Inspection Maintenace and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines - PERITUS

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines
DNV RP-F113 Deep and Ultra-deepwater Pipelines Conference 27 - 28 September 2011, Novotel Paris Les Halles Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines
Ian Nash
Introduction
R Requirements i t f for pipeline i li i inspection: ti what, h t when h and dh how Pipeline maintenance and routine inspection Pipeline damage during installation and operation in deepwater, causes and effects Understanding the real risks and potential need for repair Repair systems, tools and techniques
Deep and Ultra-deepwater Pipelines Conference 27 - 28 September 2011, Novotel Paris Les Halles
Ian Nash
Requirements for pipeline inspection: what, when and how
Ian Nash
Typical Characteristics of Deepwater Pipelines

Water depths are beyond diver limits and all activity (IMR) is remote Wall thickness are typically high } Materials, Welding, buckling Operating pressures are typically very high or very low Ambient external pressures are high, commonly similar to internal operational pressures } Coating and Insulation Degradation High levels of Insulation are commonly required } Insulation Degradation Pi li Pipelines tend d not to b be protected db by a concrete coating i } Damage D Geohazards can be significant } Spanning, Buckling, Damage, Bend Stability, Turbitity and Debris flows Slugging within produced fluids is common } Spanning, Fatigue Greater tolerances Survey inaccuracy, installation accuracy Metocean and environmental conditions tend to be benign } Stability Seabed mobility is less dominant } Scour, Spanning Corrosion coatings tend to be of very high quality } Corrosion, Damage
Deep and Ultra-deepwater Pipelines Conference 27 - 28 September 2011, Novotel Paris Les Halles Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines
All inspection, maintenance and 6C } CP, Flow Assurance, Materials Waters are typically cold approx 4Crepair is performed remotely
Ian Nash
BASELINE SURVEY
The ongoing assessment of inspection findings will involve comparison of data with that recorded during previous inspection campaigns. This will allow trends to be extrapolated and judgments made regarding the urgency of remedial action. This process necessarily commences with the acquisition of the measurement of internally and externally taken values at the commencement of pipeline service, known as a Baseline Survey. On completion l of f the h installation ll of f the h d deepwater Pipelines, l an as-built b l survey will be undertaken by the Installation Contractor to ensure that the construction is fit for service. Similarly the Subsea Commissioning Team will undertake d t k surveys t to establish t bli h correct t functionality f ti lit and d initial i iti l i integrity t it of f th the system. Together g the As-Built and Commissioning g surveys y will f form the Baseline Survey y against which future inspection will be measured.
Ian Nash
INSPECTION STRATEGY (1)

Planned inspection campaigns are an integral part of the IMR strategy, the purpose of the inspections being to monitor pipeline system integrity over time and to monitor the impact of the subsea and production environments on the pipeline. Understanding and confirming design assumptions Routine inspections may indicate a requirement for more specific investigations involving detailed or specialist techniques. The normal physical inspection tasks undertaken on the Deepwater Pipelines can be split into locations internal and external to the pipeline. Internal and External locations are typically periodically inspected by Pigging and d ROV/AUV methods th d respectively. ti l Permanent monitoring methods also exist and are becoming more commonplace. p
Ian Nash
INSPECTION STRATEGY (2)

With deepwater lateral buckling and walking issues, Inspection strategy needs to include interaction with the designers. designers If your system is anticipated to have multiple start up and shut down scenarios you will need to understand what the designers anticipated happening and how to monitor i i it. In addition there may be need to reconfirm whats happened once the pipeline is in operation. p I.e. the designers g have p probably yp planned f for the worst case, , but if f things are not that bad and/or the operational approach changes this can result in very different results to those planned and design for. The requirement for and frequency of inspection will most commonly be determined using risk based techniques
Ian Nash
INSPECTION METHODS
Location Method Technique
Magnetic Flux Ultrasonic Pigging Internal Visual Calliper Geometry (XYZ) Corrosion Probe/Spool Sand Probe Visual Geometry XYZ Inspection ROV Burial Acoustic CP Probe Weld S Scanner Tomography Scanning Side Scan Visual AUV G Geometry t (XYZ) Sidescan Permanent Monitoring
Defects
Spanning/Burial Corrosion Dents Gouges leak CP Failure C i D Coating Damage Hydrate Movement Buckle Vibration Cracking Fatigue Protection Integrity (mattresses/ Rock/Covers)
P Permanent Monitoring
External
Vibration Strain
Ian Nash
INSPECTION DEFECT MATRIX

Defect Spa anning/ Buri ial/Scour Mo ovement Pro otection In ntegrity CP PFailure Co orrosion Vibration Coating C Damage leak Location Method Technique Cr racking 9 Hydrate H Erosion Gouges G Buckle B Dents D
Internal
MagneticFlux Ultrasonic Visual Pigging Calliper Geometry (XYZ) Corrosion Permanent Probe Monitoring SandProbe Visual Acoustic CPProbe ROV WeldScanner Tomography SideScan Visual Acoustic Sidescan Vibration Strain
External AUV Permanent Monitoring
Ian Nash
Risk Based Inspection Concept

Identify Threats/Hazards to Pipeline Assess Inspection History
DNV RP-F116 (Sec H1) The risk assessment comprises the following main tasks;
Susceptibility to Threat Likelihood of Failure
Failure Mode Remaining R i i Life or Inspection Grade
a) Establish equipment scope b) Identify threats c) Data gathering d) Data quality review e) Estimate probability of ff failure (PoF) f) Estimate consequences of failure (CoF) g) Determine risk h) Identify risk mitigating measures i) All equipment threats have considered j) Determine aggregated risk k) Planning of inspection, monitoring and testing activities
Consequence of Failure
Risk Factor
Risk OK?
Mitigation Measure to reduce susceptibility
Inspection Scheme
10
Ian Nash
Targeted Inspections
Design Dossier Defect Type1 Code Requirements
Defect Type 3 Defect Type 4 Review design Review previous inspections Defect Type 5 Defect Type 6 Prepare & Perform Targeted I Inspection i
Determine most likely location
Record Results No Defect observed? Yes Assess Defect & Determine Correction
Stop
Inspection R Records
Defect selected
Defect Type 2
11
Ian Nash
Deepwater Pig Inspection

Pig Inspection of offshore pipelines tends to look for internal problems. Generally running pigs in offshore pipelines is very similar to running in onshore lines, after the wall thickness and higher pressures are taken in to consideration. The most favoured inspection methods are either ultrasonic or magnetic flux inspection. Magnetic flux is limited by magnet strength, ie get enough magnetism in the wall of the pipe to enable good results to be obtained. obtained Ultrasonic can inspect very thick wall pipe but Ultrasonic's have to be run in a liquid medium. The main difference between offshore and onshore is the length of run between pig traps, as Offshore pipelines tend not to have intermediate compression stations with conveniently located pig traps. traps The pig must not get stuck in the pipeline as retrieving it will be much more expensive than from an onshore pipeline. The pig must stay alive and recording data (battery duration may be an issue)
12
Ian Nash
Deepwater ROV Inspection
Traditionally, external inspection, of deepwater pipelines is performed using work ROVs deployed from DP ROV support vessels. These vessels are expensive, and they may not be available when they are needed most. In deep waters, ROVs become heavy to handle from these vessels, because of long umbilicals; and they become prone to breakdowns. ROV inspections of long transmission lines can be very slow and may take many months to complete end to end Weather downtime is also an issue for ROV support vessels when working in harsh and hostile environments
13
Ian Nash
AUV based Inspection

AUV-based Inspection in deepwater fields may provide dramatic improvements in cost, performance, safety and reliability. Large DPII vessels with high-end ROV spreads would no longer be required for simple inspection. AUVs have demonstrated solid performance requiring simple autonomy for missions such as bathymetric survey and high resolution sonar imaging AUVs can be deployed from small utility vessels, be capable of operations in higher seas, without the operational limitations and equipment hazards imposed by umbilical and tether management systems. Reduction in equipment complexity, vessel size and crew size would also result in i improved d safety, f t reliability, li bilit and dl lower environmental i t li impact. t In the future AUVs would become field resident, residing in the subsea field for periods of months. The end state of Vessel Independent Operations will achieve f h reductions further d in cost while h l improving performance f and d safety. f
14
Ian Nash
Pipeline routine inspection and maintenance
15
Ian Nash
Optimisation of Routine/Scheduled Inspection
An optimum IMR plan aims to strike an appropriate balance between the f ll i objectives: following bj i maximising the availability of the pipeline system during its operating life by maintaining and preserving its integrity, thus maximising revenue; minimising inspection, intervention and rectification measures through the life of the pipeline system, thus minimising through-life IMR related costs. reducing to as low as is reasonably practicable all risks to people people, the environment and assets, in accordance with legislative, societal and business requirements, thus minimising the costs of failures.
16
Ian Nash
Optimisation of Routine Inspection Measures

The typical variation of failure rate in an operating system with time, takes the shape of the classic 'bath-tub' curve, and can be divided into three phases: Phase 1, , early y failures or damage, g , due to defects in materials, incorrect installation, incorrect operation, unexpected environmental effects (Scouring etc) Phase 2, random failures or damage, due to earthquakes, impacts (dropped objects, fishing, g, anchors), ), etc Phase 3, wear out failures or damage, due to corrosion, fatigue, internal erosion, anode depletion depletion, coating breakdown etc
Phase 3 Phase 1 Failure r rate
Phase 2
Time
17
Ian Nash
Minimising through-life IMR-related costs

The implication of the bath-tub curve is that relatively frequent and intensive inspection is required in the early years, i.e. Phase 1. As inspection data demonstrating good pipeline system* performance accumulates, it is rational to adopt a reduced frequency and scope of inspection. Thus a progressive reduction of inspection effort may be expected towards the end of Phase 1 and into Phase 2 2. Phase 2 for a typical subsea pipeline extends to several decades, Phase 3 may not actually be reached during the operational lifetimes of many projects. j t H However, if inspection i ti d data t starts t t t to show h th the onset t of f wear-out t mechanisms then an increased level of maintenance could be reintroduced. As far as p possible, , inspection, p , maintenance and repair p activities should be p pre-planned p to take advantage of tendered contracts, optimum weather conditions and where necessary co-incidence with planned pipeline shutdowns.
*The Th
best way to control b l some of f these h i with is i h the h designers d i h i having the h experience i and d being b i allowed the time to investigate/ design a more robust solution CAPEX vrs OPEX
18
Ian Nash
Code Requirements DNV OS-F101

1. Define equipment scope ( i.e. All equipment that can lead to a failure) (DNVOS-F101, Sec. 11, D304) 2 For each equipment, 2. equipment identify all threats which can lead to a failure (DNV-OS(DNV OS F101, Sec. 11, D201) 3. For each threat; estimate risk (DNV-OS-F101, Sec. 11, D202) Consequence of failure (CoF) Probability of failure (PoF) Inspection, monitoring and testing (IMT) (DNV-OS-F101, Sec. 11, D103) Mitigation, intervention and repair (MIR) (DNV-OS-F101, Sec. 11, D700) Integrity assessment (IA) (DNV-OS-F101, Sec. 11, D600)
Propose plans for:
19
Ian Nash
Inspection Planning
20
Ian Nash
Example Process from RP-F116

Inspection Interval
21
Ian Nash
Example Process from RP-F116

Schedule Planning
22
Ian Nash
Years Cons stAsBuiltSurvey BaselineSurv B vey Phase1 "EarlyFailure " e"
TypeofInspection
Phase21) "RandomFailure"
Phase33) "WearOutFailure"
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 IntelligentPig VisualincludingCP andSideScan TowedAcousticSide ScanSonar 2) TargetedSpecial Events ? ? ?
1) Reduction in annual inspection applies to remote subsea pipelines only 2) Acoustic side scan sonar is not always cost effective especially in deepwater or where there are strong currents. An ROV survey with reduced scope could be considered 3) the third phase may not occur within j lifetimes, i.e. the Phase 2 (plateau phase) extends for several decades with well designed, g operated and maintained facilities. normal project
23
Ian Nash
Pipeline Maintenance
Preventive maintenance Because of the high cost and potential delays associated with intervention, preventive maintenance should be eliminated at the design stage, wherever possible. ibl Routine maintenance Routine maintenance tasks are required q where the elimination of f specific p f intervention is uneconomic or technically problematic. Normally such maintenance would be undertaken during repair activity, or combined with planned inspection p p campaigns. p g Corrective Maintenance Intervention to rectify breakdown or degradation (Corrective Maintenance) is referred to as Repair Repair .
Normally Subsea Facilities shall possess sufficient reliability to ensure availability throughout the field life. Subsea equipment that is susceptible to failure should be designed to minimize the effort/cost required for replacement of the failed assembly.
24
Ian Nash
Pipeline damage during installation and operation p in deepwater, p , causes and effects ff
25
Ian Nash
Installation Damage Scenarios

The potential causes and effects of damage during installation Phase of the pipeline(s) are summarized as follows:
3rd Party Objects Dropped from Ships Material and Construction Damage to pipeline geometry and/or pipe wall: Gouges, Grooves and Notches. Dents Wet and Dry Buckles. Overstressing or Excessive Bending. Fatigue Damage. Bend Pull Out Coating
Defects
Installation Tension failure Station Keeping Geohazards Slope Stability Route Features Rock Outcrops, Outcrops Cement Soil, Soil Shell and Coral Banks. Pockmarks
coating): g) Lost & Damaged weight coating Damaged corrosion coating Lost & Damaged insulation coating Anode Damage: g Lost anode Disconnected anode
Damage
(Corrosion
and
Weight
26
Ian Nash
Operational Damage Scenarios

The potential causes of damage during operational Phase of the pipeline(s) are summarized as follows:
3rd Party Trawling Anchoring g Objects Dropped from Ships Ship sinking Ship Grounding Shipwrecks p and Debris Material and Construction Geohazards Earthquakes Seismic Fault movement Submarine Landslides Mass Gravity Flows Turbidity Currents Sub-marine Volcanoes Liquefaction Tsunamis Route Features Rock Outcrops, p , Cement Soil, , Shell and Coral
Environmantal Wind, Waves and Currents Scour Seabed Morphodynamics p y
Defects Sabotage Military y Action
Banks. Shallow Gas and Seepage of Gas and Fluids Pockmarks Mud Diapirs p and Mud Volcanoes Slope Instability Mass Movements
27
Ian Nash
Operational Damage Scenarios (effects)
The effect of damage that could occur during the operational phase of the pipeline(s) are summarized as follows:
Damage to pipeline geometry and/or pipe wall: Rupture. Internal Corrosion. External Corrosion. Corrosion Pinhole Leak. Gouges, Grooves and Notches. Cracks and Fracture Propagation. Dents and Buckles. Buckles Overstressing or Excessive Bending. Fatigue Damage. Coating
coating): Lost & Damaged weight coating Damaged corrosion coating Lost & Damaged insulation coating Anode Damage: Lost anode Disconnected anode Over consumption Anode pasivity Hydrate Formation: Pinhole Leak. Leak Lost & Damaged insulation coating Incorrect operation
Damage
(Corrosion
and
Weight
28
Ian Nash
Damage Category and Scenario

Phase Installation Damage Category Dry Buckle Wet Buckle Loss of Coating Hydrate Specific Damage Scenario Dry Local Buckle Dry Propagating Buckle Wet Buckle Buckle/Stinger impact Hydrate Internal/External Corrosion Gouge/Dent/Buckle Overstressing Fatigue Damage Trawling/Anchoring Objects Dropped from Ships Ship Sinking/Ship Grounding Shipwrecks and Debris Earthquakes/Tsunami Mass Gravity Flows and Turbidity Currents Pinhole Leak Seismic Fault/Submarine Landslips Liquefaction/Scour Rupture p Earthquakes/Slope Stability Rupture Internal/External Corrosion
29
Localized Damage, No Leak
Operation Localized Damage, Minor Leak R t Rupture, L Local l Rupture, Extensive Length Extensive Damage, No Leak
Ian Nash
Based on the damage scenarios and risk assessment it is clear that: The pipeline installation contractor should have fully developed procedures and all necessary equipment mobilised and ready for implementation in the event of dry or wet buckles, prior to the start of deepwater pipelay operations.
The operator p should have fully y developed p procedures and all necessary p y
equipment ready for implementation prior to the start of operations, to cater for the following scenarios:

Hydrate formation. Localised damage (i.e. dent or pinhole leak). Local Rupture. Rupture over extensive pipeline length.
30
Ian Nash
This Recommended Practice (RP) is intended to provide criteria and guidelines for the qualification of fittings and systems used for pipeline subsea repair and/or modifications and tie-ins.
31
Ian Nash
Understanding the real risks and potential need for repair MEIDP Example E l
32
Ian Nash
MEIDP Example (3500m WD)
33
Ian Nash
Intervention Zones
Based on this preliminary information, the route has been divided into five different intervention requirement zones. 1) Shallow Water Zone (0 to 150m WD) 2) Continental Slope Zone (150m to 2500m WD) 3) Deep Water Section (2500m to 3500m WD) ) Remote e ote Sea Seamount ou t Sect Section o (300 (300m to 3000 3000m WD) ) 4) 5) Indus Fan Section (2500m to 3000m WD)
Slope
North Murray Ridge Dalrymple Trough South Murray Ridge
Abyssal Plain
Slope
Rise
Rise
Abyssal Plain
Qualhat Seamou nt
Middle Indus Fan
Upper Indus Fan
Abyssal Plain
Sh lf Shelf
4 3
5 3
34
Ian Nash
Typical QRA for Deepwater Pipelines
MEIDP QRA Risk Contributors and % contribution Ship sinking (40 (40.24%) 24%) Objects dropped from ships (19.91%) Ship grounding (14.07%) Material and construction defects (11.17%) External corrosion (10.62%) ( ) Anchoring (3.23%) Internal corrosion (0.63%) Trawling (0.12%)
35
Ian Nash
Typical QRA for Deepwater Pipelines
6.00E-03 3.00E-03 5.00E-03 2.50E-03 4.00E-03 2.00E-03 1 50E 03 1.50E-03 3.00E-03 1.00E-03 2.00E-03 5.00E-04 1.00E-03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00
Most likely location for Intervention is the deepest p water
Material and construction defects External corrosion Material and construction defects Internal corrosion External corrosion ShipInternal grounding corrosion ShipDropped sinking objects Dropped objects Anchoring Anchoring Trawling Trawling
Abys sal Plain North Murray Ridge Dalrym ple Trough South Murray Ridge
R is e Sl o p e
Rise
Abyssal Plain
Qualhat Seamou nt
Middle Indus Fan
Upper Indus Fan
Abyssal Plain
Shelf
Sl o p e
36
Ian Nash
Repair Scenarios and Types
Repair Scenario Dry Buckle Excessive Plastic Strain Wet Buckle Rupture Internal Corrosion External Corrosion Coating Damage Pinhole leak Dents, Gouges, g Grooves, Notches Cracks, Fracture Propagation Hydrate Blockage Excess Unsupported Span Anode damage / depletion
Repair Type Profiled clamp or Spool and /or External protection (Rock Dump) Spool (External protection)[[1]] Spool, Spool, (External protection) Clamp or Spool Clamp or Spool Clamp or Spool, (External protection) Clamp Clamp p and /or External p protection Clamp Hydrate removal External protection i.e. strakes, mechanical support (frame,
rock ,jetting additional analysis
Anode replacement
Note: [1]. External protection inside ( ) denotes a secondary measure

37
Ian Nash
Repair systems, tools and techniques
38
Ian Nash
Emergency Pipeline Repair System

The minimum functional requirements identified for an emergency repair system are listed as follows: Operable p at water depths p up p to deepest p water of the p pipeline p (3500m) ( ) Operable on pipe size(internal diameter) of pipelines (24) Operable with steel wall thickness up to maximum and relevant coatings (40.5mm) Operable O bl on soft ft seabed b d soils il (soft ( ft calcareous l clay l and d silt) ilt) Operable on seabed slopes (of up to 28 degrees) Capable of providing a repair capability extending from minor dents to replacement p of multiple p p pipe p j joints While not mandatory, it is advantageous if the system(s) and equipment also exhibit the following characteristics: Modular and/or lightweight Minimum number of components Incur minimal shut down and/or reduction of operation Minimum CAPEX investment
39
Ian Nash
Repair System Components

An overall pipeline repair system to install a clamp or spool requires an extensive array of equipment to conduct a repair operation. operation The repair systems generally perform tasks from the following list: Metrology of the pipeline damage and repair site Isolation of the damaged section of pipe with internal plugs if required Soil excavation Pipeline lifting, locally at the repair site or completely to the surface Pipe coating removal Pipe cutting Removal of damaged section Pipe p end surface p preparation p Metrology of the pipeline for clamp and spool piece preparation Transport and positioning of clamps, spool pieces and connectors Closing and sealing clamps and connectors Testing the repair Lower the pipeline to the seabed Removal of repair system equipment
40
Ian Nash
Why Tooling is Needed

Purpose Platform from which to operate ROVs and conduct repair operations. Working platform in the event that an extensive section of damaged pipeline has to be relaid/replaced. Flooding/Dewatering/Drying Various purposes including: Spread Pressure equalisation prior to cutting (flooding). Coupling for intelligent pigging (flooding). Removal of water (dewatering). Drying prior to returning to service to minimise water content and risk of hydrates. Seabed Dredging/Levelling Exposure of the pipeline, if locally trenched or buried, to allow for survey Equipment and/or repair operations. Pipeline Lifting f Frames Elevation of f pipeline off ff the seabed in the vicinity of f any repair, for f the purpose of improving access for repair equipment and operations. Subsea Measurement Tool Performance of measurements between pipeline ends for accurate spool piece and connector assembly assembly. Pipeline Cutting Tool Cutting of pipeline (and coatings) to allow removal of any damaged sections.
Equipment DP Support Vessel Pipelay Vessel
41
Ian Nash
Why Tooling is Needed

Equipment Pipeline Coating Removal Tool External Weld Bead Removal Tool End Preparation Tool Pipeline Recovery Tool Pipeline Repair Clamp Subsea Pipeline Connectors Replacement Spool piece Hydrate Blockage Removal Spread p Purpose Removal of external pipeline coatings in the vicinity of any section that has been cut (by the Pipeline Cutting Tool). Required in the event that the Pipeline R Recovery T Tool l grips i the h pipeline i li on i its external l steel l surface. f Removal of external longitudinal weld seam (SAW linepipe) to prevent interference on connector seal. Machining of the end face of the pipeline to prevent interference on connector seal. Tool connected to the end of the cut pipeline to allow recovery to surface. Designed to allow the pipeline be dewatered and isolated prior to recovery. Permanent clamp installed around the pipeline in the vicinity of minor damage (i.e. dent) for the purpose of ensuring the structural integrity of the pipeline without the need for cutting out and replacing an entire section of pipe. Connector assembly and modular system used for the installation and connection of a new section of pipeline. New section of pipeline used to replace area of damage. Accidental ingress of moisture into the pipeline can cause formation of a hydrate y p plug. g Hydrate y removal is p possible by y various p passive methods but may y ultimately require a deepwater hot-tap operation at actual location of the hydrate where the spread taps a hole into the pipeline and injects hydrate removal chemicals.
42
Ian Nash
Example Lifting Frame
43
Ian Nash
Damage Equipment Matrix

Flooding/Dewatering / Drying Spread (Onshore) Pipe Lifting Device (i.e. H-frame es) Connec ction System a and Spoolpiec ce d Dredging / Levelling Seabed Equipm ment Weld Be ead Removal Tool Intellige ent Pigging Eq quipment Hydrate e Removal Sp pread Pipeline e Recovery T Tool (with d/w w capability) Split Repair Clamp Sleeve) ) (i. .e. Deep Water Repair System Components Coating g Removal Too ol
ROV Su upport Vessel
Pipe Cu utting Tool
Pipelay Vessel
Dry Local Buckle (recoverable) Dry Local Buckle (nonrecoverable) Dry Propagating Buckle (non-recoverable) Local Wet Buckle (non(non recoverable) Hydrate plug Localised damage, no leak Localised damage with leak Rupture, local Rupture, extensive length
Metrolog gy Unit
44
Ian Nash
Repair Systems and Clubs

Equipment Name p Systems y Bespoke Chevron Petronius Repair System BP Mardi Gras Pipeline Repair System SIRCOS Pipeline Connection and Repair Systems (PCRS) Total Girassol Pipeline Repair System Oil States / Chevron Oil States / BP ENI / Saipem (Sonsub) Oceaneering Subsea 7 Repair Clubs Shell Deepwater Pipeline Repair System DW RUPE Pipeline Repair System Pool Shell HOLD (there are two version of the Shell club?) DW RUPE Technip (Norway), Deep Ocean, Statoil Newly Founded Repair Clubs Emergency Pipeline Repair Equipment Sharing (EPRES) ??
Main Contractor / Operator
South East Asia Pipeline Operators Group (SEAPOG) Pipeline Repair Operators Forum Australasia (PROFA)
45
Ian Nash
Candidate Systems Capability

Pipeline Repair Systems Up to 3500m Sonsubs SIRCOS currently can work up to 2200m Deepwater Pipeline Repair System from Oceaneering and Oil States currently rated to about 3000m. Saipem indicates it can be upgraded for higher water depths Oceaneering indicates depth requirement of 3500m can be designed and manufactured Oil States indicates further tests are required to re-qualify their system for 3500m rating
EPRSCapabilityin TermsofMEIDPRequirements
Oil States
210% 200% 190% 180% 170% 160% 150% 140% 130% 120% 110% 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Saipem
Oceaneering
Percent tageofRequirements
Water Depth (m)
Connector Size WallThickness (in) (mm)
SeabedSlope (deg)
SeabedSoil PipelineCoating Concrete Strength(kPa) (mm) Coating(mm) <600m
46
Ian Nash
Summary of Inspection for Deepwater Pipelines
Intelligent pigging is the primary form of internal inspection ROV are the primary tool for performing external inspection The development of AUVs for flypast inspections may give benefits deepwater by
isolating the vehicle from surface influences
Risk Based methods have been established for determining Inspection regimes (DnV
RP116)
47
Ian Nash
Summary of Repair for Deepwater Pipelines

Installation Phase
Damage scenarios during installations and operation pose differing levels of risk. The most significant potential damage scenarios during the installation phase are
dry and wet buckles.
The technology and methodologies required for rectification of installation phase
damage (i.e. (i e buckles) are a direct extension of techniques used for similar events in shallow water, and currently exists with installation contractors and specialist equipment suppliers.
48
Ian Nash
Summary of Repair for Deepwater Pipelines

Operational Phase
Several potential damage scenarios exist during the operational phase. The most
significant are where a damaged section of pipeline needs to be reinforced, replaced or cleared of a hydrate blockage. Where a replacement pipeline section is required, the length could vary significantly d depending di on th the nature t of f th the event t causing i the th damage d (a ( f few meters t to t several l kilometres in the event of a geohazard (i.e. slope instability). There is a wide range of qualified or nearly qualified equipment for the subsea repair both currently available and under continual development. repair, development The equipment exists both as individual components (equipment, tools and fittings) and full systems. Some repair systems are owned and operated on a club club basis, basis by a group or consortia of pipeline operators. The clubs at present operate in specific geographical locations. The need to access the p pipeline p at both ends for the p purpose p of re-commissioning g (i.e. flooding, cleaning, dewatering, etc.), is inherent in many of the repair scenarios. Access facilities and the provision of adequate space for equipment (particularly dewatering) are significant.
49
Ian Nash
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank South Asia Gas Enterprise PVT Ltd. for giving permission to publish aspects of this work, and the team in Peritus, for their continued hard work.
50
Ian Nash
References
I Nash & P Roberts OPT 2011, 2011 MEIDP The Deepwater Gas Route to India India, February
23-24, I Nash & P Roberts DUDPC 2011, Case Study: MEIDP Installation, intervention and Repair, p , Sept p 27-28 Peritus International, 18001.01-REP-IIDP-Y-0014 MEIDP, Emergency Pipeline Repair Systems, Aug 2011 Peritus International, 18001.01-REP-IIDP-Y-0007 MEIDP Quantified Risk Assessment Update, Dec 2010 Dan McLeod, Emerging Capabilities for Autonomous Inspection Repair and Maintenance, OCEANS 2010 (ART) DNV RP-F116 Integrity Management of Submarine Pipeline Systems DNV RP-F113 Subsea Pipeline Repair
51
Ian Nash

Inspection Maintenace and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines - PERITUS

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Inspection Maintenace and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines - PERITUS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Requirements for pipeline inspection: what, when and how

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Typical Characteristics of Deepwater Pipelines

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

INSPECTION STRATEGY (1)

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

INSPECTION STRATEGY (2)

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

INSPECTION DEFECT MATRIX

External AUV Permanent Monitoring

Risk Based Inspection Concept

Susceptibility to Threat Likelihood of Failure

Failure Mode Remaining R i i Life or Inspection Grade

Mitigation Measure to reduce susceptibility

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Determine most likely location

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Deepwater Pig Inspection

Deepwater ROV Inspection

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

AUV based Inspection

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Pipeline routine inspection and maintenance

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Optimisation of Routine/Scheduled Inspection

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Optimisation of Routine Inspection Measures

Phase 3 Phase 1 Failure r rate

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Minimising through-life IMR-related costs

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Code Requirements DNV OS-F101

Propose plans for:

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Example Process from RP-F116

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Example Process from RP-F116

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Years Cons stAsBuiltSurvey BaselineSurv B vey Phase1 "EarlyFailure " e"

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 IntelligentPig VisualincludingCP andSideScan TowedAcousticSide ScanSonar 2) TargetedSpecial Events ? ? ?

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Installation Damage Scenarios

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Operational Damage Scenarios

Environmantal Wind, Waves and Currents Scour Seabed Morphodynamics p y

Defects Sabotage Military y Action

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Operational Damage Scenarios (effects)

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Damage Category and Scenario

Localized Damage, No Leak

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

MEIDP Example (3500m WD)

Inspection Maintenance and Repair of Deepwater Pipelines

North Murray Ridge Dalrymple Trough South Murray Ridge

Middle Indus Fan