Process and Critical Equipment Conference

24
th
& 25
th
September 2013
Integrity Management of Critical Equipment in the Digital Era
September 2013
Introduction
Navigation through the Paper
The Necessity for Integrity Management;
Challenges for RBI Methodologies;
KPO RBI Methodology;
Future Development.
The Necessity for Integrity Management (1)
Key Purposes of Integrity Management
Integrity Management is necessary to ensure that critical
equipment are managed in such manner that:
Maximises Process Safety;
Protects the Environment;
Maintains Statutory Compliance;
Ensures Business Viability through plant reliability;
Maintains the Corporate Reputation.
The Necessity for Integrity Management (2)
Key Elements of Asset Integrity Management
Asset Integrity Management
Mechanical
Integrity
Functional
Integrity
Operational
Integrity
The Ability of the
asset to withstand
the design
mechanical load.
Includes:
Pressure
Equipment;
Piping;
Structures.
The Ability of the
asset to perform
its required
function effectively
and safely.
Includes:
Safety Critical
Process Control
Systems;
Safety Valves,
HIPPS Systems;
Gas Detection
Fire Detection
Fire Fighting Ept.
Etc.
The Ability of the
asset personnel to
operate the asset
effectively and
safely.
Includes human
factors such as:
Operator training;
Competence;
Management
Systems;
Reporting
Systems;
Anomaly tracking
Technical Integrity
The Necessity for Integrity Management (3)
Traditional Inspection versus Integrity Management
Traditional Inspection Asset Integrity Management
Focus Mechanical Integrity
Mechanical Integrity
Functional Integrity
Operational Integrity
Tools
Primarily Visual Inspection &
Hydrotest
Risk Assessment, Inspection (primarily
visual and NDE), process data, operating
history, inspection history, maintenance
history, remaining life prediction, Fitness
For Service Assessment
Frequency
All items inspected on a similar
frequency
High risk items inspected more frequently;
low risk items inspected less frequently
Effort
All items receive similar
inspection effort
High risk items inspected more intensively
than low risk items
Based on:
Hirschberg, S., Burgherr, P., Spiekerman, G., Dones, R., Severe accidents in the energy sector: comparative perspective, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Elsevier, April 2004,
pp57-66; and http://www.hse.gov.uk/offshore/statistics/stat1011.htm, Offshore Safety Statistics Bulletin 2010/11, UK HSE.
The Necessity for Integrity Management (4)
Prescriptive Legislation versus Goal Setting Legislation
Challenges for RBI Methodologies (1)
Introduction
Risk based inspection is the explicit use of risk assessment to
define inspection activity.
Effective RBI, therefore, needs to identify all pertinent damage
mechanisms for each pressure vessel and pipe, the likelihood of
their occurrence and the consequence of any resultant failure.


The Quality of the RBI Risk
Assessment is a Key Success
Factor for Integrity Management of
Critical Equipment.
Challenges for RBI Methodologies (2)
The RBI Process
Challenges for RBI Methodologies (3)
Type of RBI Methodology
Qualitative RBI
Based primarily upon expert judgement using small, multi-discipline teams;
Requires little data;
Can employ experiential knowledge from actual operational plant.

Semi-Quantitative RBI
Based primarily upon simplified quantitative calculations;
Requires simple data;
Can be over simplified & conservative;
Cannot employ experiential knowledge from actual operational plant.

Quantitative RBI
Based on fully quantitative calculations;
Requires detailed data;
Cannot employ experiential knowledge from actual operational plant.
Challenges for RBI Methodologies (4)
Code & Recommended Practice Compliance
API RP 580: 2009, Risk Based Inspection
General RBI Guidelines
No specific methodology defined
Universal application
Almost all RBI methodologies (both good and bad) comply
Compliance cannot provide any assurance of RBI quality

API RP 581: Risk Based Inspection Technology
Detailed RBI Methodology
Very specific calculations defined
Compliance does offer assurance of RBI quality
Can only be applied to single component fluids and so is not applicable for
most Critical Equipment in oil and gas facilities
Challenges for RBI Methodologies (5)
RBI Accuracy & Consistency
Qualitative RBI
Based primarily upon expert judgement, therefore is intuitive and imprecise;
Most teams consist of a single expert in each discipline, leading to the possibility of
a knowledge gap;
Poor interdisciplinary communication may result in failure to identify all threats;
Team dynamics can allow a single vocal individual to dominate decision making
leading to inaccurate or inconsistent findings;
Teams often resist assigning Extreme or Negligible risk ranks to equipment.

Semi-Quantitative RBI
Based primarily upon simplified assessment modelling;
The degree of simplification/sophistication has a direct impact on RBI accuracy;
Can be over simplified & conservative.

Quantitative RBI
Based on fully quantitative calculations;
Very accurate.
Challenges for RBI Methodologies (6)
RBI Accuracy (1)
RBI Accuracy is the ability of the RBI methodology to accurately
define both the consequence and the likelihood of a failure
occurring.

Challenges for RBI Methodologies (7)
RBI Accuracy (2)


Risk Profile for a Plant Wide Qualitative RBI Assessment
(1 = Extreme; 2 = High; 3 = Medium; 4 = Low; 5 = Negligible).
Challenges for RBI Methodologies (8)
RBI Consistency (1)
RBI Consistency is the ability of the RBI methodology to produce
results which are repeatable and consistent. It may be evaluated
in two ways:
External Consistency: How close the RBI Consequence and Likelihood
Assessment results agree with similar external or independent
calculations;
Internal Consistency: How close the RBI Consequence and Likelihood
Assessment results for one item agree with those for similar items in
the RBI assessment for the facility.

Challenges for RBI Methodologies (9)
RBI Consistency (2)
TAG Vessel 1 Vessel 2
Contents: Acid Gas (H
2
S = 42 mol. %) Process Water (Trace H
2
S)
Phase: Vapour Liquid
Flammable (Y/N) Y N
Inventory (Kg) 150 205,300
Pressure (BarA): 3.5 1.2
Temp. (C) 60 68
Qualitative CoF Rank 3 Medium 2 High
Safety Hazard Area (m
2
) 260 2.7
Semi-Quantitative CoF Rank 2 High 4 Low
Conclusion on Qualitative RBI CoF Underestimated CoF Overestimated


Challenges for RBI Methodologies (10)
Efficiency of Implementation
Qualitative RBI
Based primarily upon expert judgement, obtained through group discussion;
Depends on intuitive judgements by experts that know the plant well;
Requires only basic data;
Very easy to initiate;
Group discussion is very time consuming
1
.
1) It is estimated that an effective assessment of KPOs Karachaganak facility would occupy a multi-discipline team
full-time for about four years.
Semi-Quantitative RBI
Based primarily upon simplified assessment modelling;
Simple data is available from standard engineering documents which can often be
captured electronically into the RBI assessment model;
Assessments are very rapid.

Quantitative RBI
Based on fully quantitative calculations using complex data;
Data collection is prohibitively long for plant wide RBI.
Challenges for RBI Methodologies (10)
Auditability
Qualitative RBI
Although the RBI results are recorded, full records of the group discussion are rarely
captured;
It is possible to audit the RBI assessment to determine the assessed risk,
Consequence of Failure, and Likelihood of Failure;
It is often not possible to determine the precise reason for the risk, Consequence of
Failure, and Likelihood of Failure results.

Semi-Quantitative RBI
Full set of calculations performed;
System is fully auditable.

Quantitative RBI
Full set of calculations performed;
System is fully auditable.
KPO RBI Methodology (1)
Introduction
The Modern Digital Era allows rapid application of accurate, consistent and
fully auditable semi-quantitative RBI systems;
KPO elected to use an expert semi-quantitative system;
In order to capture experiential knowledge from actual operational plant,
including upset or abnormal operation, KPO uses an Authoritative Review
by technical experts to challenge the semi-quantitative RBI results;
The KPO system is based on API 581: 2008, but is modified to:
a) Allow dispersion modelling of multi-component fluids;
b) Add additional and more robust likelihood models;
c) Simplify the Likelihood of Failure assessment by eliminating hole sizes;
d) Simplify the Risk Assessment by using semi-quantitative models to determine
specific Risk Ranks in a 5 x 5 Risk Matrix
KPO RBI Methodology (2)
Consequence of Failure Assessment
KPO RBI Methodology (3)
Likelihood of Failure Assessment
KPO RBI Methodology (4)
Risk Matrix
The Risk Matrix is skewed in favour of Consequence of Failure
KPO RBI Methodology (5)
Authoritative Review
Key
Blue:
As new condition

Green:
Low rate of deterioration

Yellow:
Medium deterioration rate
(minor repairs anticipated).

Orange::
Significant deterioration rate
(major repair anticipated);

Red:
High rate of deterioration
(major repair necessary now).
KPO RBI Methodology (6)
Inspection Planning
Confidence Factor is based on IP 12 & IP 13 Inspection Grades
using the following criteria:
Number of previous inspections (more inspections = more confidence)
Previous inspection findings (less deterioration = higher confidence)
Predictability of operation (higher predictability = higher confidence)
Inspection Intervals use maximum recommended intervals
defined by the Safety Federation (SAFed) for the lowest risk
items.
Inspection Intervals for higher risk items is progressively
reduced from the SAFed recommended intervals according to
the risk rank.
Future Development
The Use of Real Time Data in Integrity Management
Conclusions
Bringing the Pieces Together
Risk based inspection planning has greatly improved asset integrity
management of large complex plant.
Many of the methods employed are:
Qualitative in nature;
Lack consistency and repeatability;
Are time consuming to apply;
Are slow to react to changing plant operating conditions and
feedstocks.
Modern digital techniques offer the possibility of a robust yet rapid RBI
assessment.
Linking predictive RBI tools to real-time operating data gives the potential
to predict the influence of changing operating variables as they occur, and
offers great potential for flexible plant operation.