, is limited to the following materials and weld processes:
a.
b.
c.
d.
The materials shall be limited to P-No. 1, Group 1, 2, and 3, and to P-No. 3, Group 1 and 2 (excluding Mn-Mo
steels in Group
The welding shall be limited to the shielded-metal-arc welding (SMAW), gas-metal-arc welding (GMAW), and
gas-tungstenarc, flux-cored arc welding (FCAW) and welding (GTAW) processes.
The welders and welding procedures shall be qualified in accordance with the applicable rules of the original
code of construction, except that the PWHT of the test coupon used to qualify the procedure shall be omitted.
The weld area shall be preheated and maintained at a minimum temperature of 300°F (150°C) during welding.
The 300°F (150°C) temperature should be checked to assure that 4 in. (100 mm) of the material or four times
the material thickness (whichever is greater) on each side of the groove is maintained at the minimum
temperature during welding. The maximum interpass temperature shall not exceed 600°F (315°C). When the
weld does not penetrate through the full thickness of the material, the minimum preheat and maximum
interpass temperatures need only be maintained at a distance of 4 in. (100 mm) or four times the depth of the
repair weld, whichever is greater on each side of the joint.
Note: Notch toughness testing is not required when using this preheat method in lieu of PWHT.
8.2.4.2 Controlled-deposition Welding Method (Notch Toughness Testing Required)
The controlled-deposition welding method may be used in lieu of PWHT in accordance with the following:
a. Notch toughness testing, such as that established by ASME B31.1, Chapter III Section 323, is necessary when
impact tests are required by the original code of construction or the construction code applicable to the work
planned.
b. The materials shall be limited to P-No. 1, P-No. 3, and P-No. 4 steels.
c. The welding shall be limited to the shielded-metal-arc welding (SMAW), gas-metal-arc welding (GMAW),
flux-cored arc welding (FCAW), and gas-tungstenarc welding (GTAW) processes.
d. A weld procedure specification shall be developed and qualified for each application. The welding procedure
shall define the preheat temperature and interpass temperature and include the post heating temperature
requirement in f(8). The qualification thickness for the test plates and repair grooves shall be in accordance with
Table 8-1.
The test material for the welding procedure qualification shall be of the same material specification (including
specification type, grade, class and condition of heat treatment) as the original material specification for the
repair. If the original material specification is obsolete, the test material used should conform as much as
possible to the material used for construction, but in no case shall the material be lower in strength or have a
carbon content of more than 0.35%.
e.
When impact tests are required by the construction code applicable to the work planned, the PQR shall include
sufficient tests to determine if the toughness of the weld metal and the heat-affected zone of the base metal in
the as-welded condition is adequate at the minimum design metal temperature (such as the criteria used in
ASME Code Section VIII: Division I, parts UG-84 and UCS 66). If special hardness limits are necessary (for
-7-
f.
example, as set forth in NACE RP 0472 and MR 0103) for corrosion resistance, the PQR shall include hardness
tests as well.
The WPS shall include the following additional requirements:
1. The supplementary essential variables of ASME Code, Section IX, Paragraph QW-250, shall apply.
2. The maximum weld heat input for each layer shall not exceed that used in the procedure qualification
test.
3. The minimum preheat temperature for welding shall not be less than that used in the procedure
qualification test.
4. The maximum interpass temperature for welding shall not be greater than that used in the procedure
qualification test.
5. The preheat temperature shall be checked to assure that 4 in. (100 mm) of the material or four times
the material thickness (whichever is greater) on each side of the weld joint will be maintained at the
minimum temperature during welding. When the weld does not penetrate through the full thickness of
the material, the minimum preheat temperature need only be maintained at a distance of 4 in. (100
mm) or four times the depth of the repair weld, whichever is greater on each side of the joint.
6. For the welding processes in 8.1.6.4.2.3c, use only electrodes and filler metals that are classified by
the filler metal specification with an optional supplemental diffusible-hydrogen designator of H8 or
lower. When shielding gases are used with a process, the gas shall exhibit a dew point that is no higher
than –60°F (–50°C). Surfaces on which welding will be done shall be maintained in a dry condition
during welding and free of rust, mill scale and hydrogen producing contaminants such as oil, grease
and other organic materials.
7. The welding technique shall be a controlled-deposition, temper-bead or half-bead technique. The
specific technique shall be used in the procedure qualification test.
8. For welds made by SMAW, after completion of welding and without allowing the weldment to cool
below the minimum preheat temperature, the temperature of the weldment shall be raised to a
temperature of 500°F ± 50°F (260°C ± 30°C) for a minimum period of two hours to assist out-gassing
diffusion of any weld metal hydrogen picked up during welding. This hydrogen bake-out treatment
may be omitted provided the electrode used is classified by the filler metal specification with an
optional supplemental diffusible-hydrogen designator of H4 (such as E7018-H4).
9. After the finished repair weld has cooled to ambient temperature, the final temper bead reinforcement
layer shall be removed substantially flush with the surface of the base material.
Refer to WRC Bulletin 412 for additional supporting technical information regarding controlled deposition welding.
Table 8-1—Welding Methods as Alternatives to Postweld Heat Treatment Qualification Thickness for Test
Plates and Repair Grooves
Depth t of Test Groove
Repair Groove Depth
Thickness T of Test Coupon
Thickness Base Metal
Welded
Qualified
Welded
Qualified
t
<t
< 2 in (50 mm)
<T
t
<t
≥ 2 in (50 mm)
2 in (50 mm) to unlimited
a The depth of the groove used for procedure qualification must be deep enough to allow removal of the required test specimen
-8-
Technical Inquiry – 2012-510-01
Publication Type:
Code
Publication
Number:
510
Edition:
Ninth Edition, June 2006
Addendum/Errata:
Number:
Section
Referenced:
8.2.2
Subject:
Rerating requirement for inspector to witnesses attachment of nameplate or
additional stamping
As an Inspector in Refining for ConocoPhillips for over 20 years, it was seldom
a problem to physically witness or attach the rerate tags myself. I am in a
different world now in Upstream for ConocoPhillips and for me to physically be
present for each attachment may require long drives, even airline flights or
hiring contract API 510 Inspectors to "fill in" for me when it is impractical for
me to be there.
Background:
My inquiry deals with the intent of "witness". Would it be considered meeting
the intent of the code if someone else attached the nameplate that was not a
Certified API 510 Inspector and sent photos confirming its placement and RV
set pressure for Inspector approval at a remote location? Older versions of the
Code used to say that the Inspector had to "oversee" the attachment and even
that appears to me to be subject to interpretation for if the intent is that the
Inspector be physically present.
Below is the section for consideration copied from API 510 9th edition, June
2006:
8.2 Rerating
8.2.2 The pressure vessel rerating will be considered complete when the
inspector witnesses the attachment of an additional nameplate or
additional stamping that carries the information in Figure 8-1.
Question:
Is the intent of the Code in 8.2.2 to require the physical presence on site of the
Inspector in order to "witness" the attachment of the additional nameplate or
stamping?
First Name:
Kelley
-9-
Last Name:
VanLoon
Email:
Kelley.L.VanLoon@ConocoPhillips.com
Company:
ConocoPhillips
Phone:
806-275-3486
Proposed Response: Yes
- 10 -