Haren Amsterdam - PIMS International · PDF fileGeneration of detailed Diagram Report in MS Word, using a company specific template, 2. MS Excel up- and download of the diagram, analyses

Asset Integrity Management with the methodology / tools of PIMS International

© PIMS International

Amsterdam

Haren

Why Pipeline Integrity Management?Dutch Act’s on External Safety of high pressure Pipelines

1. WION: 20081. Ground movement > 50 cm have to be reported.2. Pipeline operator and contractor (excavation, ram piling) have to prevent 3rd party

damage by joint effort

1. BEVB: 20111. Inspection by VROM ILT to verify risk & integrity managent practice2. Assets & Proces descriptions (from design – abandonment). Major element:

transparency in integrity management3. Risk based maintenance & inspection planning and above all: PDCA loop4. Condition report and Management review5. PIMS Focal Point in Company6. NTA 8000 code > NEN 3655 fullfils Dutch legal requirements


Customer PM PIMSImplementation(ASME B31.8S)

PM PIMSImplementationNTA 8000

PM Risk Assessment with Bowstar Methodology / Software

Gasunie 2003-2004 2009 2010: Onshore pipelines, Compressor Stations, Export Stations,Blending Stations, Sub-surface Valve Stations (HP and LP), GasSupply Stations, IT & Physical Security of vital infrastructure

2013: Expansion current Comparison Bench Mark2015: N2-Plant, Update all bowties, KPI-s retrieval with Bowstar

Sasol Gas (South Africa) 2004-20052012 (Revitalisation)

2012: Land Pipelines

Geoplin (Slovenia) 2006

Total (TIGF, France) 2008 2010: Development Inspection Procedure

PTT (Thailand) 2008 2009 2014: LNG-plant (investment decision Ministry of Energy)

Total EP NL 2010 2009: Offshore pipelines

ENGIE 2010 2011: Offshore Pipelines (trunk), Platforms, Risers (flexible andsteel), Onshore Pipelines, Gas processing plants (NOGAT andNGT)

2013: Wax Deposition in Oil Pipelines, Revision Permit NGT Pipelinein Environmental sensitive area (Waddenzee)

2014: Fatigue Load pipelines2015: Effectiveness and efficiency of ILI pigrun for offshore interfiled

pipelines, KPI-s retrieval with Bowstar (NOGAT Assets withCOSO model)

2016: Update all bowties

TAQA 2012 2012: Gap analysis Pipeline Integrity Management manual2013: Gas Storage Plant Bergermeer2014: Fibre Cable application

Teijin Aramid (NL) 2013: Validation Risk Policy

NAM, SHELL 2011: Gab analyses PIMS Manual

NEN 2010: Lecturing NTA 8000 in cooperation with regulator

NUON 2011: Onshore Pipeline

TENNET 2015: High Voltage Power Lines (220-380 KV)

BBL Company 2015: Onshore Pipeline

PIMS International records: PIMS implementation & Risk Management Projects


Meridian--------------------

ArcGis

1.3 Execution Annual Plan

1.1 Make annual Plan1.0 Verification Integrity

1.13Make Annual Plan

1.11Risk assessment

1.12Select pipelines to

inspect or mitigatingactions

Ideas forimprovement

Document System

1.3aModification un-

piggable pipelines

1.2 Acquire Budget

1.2aAdaptation &

approval AnnualPlan

1.2bMake Corporate

Business Plan

1.2cApproval Corporate

Businessplan

1.2dIssue approved

Annual Plan

WORKFLOW PIPELINEINTEGRITY MANAGEMENT

1.3bAcquiring budget

1.3cTender procedure

1.3dExecution pigruns

1.3eDefect assessment

1.3fRepair of defects

1.3Issue FFP report

SAP, MAXIMO

1.03Adapt Integrity Policy

1.01Verification integrity

pipelines

1.02Inventary (new) threats

BOWSTAR

BOWSTAR PIMS

Approved Annual Plan

Corporate Business Plan

Businessplan

Approved Annual Plan

List of pipelines to inspect

Budget

Report supplier

Repair program

Repair reports

Modifications

FFP Reports

Pigrun Report supplier

Requisition

Define project

Order to inspect

Costs

Asset Register

Budget

Non-conformities

Mitigating Plan

Concept Annual Plan

Modification proposals

Directiebeoordeling

Update list threats to integrity

Strategy

Registrations (Condition, Incident, Non-confomities etc)

Data supplier(s)

Defectanalyses (IT-tool)

Re-inspection interval

Measurements surveys etc

Defect data

Bizztalk

Specs supplier(s)

Method of repair (incl. markers etc..)

Risk Register

Workflow PIMS (Pipeline Integrity Management System)


How our IT-solutions can assist Asset Integrity Management

Bowstar Risk Assessment

Meridian--------------------

ArcGis

SAP, MAXIMOMaintenance Plan

Bowstar GIS

Prioritization Inspection & Maintenance Plan

Asset with unacceptable risk level

Incident & maintenance reports

Asset scope

Asset data

Asset changes

Threat & Mitigation Scheme

New and Improved Mitigations


ROV, ROTV, AUVand acoustic

data

Incident analyses report, required mitigating actions

Inspection schedule (program)

Video data

Alignment /cross checking all data pipeline

Request for repair / modification

Inspection, maintenance and repair policy (e.g. interval change)

Request for maintenance (e.g. tuning rectifier)

Request for inspection & repair (e.g. repair incl. dig up sheets)

ArcGIS

Executionwork(orders)

Pigrun data

DocumentManagement

System

AppropriateCorporate &Legal reports

MAJOR PIMS FUNCTIONS

MaintenanceManagement

Adaptations inspection, maintenance and repair methods


Optimization preventive maintenance plan (eg more CP less Pig)

QRA-tool(Carola in NL)

One callsystem

(land pipelines)

PIMSdatabase

Incident analyses

Free span calculations incl. required mitigations

Risk assessment, segmentation

Integrity calculations incl. forecast

CP analyses and modelling

Defect assessment

KPI calculations

FFP declaration, compliance reports etc

Workorder status, incident reports, maintenance reports, modifications, anomaly data, CP-readings etc.

Pipeline incidents, Fit For Purpose, Pigrun reports, Photographs

Video pipeline inspection

Inspection results

Pipeline & Object data (geodetic), Population density, Soil composition, Topographical data, One call data etc.

Workorders

Pipeline configuration

QRA

Tally list and raw data

Overview PIMS Architecture


PIMS International owns a great collection of templates to facilitatethe development of your asset-specific bowtie diagram.

What is the difference between Integrity and Risk?



And how the bowtie fits into this definition



And how the bowtie fits into this definition

30%

30%

40%40%

30%30%

Asset (e.g. pipeline)

Hazard(Unwanted event)

Threat 1

30%

Summed prev. lifecycle barriers

Actual: 0%

0%

Threat 2

40%


Actual: 0%

0%

Threat 3

30%


Actual: 0%

0%

D6 D3 D4 D1

Consequence 1Summed prev. lifecycle barriers

Actual: 0%

0%

F0 F2 F4 F2


Actual: 0%

0%

C3 C1 C5 C0


Actual: 0%

0%


Bowtie analyses PIMS International

Risk assessment workshop

2Selection of the Expert Team

of company

4Inventory threats for each

unwanted event

3Definition scope:

asset category andunwanted events

5Inventory consequences for

each unwanted event

6Ranking the risk matrix for

each consequence

7Inventory escalations for

each threat andconsequence per life cycle

Including the effectiveness and costs of eachexisting, improved and new mitigation

8Inventory mitigations for

each escalation (incl. optionsfor improvement)

Including the proportional contribution of eachthreat to that specific unwanted event

Unwanted event (e.g.):1. Pinhole2. Leak3. Rupture4. No flow

Including the proportional contribution of eachescalation to that specific threat

1Validation Risk Policy

(Benchmark risk matrix)

9Risk analyses

(Bowstar)

Final Report1. Bowtie diagram

2. Risk analyses incl mitigationeffectiveness

3. Conclusions4. Recommendations

10Concept Report

1. Bowtie diagram2. Risk analyses incl mitigation

effectiveness

11. Conclusions & Recommendations Expert Team

Bowtie diagram

Validation

Roadmap to a succesfull risk assessment with Bowstar

1. Used by key players in the industry,

2. Lots of templates from these key players thatsimplify your risk assessment and guaranteesoptimal results,

3. Maximum support by the very user friendlysoftware package,

4. The results are automatically transported to the:

1. Risk Register of Bowstar to control the risk mitigationprogram,

2. GIS-environment of Bowstar to find the high risk sectionsof the linear assets by dynamic segmentation (e.g.pipelines, high voltage power lines, dikes, railroads, watersupply etc.).

5. Full integration with Microsoft Office:

1. Generation of detailed Diagram Report in MS Word, usinga company specific template,

2. MS Excel up- and download of the diagram, analysesresults etc.,

3. Clipboard function to copy diagram, results, graphs etc.to your own text file.

6. Professional software package. Compatible withWindows, OSX, Linux etc. developed in C-Sharp


Ranking risk matrix:1. People2. Assets3. Environment4. Reputation

Hazard: Highpressure

Unwanted event

Threats that can result inthe unwanted event incl. percentage

contribution (total = 100%)

It all starts with the setup of the basic bowtie diagram

Consequences that can result fromthe unwanted event

incl. ranking risk issues


Subsea Pipelines

High gas pressure(Leak)

[T1] - ExternalInterference

34%

[T2] - Externalcorrosion

10%

[T3] - Internalcorrosion

51%

[T3.1] - Design

Actual: 19%

20%

[T3.2] - Construction

Actual: 10%

10%

[T3.3] -Commissioning

Actual: 0%

0%

[T3.4] - Operations

Actual: 60%

65%

[T3.5] - Maintenance

Actual: 5%

5%

[T3.5.1] - Severecorrosion is not

identified

100%

[T3.5.1.1] - Inlineinspection (ILI) to

indicate/verifyservere corrosion (≥

50% metal loss)1,45 MEur

90%90%

[T3.5.1.2] - Corrosioncoupons samplepoints to detectcorrosion rate

0,02 MEur

80%0%

[T3.5.1.3] - Spotmeasurement in accessible

area's (at suspiciousarea's) have indicated that

corrosion is minimal

0 MEur

90%90%

[T3.6] - 3rd Partyinterferenceprevention

Actual: 0%

0%

[T3.7] - Mothballing /removal

Actual: 0%

0%

[T4] - Erosion

5%

Life cycle barrier incl. percentageof total life cycle barriers

(total all life cycle barriers = 100%)

Threat that can result inthe unwanted event incl. percentage

contribution (total = 100%)

Mitigating measures incl costs:Green: implemented, no improvement possibleBlue: implemented, can be improvedRed: new mitigation, not implemented

Escalation factorincl. percentage contribution

to life cycle, mostly > 1(total = 100%)

Unwanted event

Threat incl. hiddenlife cycle barriers

Actual effectiveness life cyclebarrier

Hidden consequencesincl. hidden

life cycle barriers

Effectiveness mitigations:1. Potential2. Actual

The next step is the inventory of all threats (escalations) for all life cyclesFirst the preventive threats & mitigations


(Loss ofcontainment)


Bowtie diagram developmentAnd next the repressive escalations & mitigations for each life cycle

GdF Suez Assets2011

Sea pipeline(Loss of

containment)

B0 B3 B1 B1

[C1] - Gas emission,environmental damage[C1.1] - Mothballing /

removal

Actual: 0%

0%

[C1.2] - 3rd Partyinterference prevention

Actual: 0%

0%

[C1.3] - Maintenance

Actual: 9%

10%

[C1.4] - Operations

Actual: 24%

60%

[C1.5] - Commissioning

Actual: 0%

0%

[C1.6] - Construction

Actual: 0%

0%

[C1.7] - Design

Actual: 28%

30%

B3 B4 B1 B4

[C2] - Flash fire- Jet fire[C2.1] - Mothballing /removal

Actual: 0%

0%


Actual: 0%

0%


Actual: 9%

10%

[C2.4] - Operations

Actual: 27%

60%


Actual: 0%

0%


Actual: 0%

0%

[C2.7] - Design

Actual: 28%

30%

B4 B4 B2 B5

[C3] - Explosion[C3.1] - Mothballing /removal

Actual: 0%

0%


Actual: 0%

0%


Actual: 9%

10%

[C3.4] - Operations

Actual: 27%

60%


Actual: 0%

0%


Actual: 0%

0%

[C3.7] - Design

Actual: 29%

30%

[C3.7.1] - Detectionand repression

95%

[C3.7.1.1] - Gas andfire detection

Existing mitigation

50%50%

[C3.7.1.2] - ESD-measures

Existing mitigation

95%95%

[C3.7.1.3] - Acousticgas detection, not

practisized yet

Existing mitigation

20%20%

[C3.7.2] - Reductiondamage

3%

[C3.7.2.1] - Explosionstudy platformconstruction

Existing mitigation

70%70%

[C3.7.3] - Reductionfuel

2%

[C3.7.3.1] - Checkvalve and field supply

valve (production stopshowever downstream

pipe will 'produce')

Existing mitigation

40%40%

Life cycle barrier incl. percentageof total life cycle barriers

(total all life cycle barriers = 100%)

Consequences that can resultfrom the unwanted event

incl. Risk ranking


Mitigating measures incl costs:Green: implemented, no improvement possibleBlue: implemented, can be improvedRed: new mitigation, not implemented

Escalation factorincl. percentage

contributionto life cycle, mostly > 1

(total = 100%)



Potential riskreduced by

Improvements(calculated)

● = Actual risk (ranking)

Risk withno mitigations

(calculated)

3P:3 = Consequence 3P = Risk issue: People

Consequences

Unwanted event

Hazard: High Pressure

Threats

Basic model

Green: Minimum managementattention, control at workfloor level

Yellow: Continuous attention toimprove

Orange: Most of actions goes here /demonstrate ALARP

Red: Absolute priority, nottolerable

Visualization risk reduction

Detail matrix

Once developed the analytical functions of Bowstar will give you a clear view on your(potential) risk management performance!


Economics

6%

6%

1%

1%

6%

6%

13%

3%

GdF Suez Assets2011

Sea pipeline(Loss of

containment)

[T1] - ExternalInterference New

30%


Actual: 81%

81%

[T2] - Operation outsidespecs (well pressure on

pipeline)

10%


Actual: 94%

94%

[T3] - Externalcorrosion

20%


Actual: 69%

69%

[T4] - Internal corrosion

40%


Actual: 67%

93%

B0 B3 B1 B1

[C1] - Gas emission,environmental damageSummed prev. life

cycle barriers

Actual: 61%

61%

B3 B4 B1 B4

[C2] - Flash fire- Jet fireSummed prev. lifecycle barriers

Actual: 64%

64%

B4 B4 B2 B5

[C3] - ExplosionSummed prev. lifecycle barriers

Actual: 64%

64%

Maximum summed barrier valueof all life cycles that can be achieved by the

implementation of all improvements

Current contribution threatto unwanted event

Potential contribution threatto unwanted event


Unwanted event

Actual summed barrier valueof all life cycles

Threat that can result inthe unwanted event incl.

percentagecontribution (total = 100%)

The condensed bowtie diagram delivers all informationon actual and potential mitigation performance


Consequences that can resultFrom the unwanted event

incl. Risk ranking


Full understanding and monitoring of your risk mitigation is provided by the Risk Register


Actual risk level achieved bycompleted mitigations

Risk reduction potential

Risk levelwithoutmitigations

Maintenance department not involved in design criteria


KPI-s: mitigation & life cycle performance are generated automatically


The methodology of Bowstar: life cycle risk assessment incl. costs of mitigations


Advantages of the Bowstar approach of bowtie-analyses:

1. Highly structured threat inventory with a strong focus on each individual life cycle,2. Finding the right balance between investment and operational costs,3. Supports economic evaluation of all mitigations (new and existing) and as a result: the

definition of the most efficient Mitigation Plan,4. Justifies investment decisions by quantification and visualization of the effect of (new)

mitigations in the risk matrix,5. Enables balancing between preventive and repressive mitigations to find the most effective

solution in managing the risk,6. Reflects a very practical understanding of the actual and potential integrity level of the assets.

Bowstar GIS Functions

Presentation pipeline and other objects / polygons on the map

Wind turbines

TPI-activities (blue and red polygons)

More detail, map with several pipelines (blue / yellow)

Detailed info on pipe jointthat has been selected

MAP- and/or satelitebackground


Flexible Map-layer selection and settings(incl. detailed information of selected objects)

Test


Map layer examples: Line & point crossings, flexible threshold


Overview of all relevant pipeline parameters incl. dynamic segmentation based on thisdata implemented in a flexible threat model (e.g. Bowtie)

Dynamic segmentation pipeline Bowstar-Pipeline Plot window


All windows interconnected!

Bowstar-Risk window

Bowstar-GIS window

Selected segment

Individual threat contributions

Bowstar-Pipeline Plot window


Search and plot!

Search items

Item parameters(Item-based)


Flexible interface / user settings!

Example selection options


Interface Bowstar – Bowstar GIS, options menu: Export function


Import Bowstar file in Bowstar GIS – Risk module


Bowtie presentation in Bowstar GIS (90 degree rotation)


Each bar represents the overallthreat level of a pipeline. The threatlevel of the pipelines increases fromleft to right, the pipeline presentedat the right hand side of the picturehas the highest threat level =highest priority.

Threat profile along thepipeline route

The risk model from Bowstar bowtie is downloaded as a threat scheme in the Bowstar GIS Risk module.Additional algorithms are added in order to translate the generic risk analysis to a threat profile alongthe pipeline route on the basis of all relevant parameters. The Bowstar GIS module will calculate theoverall threat level of the pipeline (left picture) next to the threat profile of the pipeline (righ picture):

Risk ranking and dynamic segmentation with the Bowstar GIS – Risk module

Remark: If requested, any risk scheme (independent of the bowtie scheme) can be added to theBowstar GIS Risk module to enable dynamic segmentation of the pipelines.


Align the pigrun data in Bowstar GIS – Risk module

Opening CSV file with pigrun data, retrieved from pigrun-contractor

Test



Bowstar GIS view → upper picture = pigrun data incl. welds; lower picture = pipeline joints from as built



Bowstar GIS function → matching joints, fine tuning and approval by hand



Bowstar GIS function → example: pigrun data is missing a weld, see next picture

?



Pigrun data is missing a weld, correction by: 1) selecting a weld-point from the pigrun data



Pigrun data is missing a weld, correction by: 2) drag weld-point to the correct position



Pigrun data is missing a weld, correction by: 3) Bowstar executes automatic re-ordening of the welds



Bowstar GIS function → 2nd example: pigrun data is missing a weld, short section needs positioning by the selecting theright weld-point


Alignthe pigrun data in Bowstar GIS – Risk module

Bowstar GIS function → 2nd example: pigrun data is missing a weld, Bowstar executes automatic repositioning



Bowstar GIS function → once all welds are right positioned the corrected pigrun file is transferred to the Bowstar database


Finally the features that have been reported are shown on the map incl all pipe detailsand relevant feature parameters (geometry, safe pressure etc).

Test


Pigrun analyses and corrosion growth modelling

Enables forecast of corrosion growth and remaining strength on the basis of a user defined algorithm (see for example corrosion growth depth / length in mm/yr).

The white marked field in the table shows the date that the remaining strength doesn’t meet the coderequirements (ASME B31G) and needs a repair. The blue line indicates the remaining strength of theselected corrosion defect after 5 years.

Automatical classification defectsaccording to POF-specifications (=Pipeline Operator Forum).

Defect assessment on the basis of theASME B31G and/or other models such asBG, Rstrength


Finally the Dig-up sheet can be generated by the Bowstar Dig-up module


Our customers and publications

PUBLICATIONS


Documents

Haren Amsterdam - PIMS International · PDF fileGeneration of detailed Diagram Report in MS Word, using a company specific template, 2. MS Excel up- and download of the diagram, analyses