Wednesday, 30th August 2006, Aberdeen - Thainstone House hotel
4th September 2006
Alfred Kruijer
Shell Global Solutions, NL
Ries Langereis (project leader)
Scott Higgins (host)
Eric Wehner
Hugh Parker
Sam McFarland
Thierry Cassagne
Dag Ketil Fredheim
Maarten Kuipers
John McAuley
Tom Golden
Tony Bradford
Cameron, The Netherlands
BP, Scotland
Cameron, TX - USA
Shell, Scotland
Shell Global Solutions, NL
Total, France
Hydro, Norway
Mokveld, The Netherlands
Vetco, Scotland
Halliburton, TX - USA
FMC, Scotland
Jerry Longmire
Mario Schiatti
Dave McCalvin
Anatoly Baryshnikov
Wood Group, TX - USA
Agip, Italy
Schlumberger, TX -USA
Agip, Italy
Neil Reeve
George Huntoon
Andy Redford
Chris Patriarcha
Michel Bretenou
David Stewart
Shell Global Solutions, NL
Shell, TX – USA
Total, France
Shell, The Netherlands
Opening and safety induction
Ries Langereis welcomes everybody. Regrets received from Jerry Longmire (representing AWHEMS).
Eric Wehner will represent AWHEMS this meeting. Scott Higgins performed the safety induction.
Individual personal introduction-background
Ries Langereis. Ex Shell, now with Cameron. Nominated and accepted as ISO/TC 67/SC 4/WG 3
Project Leader for the 4th revision of ISO 10423.
Scott Higgins. BP North sea technical authority Xmas trees. Ex Shell (wells). Now working sub sea
Sam McFarland. Shell Global Solutions materials and corrosion engineer. Chair of UK branch of
John McAuley. Vetco. Design of surface wellheads.
Eric Wehner. Cameron. Ex valve engineering department, now heading quality department. Fifteen
years plus involvement with API 6A.. Member of AWHEMS.
Alfred Kruijer. Shell Global Solutions standardisation department. Co-ordinates editorial support for
this revision of ISO 10423.
Tom Golden. Halliburton. Surface Products. Fifteen years plus involvement with API 6A. Member of
Hugh Parker. Shell (SIEP). Took over from Scott Higgins. Previously with Cameron, Vetco, Norsk
Hydro, Wood Group &c. Co-ordinated first global specification for wellheads and Xmas trees in Shell
based on ISO 10423. It contains a provision for the US to maintain the API Monogram while at the
same time endorsing Annex J.
Maarten Kuipers. Mokveld materials engineering. Ex research and development department, now
heading quality department. Participated in ISO 15848 (fugitive emissions).
Tony Bradford. FMC surface and sub sea wellhead engineering. For future work group meetings,
another expert from FMC may participate.
Dag Ketil Fredheim. Hydro. Technical authority surface wellheads and Xmas trees. Previously with a
manufacturer involved with design. Norsk Hydro is now moving to more severe (sour) environments.
Thierry Cassagne. Total (Pau, south of France – formerly ELF). Materials and corrosion engineer. In
the past worked in Ni-industry (Hayes International). Secretary of the ISO 15156 Maintenance Panel.
Overall project introduction, scope of work
Presentation by Ries Langereis:
API 6A start 1947,now 19th version
ISO start 1994,now 3rd version-why ISO
Realise action activity USA,100 plus participants
Legal and competitive forces in API
ISO TC 67/SC4/WG3 secretariat is in Washington
API is the only institute that audits manufacturing plants after licensing
ISO 10423 main body serves as the backbone of both documents
ISO positioned in Geneva
Based on member countries
No commercial background
Supported by local standards organisations like BS,NEN,API,DIN
Anew version of a standard needs to be balloted/voted and needs a clear majority to pass
China and Russia coming on board ISO
Plan of action 2006/2007
Eric Wehner, in his capacity of AWHEMS member, wants to be in a position to present a draft
revision of ISO 10423 to the API/SC 6 meeting in June 2007.
Current situation USA, AWHEMS
Eric Wehner on behalf of Jerry Longmire.
AWHEMS took the lead in developing the 19th edition of API 6A. Between 4-8 experts have been
involved. Main reason to work through AWHEMS was that they meet on a quarterly basis, whereas
API/TC 6 only meets annually. After successful API ballot and subsequent publication, the work group
kept finding errors. Also, there are some 5 or 6 unresolved technical comments and in addition,
suggestions for a future revision have been made to API for review during their SC6 meeting in June
2007. The same list is offered to the ISO 10423 work group. The AWHEMS work group is as yet
undecided whether to continue or to disband. Jerry Longmire and Eric Wehmer will co-ordinate the
AWHEMS input.
Handout and discussion of first standards up-date
Some changes to ISO 10423 based on API 6A 19th edition and AWHEMS suggestions have been
implemented in draft. Maarten Kuipers, Eric Wehmer and Scott Higgins will review the changes.
Explanation of work process
Alfred Kruijer proposed the following ground rules to ensure timely, accurate and complete revisions
are made to the document:
Large document – large file
Range of experts involved
Many changes expected
Several topics worked in parallel
Ping-pong foreseen in accepting/rejecting changes
Peak periods when approaching milestones
Expensive and valuable experts involved
2-year project
Workable document size
Distribution lists for drafts
Structured input
One working file
Change tracking
Version control and trail
Secure filing on backed-up server
Continuity during editing phase
Document split in two: text/tables and figures
Project Manager custodian of team & document
Comment Form not dissimilar to ballot form
Editors only work on instruction from Project Leader
One working file on secure backed-up server
“Track Changes” to Base Document only
Automatic and unique identification in page footer
Quarterly archiving of current drafts & pdf sent
One lead editor, plus one back-up for the duration
The work group indicated that size limitations on e-mail attachments may hamper proper receipt of the
quarterly updates. The request was made to investigate e.g. Livelink space and access for the workgroup
through ISO or Shell.
New NACE implementation
The work group decided to have an independent look at how API 6A 19th edition implemented the
new ISO 15156. Hangers and stems are indicated to be the main issue.
Thierry Cassagne (lead), Sam McFarland and Maarten Kuipers volunteer to take the subject on. A
liaison will be established with the ISO 15156 Maintenance panel. Eric Wehner will participate to
provide background to all API discussions from the past.
Suggested approach is to review remaining issues from the API 6A implementation, to seek comments
and problems from the manufacturers regarding practical application of the new ISO 15156, and to
present a position paper in the next work group meeting in December.
Forgings vs. Castings
ISO 10423 requires forgings for PSL 3 and PSL 4, whereas API 6A allows castings for all PSLs. Some
manufacturers have commented that prohibiting castings was restraint of trade, because some
customers call for API 6D products manufactured to API 6A PSL requirements. The protest is related
to products outside the scope of ISO 10423 or API 6A. No technical or safety justification for the ISO
10423 restriction was available for API staff to use in response.
API indicated they can consider adopting the ISO 10423 requirements if persuasive technical and/or
safety justification is presented. Justification does not necessarily have to show forgings as clearly
superior to or safer than castings. It can be sufficient to show that there are sufficient technical
differences that the two are not interchangeable in all applications, and that forgings are preferred.
Justification must be presented to API by equipment users or other independent parties; API cannot
accept arguments from competing manufacturers to resolve a question of restraint of trade.
Alfred Kruijer (lead) and nominations from Hydro, Total BP and Shell will investigate the issue and
write a position paper. Maarten Kuipers will try to mobilise Statoil as well. The study will include a
discussion on so-called HIPping of castings and a review of the definition of “wrought products”.
Suggested approach is to finalise the nominations by mid October, to involve the academia in mapping
out the differences with respect to e.g. microstructure, metallic phases, nature and extent of inherent
flaws, mechanical properties and resistance to degradation mechanisms. This should be done for all
material classes from table 3. Quality control aspects like NDT detection thresholds, detection hit rates
should be mapped against acceptance criteria. A position paper should be presented in the December
Repair and re-manufacture
US practice is not to exclusively utilise OEMs for repair or re-manufacture. To avoid protests of
restraint to trade, API omitted Annex J from the API adopt-back of ISO 10423.
Eric Wehner mentioned that API 6DR now includes a text on repair and re-manufacture that is legally
acceptable in the US (Jonathan Jordan from API staff). He will review this text. Shell indicated a wish
to maintain the current Annex J.
Ries Langereis will liaise with API on the subject and write an A4 position paper by Christmas.
Any other business
Next meeting
Next meeting will held on the 6th of December and will be hosted by Mokveld in Gouda.
Related flashcards
Create Flashcards