Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
AES093 Rev 1
RISK BASED INSPECTION QUALIFICATIONS
Aptech Engineering Services, Inc. 16100 Cairnway Drive, Suite 310
Houston, TX 77084
832-593-0550 www.aptechtexas.com
i
AES093 Rev 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page 1 The Company .................................................................................................. 1-1 2 Asset Integrity Management .......................................................................... 2-1 3 Risk Based Inspection Introduction .............................................................. 3-1 4 Risk Based Inspection Experience and References .................................... 4-1 5 RDMIP Methodology ....................................................................................... 5-1 6 RDMIP Approach............................................................................................. 6-1 7 Software ........................................................................................................... 7-1 8 Options for Implementation ........................................................................... 8-1 9 Deliverables and Reporting............................................................................ 9-1
10 RDMIP Training ............................................................................................. 10-1
11 Compliance.................................................................................................... 11-1 12 Benefits .......................................................................................................... 12-1 13 Asset Management........................................................................................ 13-1 14 Why Aptech? ................................................................................................. 14-1 15 Conclusions................................................................................................... 15-1
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Material contained herein may not be copied by hand, mechanical, or
electronic means, either wholly or in part, without express written consent by Aptech Engineering Services, Inc.
(DLN: 03D039R1)
1-1
03D039 R1
AES093 Rev 1
Section 1 THE COMPANY
Aptech Engineering Services, Inc. (APTECH) is an internationally recognized engineering consulting firm specializing in performance optimization of equipment and the prediction and extension of condition assessment, risk analysis, performance optimization, and the extension of remaining useful life of equipment. Our engineers and operations specialists have helped a wide variety of clients achieve optimum equipment performance either through improved operating techniques and methods or by cost-effective changes or additions to design. In the past 25 years, APTECH has successfully completed over 6,000 separate projects for over 1,500 clients throughout the United States and abroad. Our clients, many of whom return to APTECH for repeat services, come from numerous business sectors, including oil and gas (both onshore and offshore); chemical/petrochemical companies; municipal and investor owned utility companies; fossil and nuclear utilities; EPRI; GRI; manufacturing and equipment vendors in the aerospace, automotive, electronic sectors, and construction firms; legal firms and insurance companies; and, various public sector and institute clients. APTECH currently has 50 full-time employees and approximately 80 part-time employees engaged in projects spanning the following industries:
Fossil Power Nuclear Power Petroleum and Chemical Industry Litigation and Insurance Support General Industry
APTECH’s corporate office is in Sunnyvale, CA (San Francisco Bay Area) with regional offices in Houston, TX; Charlotte, NC; Upper Marlboro, MD, and Palm Beach Garden, FL. In addition, APTECH has representatives in many countries worldwide, including South Africa, Taiwan, Japan, Indonesia, China, Russia, Singapore, and India. Our offices are staffed by senior project management and performance analysts, engineers, mechanical, and nondestructive examination (NDE) personnel, allowing us to respond quickly to our clients' needs in any geographical location. The use of advanced assessment, control, and management technologies is required to determine the best solutions to minimize capital, operations, and maintenance costs of facilities while maintaining safety, reliability, and productivity. APTECH provides value-added services to industry by using advanced technology and world-class expertise to solve problems and help our clients gain a competitive edge. Our expertise in metallurgy, structural analysis, stress analysis, fracture mechanics, welding, corrosion, heat transfer, nondestructive examination, safety, and risk and/economic analysis ensures that decisions are based on the most reliable evaluations
1-2
03D039 R1
AES093 Rev 1
available. APTECH maintains a complete in-house metallurgical and mechanical test laboratory, extensive computer capabilities, and the resources to perform specialized materials testing. Worldwide competition is forcing many industries to take a hard look at how to minimize capital, operations, and maintenance costs of facilities while maintaining safety, reliability, and productivity. The use of advanced assessment, control, and management technologies is required to determine the best solutions. APTECH provides value-added services to industry by using advanced technology and world-class expertise to solve problems and help our clients gain a competitive edge. APTECH’s expertise in metallurgy, structural analysis, stress analysis, fracture mechanics, welding, corrosion, heat transfer, nondestructive examination, safety, risk analysis, reliability centered maintenance, and financial risk/economic analysis ensures that your decisions are based on the most reliable evaluations available. APTECH maintains a complete in-house metallurgical and mechanical test laboratory, extensive computer capabilities, and the resources to perform specialized testing. For risk assessment studies, APTECH commonly uses a combined approach of deterministic engineering analysis with statistical analysis. System and component analysis often calls for a team of specialists including the following disciplines:
Thermal-hydraulic analysis Hydrodynamic analysis Stress analysis (static and dynamic) Fracture mechanics analysis Vibration analysis
CORPORATE ORGANIZATION
APTECH is organized into several mission-focused divisions, each reporting to the President and Chief Executive Officer. Within the Engineering and Research Division, the various technical disciplines report to the Vice President of Engineering. Project teams are created as needed from the Engineering Division. APTECH uses the matrix management approach to ensure properly trained and experienced personnel are available to provide timely project support. Many of our contracts involve quick response, with one or more professional staff members on site within a matter of days. The duration of such activities can range from a few weeks to several years. APTECH uses a formal project structure for the basic team and a matrix management system for supporting technical and administrative services. Many of our highly technical projects involve risk assessment and risk management, as well as the diagnosis and correction of known or anticipated questions of structural integrity of process system components.
1-3
03D039 R1
AES093 Rev 1
SOFTWARE TOOLS
APTECH has an extensive database of software tools that are used on different projects. Some of these tools have been specially developed in house, or others are commercially available programs that APTECH uses for specific clients. Some of these software tools include:
PREFIS Fitness for Service Faceup TFDGEN RUL SW LFRAC Balife RDMIP Pipeline Integrity Management Programs
STAFF
Performance analysis, reliability, life prediction, and damage assessment require a diverse combination of technical disciplines. APTECH's staff has this combination. Our staff cover operational testing, maintenance optimization, and performance optimization, as well as the classical disciplines of structural design, metallurgy, stress analysis, fracture mechanics, fatigue, welding, corrosion, thermodynamics, heat transfer, materials selection and fabrication, and NDE. The following is a list of key employees and their qualifications and disciplines.
1-4
03D039 R1
AES093 Rev 1
PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS
Name Qualifications Years of Service
Adams, Bob A.S., Materials Technology B.S., Metallurgical Engineering P.E. Metallurgical Engineer, California (MT1786)
27
Agan, Dwight M.S., Mechanical Engineering, Energy Studies B.S., Mechanical Engineering
15
Anderson, Steve B.S., Physics & Chemistry M.S., Materials Science
15
Burnett, Tom
B.S., Marine Engineering 32
Christi, Don Nondestructive Testing of Metals C-School (highest level) graduate, equivalent to Trade School degree Hull Technician A-School (apprentice level)
10
Cipolla, Russ B.S., Mechanical Engineering M.S., Mechanical Engineering P.E. Mechanical Engineer, California (M17973)
35
Clark, Kimble B.S., Mechanical Engineering M.S., Mechanical Engineering Ph.D., Mechanical Engineering
35
Cohn, Marvin B.S., Physical Metallurgy M.S., Engineering P.E. Civil Engineer, California (C38007) Nuclear Quality Assurance Lead Auditor, USA (ASNI N45.2.23) P.Eng., Canada (M68997)
25
Cronin, Mike B.S., Physics B.S., Mathematics P.E. Mechanical Engineer, California (M26448) AWS Certified Welding Inspector, USA (AWS 97120771)
25
Egan, Geoff B.E., Mechanical Engineering D.I.C., Mechanical Engineering Ph.D., Applied Mechanics
35
Grimsrud, Paul B.S., Physics M.S., Ocean Engineering
30
Grover, Jeff B.S., Mechanical Engineering P.E. Civil Engineer, California (C30451) P.E. Mechanical Engineer, California (M27802) AWS Certified Welding Inspector, USA (AWS 97120831)
28
Hara, Kevin
B.S., Mechanical Engineer 25
Kohan, Steve B.S., Chemical Engineer M.S., Chemical Engineer Ph.D., Chemical Engineer
30
Kuntz, Todd B.S., Metallurgical Engineering M.S., Materials Science P.E. Metallurgical Engineer, California (MT1853) AWS Certified Welding Inspector, USA (AWS 97120891)
15
1-5
03D039 R1
AES093 Rev 1
Name Qualifications Years of Service Lindsay, Phil B.S., Metallurgical Engineering
M.S., Metallurgy P.E. Corrosion Engineer, California (CR349) P.E. Manufacturing Engineer, California (MF1096)
30
Moser, Dick
B.S., Metallurgy 34
Paterson, Steve A.S., Welding & Technology B.S., Metallurgy & Welding Engineering M.S., Metallurgy & Materials Engineering AWS Certified Welding Inspector, USA (AWS 97120921)
23
Rettig, Terry B.S., Engineering P.E. Corrosion Engineer, California (CR687)
32
Schreiber, Dick B.S., Mechanical Engineering M.S., Mechanical Engineering P.E. Mechanical Engineer, California (M20112), Nevada (014786) Certified Fire & Explosion Investigator, National (NAFI 5045-1274) BATC Refinery Process Safety Orientation, California
27
Sitton, Ryan B.S., Mechanical Engineering Certified EIT, Pursuing PE licensure
15
Sulllivan, Eric B.S., Metallurgical Engineering P.E. Metallurgical Engineering, California (MT1771) Hazardous Waste Operations & Emergency Response Training (29 CFR 1910.120) BATC Refinery Process Safety Orientation
20
Sutherland, Cory B.Sc., Metallurgical Engineering P.Eng., Alberta, Canada (M61653) API 653 Inspector (#6427)
15
Torbov, Steve B.S., Mechanical Engineering M.S., Mechanical Engineering
39
Tran, Hung
B.S., Chemical Engineering 8
Traylor, Shelby B.S., Chemical Engineering P.Eng, Texas (#42664)
30
Witte, Bill
B.S., Business Administration 25
2-1
03D039 R1
AES093 Rev 1
Section 2 ASSET INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT
The APTECH Petrochemical Group is a division of APTECH Engineering Services, Inc. and is located in Houston, Texas to provide a direct focus on Asset Integrity Management solutions to the process industries. Our projects around the globe have raised the performance of our client’s facilities so their assets are performing at optimal capacity. This is achieved by using industry best practices driven by the latest technologies and innovative strategies. In addition, APTECH has developed software solutions such as the Risk Directed Mechanical Integrity Program (RDMIP) for use in Risk Based Inspection programs around the world In the future, facilities will have comprehensive, fully integrated systems and culture directed at gaining greater lifetime effectiveness, value, safety, availability, profitability, and return from production and manufacturing assets. APTECH can help your organization, plant, or facility achieve these goals. The APTECH Petrochemical Group provides asset integrity management services to the following industries:
Offshore and Shipping Pipelines Chemical and Petrochemical Refineries and Gas Processing LNG and LPG
We provide asset and life management support to infrastructure, facility, and equipment through conception, design, construction, commissioning, operations, and decommissioning phases of a facility. The following key services are offered:
Inspection (Advanced Technologies) Maintenance (Reliability, Predictive and Preventative Strategies) Operational and Process Support (Operating Windows) Risk Analysis and RBI Process Safety and Mechanical Integrity Services IT Support (Software Tools) Management Strategies Business and Financial Modeling Training in Industry Codes, Standards, and Regulations
2-2
03D039 R1
AES093 Rev 1
Benefits of such a comprehensive asset integrity management program include:
Maximizing Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability of Equipment Improving Safety and Reducing Risk Enhancing Plant Performance and Profit Reduction In Maintenance and Inspection Costs Process Optimization and Operational Control Improving Personnel Safety and Performance Optimizing Sparing Compliance with Corporate and Industry Regulation and Legislation
3-1
AES093 Rev 1
1
Section 3 RISK BASED INSPECTION INTRODUCTION
Traditional inspection programs consist of baseline inspections and documentation on all equipment. Field inspection data are used to determine degradation mechanisms, corrosion rates, and the RUL of equipment. These programs are both costly and time consuming since resources are not focused on high-risk items, particular damage mechanisms, and specific inspection techniques. RBI philosophy is now being recognized in the USA and elsewhere as an alternate methodology for the planning and implementation of inspection and maintenance programs. The American Petroleum Institute (API) and others have recognized this approach as a means of determining inspection scopes and intervals. APTECH has extensive experience in the development and implementation of these cost-effective inspection and maintenance programs. The purpose of risk ranking equipment is to provide the basis for a risk–directed inspection program where maintenance resources (time and money) can be optimized in the inspection program. The optimization of limited resources based on risk will result in safer, more reliable plant operations. Both the likelihood of failure (LOF) and the consequence of failure (COF) are evaluated for each equipment item. The LOF and COF ratings for each fixed equipment item are multiplied to achieve a combined risk ranking. The results are placed into a matrix for inspection planning purposes. This is the first step in prioritizing the Inspection and Maintenance Planning program. APTECH can take this information and develop risk matrices, summary reports, and specific inspection plans for each equipment item studied. These reports will include possible damage mechanisms for each equipment item, recommended inspection techniques, and the scope and frequency of scheduled inspections. The results of the risk-ranking process can also provide additional information that can be used for allocation of resources and establishing relative priorities for some or all of the following types of activities:
Inspection, maintenance, repair, or replacement
Reliability studies
Risk management and the addition of safety features and alarms
Procedures and training improvements
Refinements in operations, process parameters, or equipment design The information developed can also assist in improvement of contingency plans, backups, and emergency response plans.
3-2
AES093 Rev 1
1
RBI studies constitute a first step in the practical application of risk management concepts to focus maintenance and inspection activities. It has been shown that this approach can save a plant considerable time and money in the short term, as well as in the long term. By conducting the correct inspections, using the correct inspection techniques, and carefully documenting the inspection findings, a facility can reduce the overall risk associated with equipment items and improve plant reliability. This will result in a safer more reliable plant, which operates cost effectively. A risk assessment is the process of gathering data and analyzing information in order to develop an understanding of the risk of a particular process. Three basic questions are considered to establish the basis for defining risk as follows:
What could go wrong (scenario or event)?
How often might it happen (likelihood)?
What are the effects (consequences)? Risk may in its most simple form be characterized as the product of probability of a given failure event, (LOF) and the consequences of that event, (COF).
Risk is the combination of the frequency of some event occurring and the consequences, generally negative, associated with that event
Risk assessments can be qualitative, semi-quantitative, or quantitative. Generally, these assessments are denoted as Level I, II, and III assessments. Qualitative answers are often sufficient to make robust decisions, but as more detail is required, more quantitative methods are necessary in order to make difficult risk decisions. The level of information necessary to make decisions varies widely. After identifying the hazards, qualitative methods for assessing the frequency and consequence are often satisfactory to enable the risk analysis to be completed. In other cases a more detailed analysis will be necessary. There are many different analysis techniques and models that have been developed to aid in conducting risk assessments; many of these techniques have been developed by the aerospace and nuclear industries. The key to conducting a successful risk analysis is as follows:
Choose the correct method for the particular problem at hand, or choose the appropriate techniques to achieve corporate goals.
4-1
AES093 Rev 1
Section 4 RISK BASED INSPECTION EXPERIENCE
AND REFERENCES APTECH maintains a staff of recognized experts in metallurgy, RBI, plant inspection programs and process safety management (PSM), among other things. APTECH developed the "Mechanical Integrity Supplement to the Maintenance Excellence Guide" under contract to CMA for the Responsible Care Program. With respect to RBI, we began developing RBI technology and software tools in the mid-1990s and offer one of the leading software products in this field. The APTECH Houston office has a team of dedicated engineers who have many years of experience at RBI implementation. This implementation has included the API’s methodology, APTECH’s in-house program, Risk Directed Mechanical Integrity Program (RDMIP™) and other commercial RBI programs. APTECH is also a member of the API RBI task force and has followed all API RBI activities with great interest. Because of this wide range of RBI experience, APTECH personnel can evaluate what programs are suitable and applicable for each client’s needs. APTECH personnel who have implemented RBI programs include experienced data clerks who are familiar with refinery operations and documentation. Process engineers who are experienced in refinery unit operations are used to conduct the COF evaluations, and experienced metallurgists or corrosion engineers are used to conduct the LOF. The Houston office has qualified corrosion experts who have many years of refinery experience and are familiar with all degradation mechanisms and corrosion problems associated with the petrochemical industry. In addition to this, APTECH has engineers who regularly conduct Level II and Level III RUL and fitness-for-service evaluations (FFS) (API 579). These personnel are used if the RBI analysis and subsequent inspections merit such evaluations. Additional information regarding our experience and skills may be found on our website at www.aptecheng.com or www.aptechtexas.com. APTECH’s August 2, 1999 article in the Oil and Gas Journal entitled, “Risk Based Methods Optimize Maintenance Work Scope” and “The Implementation of RBI Programs” published in the January 2002 Hydrocarbon Processing magazine are informative on the overall approach process and benefits. APTECH’s approach meets the requirements of API’s API 510, API 570, and API 580, and generally accepted good engineering practices. It is anticipated that over the next five years 80% of the facilities that could take advantage of RBI technologies will be implementing programs to realize the significant benefits. Our article on Process Plant Maintenance, which was also published in the Oil and Gas Journal in May 2000 provides additional information on benefits of our RBI approach.
4-2
AES093 Rev 1
Over the past seven years APTECH has:
Analyzed over 25,000 pieces of fixed equipment, piping and pumps
Developed an extensive database of units, processes, and equipment items
Completed approximately 25 projects worldwide
• United States, South Africa,
• South Korea, Australia, Europe
Conducted RBI projects on refineries, gas plants, and chemical plants
Interacted with regulatory authorities in Tennessee, South Africa, and Australia
Completed RBI training, technology transfers, and turnkey projects
4-3
AES093 Rev 1
PARTIAL LISTING OF RISK AND RELIABILITY ANALYSIS PROJECTS
CLIENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Pinjarra Power House Reliability and Risk Modeling
Pinjarra Boiler Feedpump Reliability Study
Alcoa - Australia
UNIRAM Reliability Study
Caltex Oil (SA) (PTY) Limited Purchase APTECH’s Risk Directed Mechanical Integrity Program (RDMIP™) Software and Consulting Services
CH2M Hill Hanford Group Risk Assessment of Storage Tank
City of Austin Generation Reliability Improvement Program (GRIP), Phase 1 Planning Purchase RDMIP Corporate License Eastman Chemical Company
Tennessee Eastman Division RDMIP Engineering and Consulting Services
Assistance with Engen’s RDMIP ENGEN - A Division of Engen Petroleum
Purchase User License for APTECH's RDMIP Software – Equipment and Piping Modules – Version 1 and Support Services
Environ Corporation USA Risk Assessment Workshop and International Training
H.B. Fuller Company Mechanical Integrity Implementation
Hampshire Chemical Corporation Conduct Mechanical Integrity Gap Analysis for the Hampshire Chemical Plant in Owensboro, KY
Hewlett Packard Company Risk Assessment, Materials Selection for Handling Hazardous Gases
Huntsman Chemical Company Australia PTY Limited
Inspection Management System for Stationary Equipment
Huntsman Chemical Company RDMIP Services and Consulting. Perform RBI Study on Vessels and Tanks-D-107, D-1001, D-1002, D-1204, D-208, D-210, and T-201.
IIR Holdings Ltd. Inhouse Training on Mechanical Integrity and Risk Based Reliability Process Safety Consulting and Operational Integrity Management System
Kaiser Aluminum Corporation
KJBC Reliability and Safety Program
Komag Company Risk Management and Prevention Program
4-4
AES093 Rev 1
CLIENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Marathon Oil Company Reactor Vessel Risk/Integrity Assessment
Niagra Mohawk Power Corporation Chemical Risk Assessment and Prevention Program
Construction and Operations Phase Risk Analysis (1100 km of Subsea Piping) Subsea and Onshore Reliability Analysis
Risk and Reliability Presentation Support
Oman India Gas Pipeline
Oman-India Pipeline — Risk Analysis Including Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment, and Risk Management
Occidental Chemical Company Process Risk Analysis Study
P.T. Badak Risk Based Prioritization of Life Extension Program Issues at LNG Plant Risk Based Prioritization of Equipment for Life Extension at Acetocyanahydrine Unit (Approximately 2000 equipment items)
Rohm & Haas
UNIRAM Availability Assessment
Samsung General Chemicals Company, Ltd. Purchase of RDMIP Software, License, and Installation, and RDMIP Training Safety and Reliability Assessment Project SK Chemicals
(Formerly Yukong Limited) RDMIP Implementation and Consulting Services
Reliability Investigation of Generator Retaining Rings
Reliability and Maintainability Analysis of Plant 37
Reliability and Maintainability Analysis of Water Treatment Plant
Suncor, Inc.
Reliability and Maintainability Analysis of Suncor’s Millenium Project
Tennessee Valley Authority Probabilistic Risk Analysis, Browns Ferry Plant
Covered/Excluded I&C for Refinery Tesoro Petroleum Hawaii (Formerly BHP Hawaii, Inc.)
Equipment Risk Ranking for BHP Phase 2
4-5
AES093 Rev 1
CLIENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Pilot Risk Ranking Project Tesoro Petroleum Hawaii (Cont.’d) (Formerly BHP Hawaii, Inc.)
Total Plan Fixed Equipment Risk Directed Inspection Planning Project
Texas Utilities Generating Company Risk Based Prioritization of Materials Change-out, Comanche Peak Plant
TUV Suddeutschland Purchase of RDMIP Software Data Transfer into RDMIP
VICO Services, Inc. Risk Based Maintenance Prioritization, LNG Plant
Washington Public Power Supply System Chemical Risk Assessment and Prevention Program
Westinghouse Savannah River Risk Assessment Study, K-Reactor
Risk Based Adjustment of Siting Assessment Wilfred Baker Engineering
Quantitative Risk Analysis of Heat Exchangers
Williams Refinery LLC (Formerly MAPCO Petroleum, Inc.)
RDMIP for MAPCO Petroleum, Inc.
4-6
AES093 Rev 1
PARTIAL LISTING OF RISK BASED INSPECTION PROJECTS
(*Designates Refineries)
CLIENT PROJECT Ammonia Plant (Completed Under Client Attorney Privilege)
Risk Based Inspection Program and Assistance with Siting Calculations (20 Fixed Equipment Items and Piping)
Bariven, S.A., PDVSA Services, Inc. Technical Assistance in Mechanical Integrity and Risk Based Inspection Program
Caltex Oil (SA) (Pty) Limited* Risk Based Inspection Pilot Program (100 Fixed Equipment Items)
Coastal Aruba Refining Company N.V.* (Formerly El Paso Corporation)
Risk Based Inspection Pilot Study Using API Methodology (100 Vessels and Related Piping)
Companhia Portuguesa de Producao de Electricidade, S.A.
Risk-Based Workshop in Portugal
Risk Directed Mechanical Integrity Program (RDMIP™) Corporate License Risk Based Inspection Program of Fixed Equipment (3,000 Fixed Equipment Items) Risk-Based Piping Inspection Pilot Program
Eastman Chemical Company* Tennessee Eastman Division
Risk-Based Inspection Support for Tennessee Eastman Division
Engen – A Division of Engen Petroleum* Risk Based Inspection Program (600 Fixed Equipment Items and Piping)
EOTT Energy/Enron* Risk Based Inspection Program and Turnaround Planning (40 Vessels)
H.B. Fuller Company Risk Based Inspection Program at 7 Facilities (1,500 Fixed Equipment Items and Piping)
Huntsman Chemical Company Australia Pty Ltd Risk Based Inspection Program and Mechanical Integrity (700 Fixed Equipment Items) Risk Based Inspection Study of 600 Vessels at A&O Plant
Risk Based Inspection Study of 400 Vessels at P&O Plant
Huntsman Chemical Company
Purchase RDMIP Software – Perform Risk Based Inspection Study at the Propylene Oxide and Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ester Plant in Port Neches, Texas
Japan Tech Services Corporation Risk Based Inspection Survey
Jose Cryogenic Plant, PDVSA, Venezuela Risk Based Inspection Program Audit (50 Fixed Equipment Items)
Kuwait Oil Tanker Co. S.A.K. Development and Implementation of Inspection and Maintenance Program at Gas Filling Plant
Marathon Ashland Petroleum LLC* Risk Based Inspection Pilot Study
4-7
AES093 Rev 1
CLIENT PROJECT Risk Based Inspection Study and Inspection Planning Report
Occidental Permian LTD* (Formerly Altura Energy)
Risk Based Inspection Program for 4 Gas Plants Using API Methodology (2,000 Fixed Equipment Items and Piping)
Phibro Energy USA Development of Procedures for Inspecting Fixed Equipment Risk Based Inspection Program (450 Fixed Equipment Items)
Premcor Refining Group Inc.* (Formerly Williams McKee Refinery)
Assist with Preparation for RBI State Board Hearing
P.T. Badak Risk Based Prioritization of Life Extension Program Issues at LNG Plant (Trains A and B)
Rohm & Haas Risk Based Prioritization of Equipment for Life Extension for Acetocyanahydrine Unit (Approximately 2,000 Equipment Items) Risk Based Inspection Study of Styrene Unit Samsung Autofina Chemical
(Formerly Samsung General Chemicals) Risk Based Inspection Management and Implementation
Sasol Condea Vista* Risk Based Inspection of Ethylene Unit (200 Fixed Equipment Items)
SC Johnson Wax Demonstration Project on Risk-Based Inspection
SK Chemical Company LTD* (Formerly Yukong Refinery, Ltd)
Safety Assessment of Category A Equipment for SK Corporation, HOU Plant (300 Fixed Equipment Items and Piping)
SK Chemical Company LTD* (Formerly Sunkyong Industries)
Risk Based Inspection Program and Safety Assessment (450 Fixed Equipment Items and Piping)
Star Enterprises Risk Based Inspection Procedures, Butane Sphere
Sunoco - Aristech Neal Plant* (Formerly Aristech Chemicals)
Risk Based Inspection Study
Tesoro Petroleum Hawaii* (Formerly BHP Hawaii Refinery, Inc.)
Risk Based Program of Fixed Equipment and Inspection Program Management (650 Equipment Items and Piping) Risk Based Inspection Study (100 Turnaround Vessels)
Risk Based Inspection Pilot Study (10 HF Alkylation Vessels and Perform Fitness-for-Service Evaluation on 3 Vessels.) Conduct Risk Based Inspection on 104 Pieces of Equipment
Tesoro Refining & Marketing Company*
Provide Engineering Services and Conduct Risk Based Inspection Study
Williams Refining LLC Risk Based Inspection Analytical Services to Develop Equipment Risk Ranking and Specific Equipment Inspection Plans
4-8
AES093 Rev 1
APTECH CLIENT REFERENCE LIST
Project Type Client Project Title Client Contact Name & Phone
Eastman Chemical Company* Tennessee Eastman Division
1. Purchased Corporate License of RDMIP Software
2. RBI Program of Fixed Equipment (3,000 Fixed Equipment Items)
3. Risk-Based Piping Inspection Pilot Program
4. RBI Support for Tennessee Eastman Division
Mr. Tim Malone 423-229-8031 [email protected]
Huntsman Chemical Corporation 1. Purchase RDMIP Software – Perform Risk Based Inspection Study at the Propylene Oxide and Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ester Plant in Port Neches, Texas
2. RBI Study of 600 Vessels at A&O Plant 3. RBI Study of 400 Vessels at P&O Plant
Mr. Chris Archie 409-724-4481 [email protected]
Occidental Permian LTD RBI Program for 4 Gas Plants Using API Methodology (2,000 Fixed Equipment Items and Piping)
Mr. Bob Newberry 806-229-9756 [email protected]
Risk Based Inspection
Premcor Refining Group, Inc. 1. RBI Program (450 Fixed Equipment Items).
2. Assist with Preparation for RBI State Board Hearing
Mr. Rodney Addison 901-947-8351 [email protected]
Apache Nitrogen Products, Inc. Review and Development of Mechanical
Integrity Program and Procedures. Determine Covered and Non-Covered Equipment (Prioritize Equipment)
Mr. Mike O’Neill 520-720-2119 [email protected]
Huntsman Chemical Corporation Australia PTY Ltd.
Risk Directed Inspection Program Services and Assistance with Development of Huntsman’s Mechanical Integrity Program
Mr. Frank Orszag [61] 3-93-16-3139 [email protected]
Mechanical Integrity
Tesoro Petroleum Hawaii (Formerly BHP Hawaii, Inc.)
Mechanical Integrity Piping System Inspection and Testing Program
Mr. Jim Kappel 808-479-0504 [email protected]
4-9
AES093 Rev 1
Project Type Client Project Title Client Contact Name & Phone Premcor Refining Group, Inc. Perform Field Metallography on H-1 Heater
Outlets at CRU 1344 Mr. Sheldon Bouillion 409-985-1157 [email protected]
Insul-Therm International, Inc. Root Cause Failure Analysis of Aluminum Cladding
Mr. Thomas Tuttle 323-728-0558 [email protected]
Metallurgical & Failure Analysis
Tesoro Refining & Marketing Co. Corrosion/Material Technology Development
Mr. Mike Sefcik 701-667-2447 [email protected]
Abu Dhabi Gas Industries Ltd (GASCO)
1. Risk Assessment of Gasco 12-Inch Pipeline
2. Review and Strategy for Remediation of Black Dust Problem on 42-Inch Lean Gas Pipeline from Habshan to Ruwais
Mr. V.R. Krishnaswamy [971] 2-603-7336 [email protected] Mr. Zafar Akhtar [971] 2-603-1188 [email protected]
Pipeline Integrity
Occidental Permian LTD
Oxy Pipeline RBI Program Mr. Bob Newberry 806-229-9756 [email protected]
Abdel Hadi Abdullah Al-Qahtani & Sons (Representative for SABIC and Saudi Chevron Philips)
1. Training at SABIC – Development and Implementation of Process Piping Inspection Programs
2. Training at Saudi Chevron Philips – Safety, Life Management, and Technical Integrity Training
Mr. Mohammed Ashraf [966] 3-826-1477 [email protected]
Harvard Technology Training Course of Technical Integrity in Refineries and Petrochemical Plants
Dr. Jalil Ghanem [971] 2-627-7881 [email protected]
Training & Seminars
Kuwait Oil Tanker Co. S.A.K. Risk, Mechanical Integrity, and the Latest Inspection and Maintenance Strategies
Mr. Fat'hi Ahmad Shamma [965] 326-3924 [email protected]
5-1
AES093 Rev 1
Section 5 RDMIP METHODOLOGY
Due to proprietary reasons, APTECH cannot divulge all information regarding the methodologies used to calculate risk ranking of equipment. However, APTECH’s approach and methodology is fully compliant with industry guidelines and best practice, such as described in API 580. In order to conduct a risk assessment in a systematic and methodical manner, a particular stepwise process is followed. Basic steps would include:
Hazard Identification
Frequency Assessment
Consequence Assessment
Risk Evaluation and Reporting The following provides a brief description of the overall method. APTECH’s RBI program uses a combination of metallurgical theory, industry experience, and specific plant evidence in order to risk rank equipment. The results of the risk ranking process generally provide additional information that can be used for the allocation of resources and relative priorities for some or all of the following types of activities:
Inspection repair or replacement
Addition of safety features and alarms
Procedures and training improvements
Refinements in plant equipment design
Frequency and scope of inspections Risk reduction implementation normally can be easily quantifiable in terms of costs in staff time for inspection programs, planning, maintenance upgrades, revisions, training, etc. The information provided by this procedure provides an objective basis for making these potentially difficult decisions for the allocation of resources to risk control and reduction. Traditional risk programs have tended to be based more on historical or theoretical failure probabilities, utilizing experiential data from similar plants, units, systems, and/or components to arrive at a measure of risk expressed in failures per year with numbers typically around 10-5
to 10-6.
5-2
AES093 Rev 1
When dealing with numbers this small, it is often difficult to conceptualize the relative risk weighting of individual components. Since it is APTECH’s objective to provide a program where the efforts of the Inspection Department can be managed in the context of risk reduction, the focus is on development of a baseline risk assessment using actual plant evidence of problems and known industry problems to formulate the LOF ratings. Because the project is based on evidence (utilizing documented and anecdotal experience along with industry data), it captures available knowledge on equipment integrity and provides a meaningful tool for future inspection planning purposes. The risk ranking considers the LOF of a component and the consequences of that failure, if it should occur. COF is ranked using a methodology designed to focus on worst-case hazard characterization. Both the LOF and COF evaluations use a ranking scale that ranges from 1 (highest LOF and worst COF) to 4 (lowest LOF and COF). The LOF and COF ratings for each fixed equipment item are multiplied to achieve a combined risk ranking. The output from the LOF and COF analysis is combined in a linear (non-weighted) matrix, which assumes that there is equality between like-ranked elements of LOF and COF. The four-by-four matrix results in ranking values between 1 and 16. This matrix is partitioned back down to a 1 to 4 value for the convenience of assigning inspection frequencies and providing a practical limit to the number of ranking levels to consider. The ultimate goal of this effort is to use the risk ranking to prioritize the maintenance and inspection workload and improve (or lower) the level of risk through increased proactive and focused maintenance and inspection of critical equipment.
DEFINITIONS
Likelihood Ranking Likelihood Category Definition
1 Very High Has occurred in the past (at this location). Likelihood of repeated incidents
2 High Has occurred in the past.
3 Medium May occur during lifetime. Incident has occurred in industry.
4 Low Not likely to occur. No historical experience.
5-3
AES093 Rev 1
Consequence
Ranking Consequence
Category
Health/Safety Environmental
Impact Financial
Impact 1 or A Very serious Plant fatalities.
Serious impact on public.
Major – extended duration. Full scale response.
Corporate-wide (fines, cleanup, significant downtime, replacement costs)
2 or B Serious Serious injury to plant personnel. Limited impact on public.
Serious – significant resource commitment.
Region/Affiliate (fines, downtime, replace, plant downtime)
3 or C Marginal Medical treatment for personnel. No impact on public.
Moderate – limited response of short duration.
Division/Site (replace equipment)
4 or D Negligible Minor or no impact on personnel.
Minor – little or no response needed.
Minor (replace minor equipment items)
RISK MATRIX
High Risk Very High
High
Medium
Low
Low Risk
Very Serious Serious Marginal Minor
Likelihood
Consequence
5-4
AES093 Rev 1
Risk Categories
• Very High
• High
• Medium
• Low The development and utilization of a risk-based ranking program for equipment items differs from traditional inspection programs in that it provides for a systematic, structured approach to analyzing the potential problems, ranking them relative to other problems, and determining the most cost-effective inspection method to reduce risk. The most important aspect of an effective RBI program is that it must be evergreen. That is, after each inspection is conducted the following is done:
The state of knowledge is redefined.
Potential damage mechanisms are either confirmed to exist or not exist; corrosion rates are established or tracked and compared to predicted rates.
Confidence in inspection findings is improved through increased scope or through the use of different/complementing technologies, etc.
This new information is then incorporated into the risk model, and the change in risk can be recalculated. The program will also provide for a systematic review of process changes that can affect the life of fixed equipment. With time, the model will self-correct and reduce the LOF through the efficient use of inspection resources.
6-1
AES093 Rev 1
Section 6 RDMIP APPROACH
RBI programs provide a structured method for identifying and assessing the potential impact of deficiencies on an operating plant, as well as ascertaining inspection methods to mitigate these deficiencies. RBI provides a systematic methodology for factoring risk into infrastructure maintenance and inspection decision making. APTECH maintains its own database of damage mechanisms and operational conditions that could cause degradation of materials. The objective of RBI is to focus and prioritize the inspection effort without doing additional work (other than the RBI study). Instead of baselining all equipment, it allows one to focus initially on the high-risk equipment items without jeopardizing plant safety. APTECH has many years experience in the development and implementation of RBI programs for process facilities, worldwide. It is our experience that a complete RBI program consists of the following elements:
Training Software Data Collection and Management LOF and COF Analysis Risk Ranking Analysis
Reporting Risk Management − Dealing with
High Risk Items Turnaround Planning Updating and Continuous
Improvement APTECH has a risk management system in place to assist with the development and implementation of a RBI program. The RDMIP system consists of:
Volume I — RDMIP Management Overview Volume II — RDMIP Implementation Volume III — RDMIP Work Management Program Volume IV — Software Manual Volume V — Training Manual
APTECH proposes to assist facility personnel understand the fundamentals of these elements and provide experienced personnel to assist in implementing a RBI program.
6-2
AES093 Rev 1
A typical RBI project, conducted by APTECH personnel, could consist of the following:
Provision of software, procedures, training and RBI methodology
Facility will provide access to the necessary equipment and plant data for the RBI analysis. APTECH will provide a listing of the information required.
Facility will identify plant contacts to assist with questions concerning process details, construction and fabrication, and inspection history data. APTECH’s experience is that occasional questions will arise which will require this kind of assistance.
Project initiation will begin with a kick-off meeting to assure APTECH’s project team is properly aligned with project objectives and schedule, and that there is clear agreement on the deliverables to be provided.
APTECH will set up software, procedures and train personnel in methodologies and data collection and input. The facility or APTECH could provide a team of personnel who will collect data and input into the software. APTECH, in conjunction with plant personnel, will provide inspection, metallurgical, and process support to conduct the RBI analysis.
A review of the results, conclusions, and recommendations will be conducted with plant management, maintenance, and inspection personnel.
APTECH will develop comprehensive inspection plans and conduct QA of the product and periodic updates.
The RBI program can be incorporated into current maintenance and inspection programs at a facility, as well as being linked to existing software tools as shown in the next figure.
FieldInspection
Data
PressureVessel Risk
RankDatabase
COF LOF
MaintenanceManagement
System
UT
Database
InspectionPlans
InspectionSchedules
InspectionReports
Workorders
6-3
AES093 Rev 1
The overall program and approach can be divided into three distinct phases and subsequent tasks:
Goal/Objective
Assemble Resources
Determine Technical Approach/Software
Initial Screen (Scope)
Risk Management
Identify Hazards
Data Collection
COF LOF
Initial Risk Rank
Risk Reduction (Mitigation)
Inspection Plans
Fitness For Services
Remedial Actions
Evergreen Implementation
Others
Others
Quality Assurance
(QA)
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
7-1
AES093 Rev 1
Section 7 SOFTWARE
The APTECH RDMIP software has been in development for over seven years. It is used on refineries, chemical plants, gas plants, and petrochemical facilities worldwide. Over 25 major companies have used the RDMIP system in order to implement RBI programs. Major users are Eastman Chemical (Corporate License), Huntsman Chemical, Samsung Chemical, Caltex Oil, ENGEN refinery (subsidiary of Petronas), and the Tesoro refineries. The software comes in two versions (MS Access and SQL version) and is fully compatible with Windows 95, 98, 2000, and XP. APTECH’s RDMIP software meets the specific needs of both the chemical industry and refining, and it also meets the American Petroleum Institute (API) standards. Unlike other products available, RDMIP provides hazard information on over 1,600 chemicals. It is unique in that it is able to evaluate mixtures of both flammable and toxic chemicals. The software is self-contained and does not require the purchase of any further software. The software allows equipment items to be broken down into subcomponents (tube, shell of HE), contains 1,600 chemicals, and approximately 70 damage mechanisms. It is not data intensive like some RBI programs, yet it is robust and easy to understand. It calculates the LOF and COF of subcomponents and risk ranks them. Based on that information, inspection plans are developed for each equipment item. A summary of the RDMIP software follows:
Over 7 Years in Development
Modules for
• Fixed Equipment (to Subcomponent Level) • Piping (to Circuit and Element Level)
Useful for Any Process Facility
Levels A and B, Simple to Advanced
Reports for Operations, Maintenance, and Inspection
Can Interface with Existing Inspection Planning Software
1,600 Chemicals and Toxics, Mixing Rules
70 Damage Mechanisms Different pricing options are available for the RDMIP software. These options can be discussed with APTECH personnel or their appointed agents.
7-2
AES093 Rev 1
FIXED EQUIPMENT – DATA ENTRY Fixed Equipment Data Entry has three main sections:
The Equipment Information Section (section indicated in red) The Subcomponent Level A/Essential Section (section indicated in green) The Subcomponent Level B/Detail Data Section (section indicated in green)
7-3
AES093 Rev 1
PROCESS STREAM – DATA ENTRY (COF ANALYSIS)
7-4
AES093 Rev 1
DAMAGE MECHANISMS – DATA ENTRY (LOF ANALYSIS)
8-1
AES093 Rev 1
Section 8 OPTIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION
When it comes to implementing a RBI program, companies and operators have a range of choices. They can develop and implement the technology themselves; they can buy the technology and implement it themselves; or, they can buy the technology and let someone else do the implementation. By answering the questions described below, a company will get a feel for its expertise and ability to conduct a risk assessment.
Why is the assessment being done? What knowledge and skills are required for the assessment? Who is on the RBI team? What are their roles in the RBI process? Who is responsible and accountable for what actions? Which facilities, assets, and components will be included? What technical approach, methodology, software will be used? What data are to be used in the assessment? When will the assessment be completed? How long will the assessment remain in effect, and when will it be updated? How will the results be used? What benefits will be derived from the program?
Facilities have several options for implementing a RBI program at its facilities. Some of these options are discussed below. ORGANIZATIONAL REQUIREMENTS
In order to complete a RBI project, personnel with various skills are needed. Typically, a team is used to collect data, input data into a database, liase with plant personnel, conduct the analysis, and complete the reporting. A typical team would consist of:
Metallurgical or Corrosion Engineer (or an Experienced Inspector)
Process Engineer
Part-time Support from a Project Manager, Data Input Clerk, Inspectors, Operations and Maintenance Personnel
8-2
AES093 Rev 1
Such a team can usually complete 50 equipment items a week. If more equipment items need to be completed, the team can double or triple in size. This team can be provided by APTECH, the facility, or a mixture of both, depending on the availability and expertise of the facility’s personnel. The personnel used on the project should be familiar with the process, operations, and metallurgy/corrosion issues associated with the plant. APTECH only uses experienced engineers who are familiar with a client’s operation and process, and who also have extensive RBI experience. The input of specific plant personnel is also needed during the duration of the project. This time is usually not more that one to two hours per week (unless the facility wants extensive input), and would consist of interviews or assistance with particular data gathering. These personnel would include operators, inspectors, engineering, maintenance, and safety personnel. These personnel would also be included in a final review of the project results. Option 1 – Single-Site License Fee and Training (Technology Transfer)
A single-site license fee can be purchased together with four days of training or RBI certification. Option 2 – Single-Site License, Training, and Consulting
A single-site license fee can be purchased together with training and consulting services. If a facility has the personnel and expertise, implementation can be conducted by the facility personnel, after the initial training period. In this instance, APTECH would provide project management and QA support. This approach would minimize APTECH’s engineering input and lower costs of implementation, but still ensure that the facility receives a quality product. The facility would need to provide a full-time corrosion engineer (or experienced inspector), a process engineer, and part time data input and management support. Option 3 – Training and Pilot Study Implementation
APTECH can provide a team to conduct the implementation of a RBI pilot study on plant equipment. A project would consist of training, data collection by APTECH, RBI analysis of the data by APTECH personnel in Houston, and review and final reporting by APTECH at the plant site. In this instance, the facility would not be required to purchase the RDMIP software.
8-3
AES093 Rev 1
Option 4 – Turnkey Implementation
A final option would be for APTECH to provide personnel to implement the entire program turnkey. This can be achieved with or without the purchase of the RDMIP software. A project would consist of training, data collection by APTECH, RBI analysis of the data by APTECH engineers, and review and final reporting by APTECH at the plant site. APTECH can provide a facility with training, consulting, quality control checks, and other ongoing support services in the risk analysis, materials technology, FFS, and RBI areas. This work can be conducted on a time and materials basis in accordance with APTECH’s standard terms and conditions. A facility may consider additional services or deliverables that may enhance the value of the RBI study. These could include:
Development of a proprietary damage mechanism database that is plant, process, or industry specific. This database would be included in the RBI database and would give guidance on corrosion/damage mechanisms, susceptible areas and equipment, process and operating limits to mitigate damage, and NDE techniques most appropriate to discover the damage.
Development of a software link to current inspection planning programs so as to achieve maximum benefit from both programs.
.
9-1
AES093 Rev 1
Section 9 DELIVERABLES AND REPORTING
Typical deliverables for the APTECH RDMIP program can include:
Procedures and Software Manual
Populated database for future use by facility.
Summary report identifying overall conclusions and any assumptions used in the analysis
Risk Matrix for each unit
Risk Rank Summary Report which includes:
• Likelihood and consequence ranking for each equipment item
• Risk ranking for each item
• Identified damage mechanisms
Inspection plans for each equipment item that include:
• Equipment overview
• Potential and historical damage mechanisms
• Type and extent of inspections, including frequency and scope
Inspection planning spreadsheet and future inspection planning horizon Additional deliverables could include:
Simplified process flow diagrams highlighting potential and historical damage mechanisms. These can be used later to define inventory groups for the analysis of piping.
Detailed inspection point maps for high-risk items.
Cost benefits analysis Examples of a risk matrix, summary report, and specific inspection plan are shown on the next pages.
9-2
AES093 Rev 1
9-3
AES093 Rev 1
9-4
AES093 Rev 1
9-5
AES093 Rev 1
10-1
AES093 Rev 1
1
Section 10 RDMIP TRAINING COURSES
APTECH can provide a range of RBI training courses for its clients. These courses range from a one-day general RBI course for managers, to a full week course for personnel who are going to implement RDMIP themselves. The following provides a brief summary of the training program: MODULE 1 — RBI/RDMIP OVERVIEW
Objective and Contents of Module – Upon completion participant should:
Understand the background of RBI and RDMIP
Understand the similarities and differences between APTECH and API approaches
Have a basic understanding of the RDMIP process and software
Understand the difference between the RDMIP analysis and day-to-day inspection management
MODULE 2 — PROJECT ELEMENTS AND DATA COLLECTION
Objective and Contents of Module – Upon completion participant should
Understand the roles and responsibilities of project team members
Understand the elements that make up a successful program
Have a working knowledge of why certain data are important
Understand the equipment/software data hierarchy
Have a working knowledge of data entry in the software MODULE 3 — COF
Objective and Contents of Module - Upon completion participant should
Understand the COF Analysis
Have a working knowledge of data importance and approximations
10-2
AES093 Rev 1
1
Have a working knowledge of the Level A COF calculation done in the software
Be acquainted with the Level B calculation MODULE 4 — LOF
Objective and Contents of Module – Upon completion participant should
Understand the LOF analysis
Have a working knowledge of data importance
Have a working knowledge of how to conduct a Level A LOF analysis, including the importance of documenting the engineering basis for decisions in the software
Be acquainted with the Level B evaluation MODULE 5 — SPECIAL FUNCTIONS AND REPORTING
Objective and Contents of Module – Upon completion participant should
Be acquainted with some of the features in the software
Understand how to generate standard reports contained in the software
Understand the ability to use the software to generate unique plant reports
Understand special functions
• Importing and exporting
• Copying and updating records
• Historical archiving (check in, check out)
• Administration MODULE 6 — INSPECTION AND TURNAROUND PLANNING
Objective and Contents of Module – Upon completion participant should
Understand the difference between the RDMIP analysis and day-to-day inspection program management.
• Fundamentals of inspection and risk based turnaround planning
• Evergreen process
• Deficiency resolution
10-3
AES093 Rev 1
1
• MI risk evaluation
• Turnaround integration
• Some basic RUL concepts The above training can be completed in three days. The remainder of the training time will be devoted to use and practical application of APTECH’s RDMIP software.
11-1
AES093 Rev 1
Section 11 COMPLIANCE
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s OSHA 29 CFR Part 1910 contains requirements for preventing or minimizing the consequences of catastrophic releases of toxic, flammable, or explosive chemicals. Paragraph (j) relates to MI and applies to pressure vessels, storage tanks, piping systems, relief devices, vent and emergency shutdown systems, as well as controls, alarms, and interlocks. A requirement for compliance is that inspections and tests shall be performed on process equipment.
“Inspection and testing procedures shall follow applicable codes and standards, such as those published by ASME, API, AICE, ANSI, ASTM and NFPA, where they exist; or, recognized and generally accepted engineering practices.” “The frequency of inspections and tests shall be consistent with applicable codes and standards; or, more frequently if determined necessary by prior experience.” “The employer shall have a certification record that each inspection and test has been performed in accordance with paragraph (j)."
The generally accepted standards for the inspection of petrochemical equipment are found in API Standards 510, 653, and 570. The API 510 Pressure Vessel Inspection Code relates to the maintenance inspection, rating, repair, and alteration of pressure vessels. Barring state, county, or city regulations that are more stringent than the federal code, it is apparent from current industry guidelines and standards that inspections can extend beyond 10-year intervals and that external inspections can be substituted for internal inspections. This can be done by conducting a thorough RBI study in which both the LOF and COF are closely examined for pressure equipment. The RBI study should be conducted according to the guidelines described in API 580 (or any other engineering standard that constitutes good engineering practice).
11-2
AES093 Rev 1
In addition to this, there is justification for doing external inspections over internal inspections, if certain criteria are met, as described in API 510. It is suggested that these criteria become part of the LOF procedure used to conduct the risk ranking of equipment. The decision that certain vessels meet these criteria should be carefully discussed with appropriate personnel when risk ranking is being conducted. Recommendations based on the risk ranking of vessels or equipment meeting these criteria should be carefully analyzed, and the final decision to extend inspection intervals beyond 10 years or to substitute internal inspections must be made by the a chief inspector or engineer, as described and recommended in the standard. If these steps are completed correctly and are well documented, the client will be in compliance, based on the fact that officially accepted standards and guidelines have been used to reach such decisions. API RP 580 provides the basic elements required to implement a RBI program. The document is designed to provide a framework that clarifies the expected attributes of a quality risk assessment, without imposing undue constraints on users, and offers users the flexibility to apply the RBI methodology within the context of existing corporate risk management practices. APTECH has compared its program to API 580 and the inspection codes, to ensure compliance. These comparisons are well documented in the RDMIP procedures.
12-1
AES093 Rev 1
Section 12 BENEFITS
The benefits of implementing a RBI program on a facility are many and varied. Benefits depend on the type of program implemented, the goals of the program, and the facility’s previous inspection and maintenance history. Benefits of a RBI program include improved MI with better identification of probable damage mechanisms at work. The appropriate inspection program can then be developed to manage them. Inspection programs can be developed based on risk (not time based), and priorities can be set according to the LOF and the possibility that certain damage mechanisms will occur. Plants with current RBI programs also report an $8 to $20 return on investment for every dollar spent to establish the program. This return is the result of improved inspection definition and associated labor and plant downtime cost benefits. Additional benefits include reducing thickness monitoring locations (TMLs) on low risk equipment items and improved turnaround planning. A summary of expected benefits from such a program would include:
Regulatory Compliance/Acceptance
Improved Safety and Reduced Risk
Long Term Cost Benefits
Focused Inspections
• TML Reduction
• Extending Intervals Beyond 10 Years
• Opportunity to Reduce Internal InspectionsTurnaround Planning
Use of New Inspection (NDE) Technology
Informed, Documented, Defensible Decisions PLANT PERFORMANCE BENEFITS FROM RBI PROGRAMS
RBI studies provide a detailed understanding of potential hazards and failure mechanisms related to the possible loss of pressure containment in pressure vessels and piping. This information can provide an excellent MI program, resulting in properly managed hazards. This improvement in the MI approach provides substantial cost/performance benefits in four major areas. During the analysis, specific recommendations are made relating to operational, corrosion, and inspection needs that address identified damage mechanisms in equipment. All decisions are documented, allowing management to make informed, defensible decisions based on risk. RBI provides the information necessary to establish a high quality, cost-effective inspection program.
12-2
AES093 Rev 1
Avoided Catastrophic Failure
The first priority of any MI system is to avoid catastrophic failure, which could result in injury, environmental damage, or major financial loss. RBI analysis provides the understanding required to properly manage pressure equipment integrity. Turnaround-Related Impacts
RBI can be used to provide the following benefits:
Turnaround Intervals – RBI is used to define required equipment inspection schedules. This information is then included in turnaround planning. Often, plant turnaround intervals can be lengthened. This can extend average annual operating days by 1 to 2% per year, resulting in substantial increases in production value.
Turnaround Duration – RBI analysis information often allows reductions of planned turnaround duration. Proper inspection intervals frequently allow the inspection work scope to be substantially reduced. This allows shorter duration when inspection requirements are on the critical path. It also allows better turnaround planning with fewer surprises in execution.
Unexpected Damage Findings – Often equipment damage is discovered during a turnaround, which requires additional unexpected work, extended turnaround duration, or both. This can have a substantial unplanned cost impact because of both the additional work and the added lost production. Plants can often reduce turnaround costs by 10% or more by using RBI information in the turnaround planning process.
Turnaround Inspection Costs – Reduction of excessive inspection work during a turnaround is normally achieved by using RBI defined inspection plans. This reduces turnaround costs for these inspections. It also helps the turnaround by allowing planning and execution to focus on fewer things.
Unplanned Outages Due to Pressure Equipment Failure
Most equipment failures are not catastrophic. However, they can still have significant impacts. Unscheduled downtime or reduced operating rates may be required to repair damaged equipment. RBI analysis greatly reduces this risk by providing better knowledge of damage mechanisms at work. An appropriate program can be established to manage pressure equipment assets. Costs Due to Excessive Inspections on Low Risk Equipment
The traditional inspection methodology required a baseline thickness inspection for all equipment followed by one to two more inspections over the next three to five years. Corrosion
12-3
AES093 Rev 1
rates are calculated and then used to extend future intervals where appropriate. This approach requires a major inspection cost investment, especially in the first few years of the life of a plant. Protecting Equipment from Excessive Wear and Corrosion
By understanding potential damage mechanisms and using appropriate risk reduction techniques, the life span of equipment items can be increased. Cost savings associated with RBI projects that APTECH has conducted include:
Chemical Plant – Extension of mandated 2-year turnaround cycle to 4 and 6 year intervals. Savings of more than $11 million dollars every 2 years.
API Evaluation of Gas Plant – Turnaround times shortened by 10 days. Savings of $10 million dollars every turnaround cycle.
Ethylene Oxide Unit – A 5-year turnaround cycle was changed to a risk approach where vessels are now inspected according to risk. Eighty percent of the vessels are now inspected at more than 10 years. This resulted in a savings of $4 million dollars every 5 years.
Ethylene Unit – RBI study on 600 turnaround vessels. Results from study resulted in more than $500,000 savings on turnaround.
Refinery – RBI study on proposed turnaround vessels resulted in reduction of turnaround scope resulting in substantial cost savings.
Primary cost benefit is savings in lost production and avoidance of major incident or catastrophic failure.
13-1
AES093 Rev 1
Section 13 ASSET MANAGEMENT
Many process facilities are searching for new methodologies and systems to inspect and manage the integrity of their pressure equipment. The driving forces for such programs are reduced margins, increased competition, new standards, and more stringent environmental regulations. In order for a facility to extend the operating lifetime of pressure vessels and piping, safely and cost effectively, it is necessary to implement the latest inspection and maintenance strategies. RBI has its roots in PSM and MI programs and is gradually becoming accepted as good engineering practice for the implementation of inspection and maintenance programs. This section describes the methodologies and practices that may be used to implement a Plant Integrity Management System (PIMS) in order to be in compliance with existing regulations and assist with inspection, maintenance, and turnaround planning. The objective of developing a complete asset management program is to raise the performance of a facility’s inspection and maintenance programs so they outperform associated programs worldwide. This can be achieved by using industry best practices to move away from reactive maintenance programs and towards preventative and predictive programs, which incorporate reliability and risk. In the future, a facility will operate using risk-based reliability centered maintenance and inspection programs, which are driven by the latest technologies and practices. The majority of plant maintenance staff operates in a reactive mode. This means that the largest expenditure of maintenance resources in plants typically occurs in the area of corrective maintenance i.e., when problems or failures occur, they are corrected. Most facilities have been operating for extended periods in a reactive maintenance mode. Maintenance resources have been almost totally committed to responding to unexpected equipment failures, and very little is done in the preventative arena. Corrective, not preventative, is frequently the operational mode of the day, and this tends to blur how many people view what is preventative and what is corrective. Some plants actually foster pride in how quickly they can fix things or correct failures under pressure. However, it has been proven that this type of operation is not cost effective in terms of safety, downtime, and efficient use of resources. Some common maintenance problems include:
Insufficient proactive maintenance
Frequent problem repetition
Erroneous maintenance work
Not using sound maintenance practices
13-2
AES093 Rev 1
Unnecessary and conservative preventative and predictive maintenance (PM)
Poor rationale for conducting PM actions
Program lacks traceability and visibility
Blind acceptance of original equipment manufacture’s (OEM) input
PM variability between like units
Exclusion of new technologies, such as predictive applications, reliability, and risk By addressing these problems and moving towards a preventative and predictive program, a facility can achieve the following:
Prevent failures
Detect the onset of failures
Discover hidden failures Creating a new PM program or updating an existing one involves essentially the same process. One needs to determine what is to be achieved with the PM program and how the program can be built into a new or existing infrastructure. There is a host of supporting technologies that can be included in a PM program. Some of these include:
Failure Analysis Technology
Incipient Failure Detection
Information Management – Maintenance Management Information System (MMIS) or Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS)
Reliability/Availability/Maintainability (RAM) technology
Risk Technology A useful philosophy to incorporate into a PM program is the concept of reliability. Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) has been so named to emphasize the role that reliability theory and practice play in properly focusing (or centering) preventative maintenance activities on the retention of the equipment’s inherent design reliability. As the name implies, reliability technology is at the very center of the maintenance philosophy and planning process. Finally, the latest concept in maintenance and inspection activities is the incorporation of risk to prioritize maintenance tasks and schedules. It is no longer practical to choose systems for RCM analysis based on subjective risk importance. The primary systems on refineries and petrochemical plants are not as obvious as in the aircraft and nuclear industries (where RCM was born). Risk-centered maintenance uses the identical functional description of systems, subsystems functional failures, and failure modes that RCM employs. However, it is different from the RCM method in that the criticality class is replaced with an explicit risk calculation.
13-3
AES093 Rev 1
Using quantitative values, instead of coarse assignments, allows a more complete description of the actual hazards that exist in a facility and help to properly focus and prioritize maintenance activities. All of these concepts and tools should be considered in the development of a “world’s best practice” maintenance and inspection program for a facility. Engineering and management structures, currently in place at a facility, need to be reviewed. Such a review should focus on operational set-up, operating strategies, contracting schemes, organizational structures, and management culture. In addition to this, a review of the facility history, procedures, and inspection and maintenance records should be conducted to determine the current mechanical status of plant assets. This review could include plant walkdowns and comparison with industry practices and general plant conditions. This “gap analysis” should highlight deficient areas that need correcting in the PM program. During this task, APTECH will review the current inspection program and practices. The review will cover the following:
Equipment files
Inspection reports and results
Inspection procedures
Training records for inspectors
Inspection plans
Inspection schedules
Existing local rules and regulations
Existing inspection program organizational charts
Personnel job duties and responsibilities
Interviews with key inspection personnel, including inspectors, inspector supervisors, maintenance manager, and others, as deemed necessary.
The purpose of the review can be considered to be three-fold:
Determining whether the current inspection program and its practices meets what would be considered generally and accepted good engineering practices
Determining whether the current inspection program meets local rules and regulations
Determining whether the current inspection program provides sufficient and clear information for deciding whether or not equipment is fit for service
13-4
AES093 Rev 1
In order to implement a corrosion control program (dehydration, filtering, chemical inhibition, cleaning, pigging, planned repair, and maintenance), it is necessary to install an internal corrosion monitoring system so data can be generated that detail the present condition of the production, transportation, and storage facilities. This system will also allow an efficient low maintenance system to be run in the future. The management and implementation of such a PM program requires that much data be collected, analyzed, and stored. Many software programs exist for these tasks, however, many of them are standalone and communication between different disciplines is rare. For the PM program to work effectively, all data should be stored, analyzed, managed, and acted upon from a single source. This source could be a program, portal, or methodology. An example of a computerized maintenance management system is shown in Figure 1. Software systems may include reliability tools such as:
UNIRAM – Availability Modeling ACOM – Cost Optimization UNISAM – Spares Analysis OVERT – Overhaul, Replacement Decision Analysis BALIFE – Bayesian Life Prediction RBI – Risk Based Inspection Tools
Following the industry review, a system should be agreed upon and incorporated into the PM plan.
Figure 1 – Maintenance Information Management System.
PdM – Predictive Maintenance PM – Preventative Maintenance
Management System
PM Tasks/ Frequencies
PdM Tasks/ Frequencies
PdM Repair Work Orders
PdM Work Orders
PM Work Orders
Failure Work Orders
Root Cause Failure Analysis
Risk Based Inspection DB
13-5
AES093 Rev 1
A report will be provided with details of APTECH’s observations. We will identify any gaps in the current program in reference to local rules and regulations, as well as what is considered good and generally accepted engineering practices. The report will include APTECH’s conclusions and recommendations for improving the program. A key aspect of the report will be APTECH’s work plan for the implementation of the proposed management system, including the identification of key positions and their roles and responsibilities in the form of organization charts, mission statements, and job descriptions. The principle deliverable from this task will be to provide a clear and concise guide to improving the performance of plants by improving reliability and inspection and maintenance practices. This roadmap will allow management to clearly identify realistic steps that when implemented will significantly improve the performance of the refinery assets within a set time frame. The roadmap should include the facility’s objectives in implementing such a program, and how these objectives will be met, measured, and in what period (milestones). The reliability improvement program plan should identify changes or improvements to the following:
Physical assets Operational strategy Maintenance and inspection practices Asset management systems (including software) Organizational set up and management philosophy
Such a program may take years to implement. Milestones and reliability improvement achievements should be carefully tracked and reported on. Within a year, the program should be showing overall improvements and benefits for the facility, which should be reported to management and personnel. This will ensure continued development and implementation of the plan. APTECH can assist with overall implementation by conducting training and reviews. For such a program to be successful and sustainable in the long term, facility personnel will require training. This training may cover the following issues:
Damage mechanisms affecting refinery equipment Appropriate means of identifying such damage mechanisms RBI theory Plant life assessment theory Preventative, predictive, and reliability theory Engineering materials selection
APTECH can assist with training and periodic reviews of the PM program. These reviews would focus on QA, as well as best-practice issues and methodologies. An example of the overall implementation process is shown in Figure 2.
13-6
AES093 Rev 1
Figure 2 – Asset Management.
Business Objective
Operational Imperatives
Regulatory Compliance
Current Plant Condition Design Data
Maintenance Requirements
Performance Improvement
Performance Testing
Repair Procedures
Remaining Life Optimization
Best Practice Maintenance Management
Operational Charges
Condition Monitoring
Plant Inspection
Fitness for Purpose(Run / Repair / Replace)
Integrity Assessment
Plant Risk Analysis Concepts - Identify Critical Plant - Identify Highest Priority Components - Assess Safety Risks
Risk Based Inspection Program
Design Modification
14-1
AES093 Rev 1
Section 14 WHY APTECH?
The advantages of using APTECH to implement your RBI study would include:
APTECH conducts engineering work in several industries, including nuclear, fossil fuel and petrochemical.
APTECH has conducted risk assessments and asset management programs for decades for the nuclear industry.
The APTECH RBI system has been in development for approximately ten years and has its roots in the nuclear industry.
APTECH has developed and implemented RBI software for the past seven years for a wide variety of clients in the refinery and petrochemical industry.
APTECH’s RBI system is used by over 30 clients, on all continents.
APTECH has extensive experience working in many different countries and under various conditions.
APTECH has a team of dedicated RBI specialists who have process and metallurgical experience in refinery and petrochemical processes.
APTECH is an active participant in industry RBI initiatives and has published many papers and articles on RBI implementation.
RBI staff at APTECH have worked with several RBI methodologies, including the API and Tischuk systems.
APTECH has an extensive database of damage mechanisms and equipment items from a wide variety of process units.
The APTECH RDMIP software is considered a leader in its field.
The software contains 1,600 chemicals and approximately 70 damage mechanisms.
Extensive reporting is provided in the software, including specific inspection plans for each equipment item, detailing damage mechanisms, appropriate NDE techniques and inspection schedules.
APTECH’s software is flexible and customizable.
Software is fully supported by a software development company
RDMIP user group provides additional support to all clients.
APTECH provides follow-up services and 24/7 engineering support to all its clients.
15-1
AES093 Rev 1
Section 15 CONCLUSIONS
A significant economic advantage can be obtained by applying risk-based prioritization strategies to establish the most effective methods for scheduling and performing maintenance and inspection activities. A risk-assessment program can be developed to assist plant management in meeting corporate objectives of high reliability and low-cost operations. In this age of increasing global competition among producers, programs aimed at lowering production costs without adverse environmental, safety, and health impacts are critical. A risk assessment program will help plant management in meeting these objectives. Pilot studies and full plant implementation have highlighted the benefits that can be obtained from such programs. These studies show the importance of the practical application of this technology in identifying potential damage mechanisms, and the timely prevention of possible failures. Finally, the broader application of these methods will be driven by the need to do more maintenance as equipment ages, with less resources, and, in particular, less manpower. This will establish the need for smart systems that ultimately integrate information from many different sources in order to enable maintenance and inspection decisions to be made effectively and safely.
