Asset Integrity Management
Overview
Life-Cycle Management of Pressurized Fixed
Equipment
Tuesday 6 March 2012
API Singapore 2012
Singapore Marina Bay Sands Resort
Philip A. Henry, P.E.
RBI Technical Advisor and Principal Engineer
The Equity Engineering Group, Inc.
Shaker Heights, OH USA
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
2
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?
3
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….”
4
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
5
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
6
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
7
The Life-Cycle Management Process
• Life-Cycle Management
(LCM) for Pressurized Fixed
Equipment: Key Elements
Specify Design Conditions and Identify
Damage Mechanisms
(API 571 & WRC 489)
Select Materials of Construction
Construction Code
ASME VIII-1, VIII-2, VIII-3, B31.3
API 530, 620, 650
– Damage Mechanism
Identification
Commissioning
(Baseline Inspection)
– 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
•
•
In-Service Inspection
(Establish Inspection Interval)
Prescriptive (API 510/570/653,NBIC)
Risk-Based (API 580/581,PCC3)
Continue Service
Anticipated
Damage
Inspection
Results
Unanticipated
Damage
Identify Damage Mechanisms
(API 571, WRC 488, WRC 489, WRC 490)
Technology Integration
– Construction Codes &
Standards
Fitness-For-Service
API 579/ASME FFS-1
Run/Rerate
Repair
Replace
ASME PCC2
8
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
9
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
10
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)
11
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
12
The Life-Cycle Management Process
Construction Codes & Standards
• 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
13
The Life-Cycle Management Process
Construction Codes & Standards
• 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
14
The Life-Cycle Management Process
Construction Codes & Standards
• 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
15
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
16
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
17
The Life-Cycle Management Process
FFS Standard
• ASME and API jointly produce a co-branded Fitness-ForService document, API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 2007 FitnessFor-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
18
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
19
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
20
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 inservice 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!
23
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.
24
The Life-Cycle Management Process
Best Practices
Specify Design Conditions and Identify
Damage Mechanisms
(API 571 & WRC 489)
Select Materials of Construction
Construction Code
ASME VIII-1, VIII-2, VIII-3, B31.3
API 530, 620, 650
•
•
In-Service Inspection
(Establish Inspection Interval)
Prescriptive (API 510/570/653,NBIC)
Risk-Based (API 580/581,PCC3)
Continue Service
Anticipated
Damage
Inspection
Results
Unanticipated
Damage
Identify Damage Mechanisms
(API 571, WRC 488, WRC 489, WRC 490)
Best Practice
Commissioning
(Baseline Inspection)
Technology Integration
• In the proposed LifeCycle Management
(LCM) for pressurized
fixed equipment, a best
practice is an overlay in
the process based on
the corporate knowledge
• Best Practices in
pressurized fixedequipment 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
Fitness-For-Service
API 579/ASME FFS-1
Run/Rerate
Repair
Replace
ASME PCC2
25
LCM Case Study
Analysis of Tubesheet Corrosion
Construction Code
ASME VIII-1, VIII-2, VIII-3, B31.3
API 530, 620, 650
– DP: 300 psig
– DT: 150 °F
•
Tubeside Design conditions
– DP: 800 psig
– DT: 550 °F
•
Materials of Construction
– Shell: CS
– Tubesheet: CS
•
Commissioning
(Baseline Inspection)
Design Corrosion Allowance
•
•
In-Service Inspection
(Establish Inspection Interval)
Prescriptive (API 510/570/653,NBIC)
Risk-Based (API 580/581,PCC3)
Continue Service
Anticipated
Damage
Inspection
Results
Unanticipated
Damage
Identify Damage Mechanisms
(API 571, WRC 488, WRC 489, WRC 490)
– SS: 0.125 in
– TS: 0.125 in
Best Practice
•
•
TEMA Class R Shell & Tube
Heat Exchanger
Hydrocarbon Service
Shellside Design conditions
Technology Integration
•
Specify Design Conditions and Identify
Damage Mechanisms
(API 571 & WRC 489)
Select Materials of Construction
Fitness-For-Service
API 579/ASME FFS-1
Run/Rerate
Repair
Replace
ASME PCC2
26
LCM Case Study
Analysis of Tubesheet Corrosion
Construction Code
ASME VIII-1, VIII-2, VIII-3, B31.3
API 530, 620, 650
– ASME B&PV Code, Section
VIII, Division 1
– TEMA Class R
Commissioning
(Baseline Inspection)
•
•
In-Service Inspection
(Establish Inspection Interval)
Prescriptive (API 510/570/653,NBIC)
Risk-Based (API 580/581,PCC3)
Continue Service
Anticipated
Damage
Inspection
Results
Unanticipated
Damage
Identify Damage Mechanisms
(API 571, WRC 488, WRC 489, WRC 490)
Best Practice
•
TEMA Class R Shell & Tube
Heat Exchanger
Construction Codes
Technology Integration
•
Specify Design Conditions and Identify
Damage Mechanisms
(API 571 & WRC 489)
Select Materials of Construction
Fitness-For-Service
API 579/ASME FFS-1
Run/Rerate
Repair
Replace
ASME PCC2
27
LCM Case Study
Analysis of Tubesheet Corrosion
•
Construction Code
ASME VIII-1, VIII-2, VIII-3, B31.3
API 530, 620, 650
Corrosion Monitoring
Locations (CML) assigned
Commissioning
(Baseline Inspection)
Initial thickness readings
taken at commissioning
•
•
In-Service Inspection
(Establish Inspection Interval)
Prescriptive (API 510/570/653,NBIC)
Risk-Based (API 580/581,PCC3)
Continue Service
Anticipated
Damage
Inspection
Results
Unanticipated
Damage
Identify Damage Mechanisms
(API 571, WRC 488, WRC 489, WRC 490)
Best Practice
•
TEMA Class R Shell & Tube
Heat Exchanger
Technology Integration
•
Specify Design Conditions and Identify
Damage Mechanisms
(API 571 & WRC 489)
Select Materials of Construction
Fitness-For-Service
API 579/ASME FFS-1
Run/Rerate
Repair
Replace
ASME PCC2
28
LCM Case Study
Analysis of Tubesheet Corrosion
•
Construction Code
ASME VIII-1, VIII-2, VIII-3, B31.3
API 530, 620, 650
Local corrosion on the
shellside of a tubesheet
found during a shutdown
Unanticipated damage
based on operating
conditions, fluids, and
materials of construction
Commissioning
(Baseline Inspection)
•
•
In-Service Inspection
(Establish Inspection Interval)
Prescriptive (API 510/570/653,NBIC)
Risk-Based (API 580/581,PCC3)
Continue Service
Anticipated
Damage
Inspection
Results
Unanticipated
Damage
Identify Damage Mechanisms
(API 571, WRC 488, WRC 489, WRC 490)
Best Practice
•
TEMA Class R Shell & Tube
Heat Exchanger
Technology Integration
•
Specify Design Conditions and Identify
Damage Mechanisms
(API 571 & WRC 489)
Select Materials of Construction
Fitness-For-Service
API 579/ASME FFS-1
Run/Rerate
Repair
Replace
ASME PCC2
29
LCM Case Study
Analysis of Tubesheet Corrosion
30
LCM Case Study
Analysis of Tubesheet Corrosion
Construction Code
ASME VIII-1, VIII-2, VIII-3, B31.3
API 530, 620, 650
Damage Mechanism,
accelerated corrosion from
carbonic acid corrosion
Commissioning
(Baseline Inspection)
•
•
In-Service Inspection
(Establish Inspection Interval)
Prescriptive (API 510/570/653,NBIC)
Risk-Based (API 580/581,PCC3)
Continue Service
Anticipated
Damage
Inspection
Results
Unanticipated
Damage
Identify Damage Mechanisms
(API 571, WRC 488, WRC 489, WRC 490)
Best Practice
•
TEMA Class R Shell & Tube
Heat Exchanger
Technology Integration
•
Specify Design Conditions and Identify
Damage Mechanisms
(API 571 & WRC 489)
Select Materials of Construction
Fitness-For-Service
API 579/ASME FFS-1
Run/Rerate
Repair
Replace
ASME PCC2
31
LCM Case Study
Analysis of Tubesheet Corrosion
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
Commissioning
(Baseline Inspection)
•
•
In-Service Inspection
(Establish Inspection Interval)
Prescriptive (API 510/570/653,NBIC)
Risk-Based (API 580/581,PCC3)
Continue Service
Anticipated
Damage
Inspection
Results
Unanticipated
Damage
Identify Damage Mechanisms
(API 571, WRC 488, WRC 489, WRC 490)
Best Practice
•
Construction Code
ASME VIII-1, VIII-2, VIII-3, B31.3
API 530, 620, 650
Technology Integration
•
Specify Design Conditions and Identify
Damage Mechanisms
(API 571 & WRC 489)
Select Materials of Construction
Fitness-For-Service
API 579/ASME FFS-1
Run/Rerate
Repair
Replace
ASME PCC2
32
LCM Case Study
Analysis of Tubesheet Corrosion
33
LCM Case Study
Analysis of Tubesheet Corrosion
34
LCM Case Study
Analysis of Tubesheet Corrosion
– 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
Specify Design Conditions and Identify
Damage Mechanisms
(API 571 & WRC 489)
Select Materials of Construction
Construction Code
ASME 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)
Continue Service
Anticipated
Damage
Inspection
Results
Unanticipated
Damage
Identify Damage Mechanisms
(API 571, WRC 488, WRC 489, WRC 490)
Best Practice
•
Recommendations
Technology Integration
•
Fitness-For-Service
API 579/ASME FFS-1
Run/Rerate
Repair
Replace
ASME PCC2
35
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
36
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
37
Philip A. Henry
email: pahenry@equityeng.com
20600 Chagrin Blvd. • Suite 1200
Shaker Heights, OH 44122 USA
Phone: 216-283-9519 • Fax: 216-283-6022
www.equityeng.com
38