Wednesday, February 17, 2016

Risk Based Inspection for Offshore Pipeline

What is RBI?
– Any process where the decision of what inspection to perform and how often to inspect depends on risk – A structured approach to planning inspections (based on risk)– “The intention of using a risk based approach is that the activities are selected and scheduled on the basis of their ability to explicitly measure and manage threats to the pipeline system and ensure that associated risks are managed to be within acceptable limits.”

Why RBI?
– Operating pipelines presents a risk– We cannot eliminate the risk unless we remove the hazard (i.e. don’t have the pipeline)– We need to control the risk– Appropriate inspection contributes to risk control– “General industry practice is that a risk based integrity management approach should be applied.”– UK PSR• Previously a prescriptive requirement for periodic inspection• Now required to identify hazards and demonstrate that risk is controlled– all hazards relating to the pipeline with the potential to cause a major accident have been identified;– the risks arising from those hazards have been evaluated;– the safety management system is adequate; and– adequate arrangements for audit and for the making of reports thereof.

Application of RBI for pipelines
• Code guidance and methods– API 580 / 581– DNV RP F116– API 1160– ASME B31.8S

Common elements of RBI:
– Asset identification– Segmentation– Hazard identification– Probability of failure– Consequence of failure– Risk assessment– Inspection plan

But, how does inspection control risk? For time dependent hazards we can use inspection to: • Monitor deterioration• Predict future deterioration• Plan to take action before failure• But there is uncertainty• Hence we are dealing with a probability of failure rather than a fixed, known, failure date.For random hazards, an incident may result in:– Instantaneous failure– Damage which may fail with time– Initiation of a deterioration mechanism• Inspection cannot control the risk of instantaneous failure• Inspection can be used to monitor for damage, or the onset of deterioration 

Tuesday, February 16, 2016

Horizontal Directional Drilling

Benefits of horizontal directional drilling

We have established ourselves as the leader in HDD industry. HDD constitutes an important component of many pipe­line construction projects. For more than twenty years we have employed this drilling technique as an environmen­tally friendly, safe, realiable and efficient alternative to conventional construction methods. Horizontal directional drilling is more efficient, often more economi­cal, faster and, above all, has much less impact on the environment. It is also widely used in the oil and gas, power and telecommunications industries for bringing pipelines and cables ashore or taking them offshore.

The characteristics of HDD make it the best solution for many customer needs; in some cases it provides the only prac­tical solution. Nacap uses horizontal directional drilling for, among others: 
  • Waterways
  • Nature reserves
  • Major roads and traffic junctions
  • Railways
  • Industrial sites
  • Densely populated regions and urban areas
  • Landfalls and outfalls
  • Flood plains and bogs
  • Unstable soil conditions
  • For getting below contaminated ground.
  • Environmentally friendly with minimal disturbance 

The traditional method of constructing a pipeline, in which a trench is exca­vated, can lead to major obstructions and objections amongst various autho­rities and in different areas. Horizontal directional drilling avoids breaking open or causing damage to these areas and it minimises the impact to the surroun­dings of the works.

HDD in steps
• a pilot hole is drilled according to the pro­file design. Directional control is achieved by using the survey steering tool system. The survey probe installed in the drilling assembly measures the survey data re­quired for steering the drilling tool along the design profile• The hole is then enlarged and conditioned in stages using a sequence of reamers/flycutters/hole openers to the required diameter for receiving the product pipe• The product pipe is then pulled into the hole by the rig

Flexible Riser

Conduits to transfer materials from the seafloor to production and drilling facilities atop the water's surface, as well as from the facility to the seafloor, subsea risers are a type of pipeline developed for this type of vertical transportation. Whether serving as production or import/export vehicles, risers are the connection between the subsea field developments and production and drilling facilities. 

A hybrid that can accommodate a number of different situations, flexible risers can withstand both vertical and horizontal movement, making them ideal for use with floating facilities. This flexible pipe was originally used to connect production equipment aboard a floating facility to production and export risers, but now it is found as a primary riser solution as well. There are a number of configurations for flexible risers, including the steep S and lazy S that utilize anchored buoyancy modules, as well as the steep wave and lazy wave that incorporates buoyancy modules. 


Flexible risers are being usurped by metallic systems in some of the newer deepwater developments. Shell chose steel catenary risers for its three latest TLPs in the Gulf of Mexico, and Petrobras has followed suit for gas export from the Marlim semi. In Norway, titanium is making its mark in the riser for the Heidrun TLP.
The downside of metallic systems is the extra expense perceived for many applications. For this reason, flexible risers will remain popular for all water depths. However, there are serious design challenges to surmount as development heads deeper.
In a paper delivered at Deeptec '96, Aberdeen, Svein Are Lotveit of SeaFlex put collapse capacity and weight limitations at the top of his list. He also drew attention to related concerns for deepwater flexible pipe, namely:
  • General demand for large bore risers
  • High pressure, high temperature and aggressive fluids
  • Complicated replacement/repair of deep water risers, which needs to be avoided.
SeaFlex, a Norwegian engineering consultancy, is also part of the technical support team evaluating Coflexip and Wellstream pipes at Shell's facilities in The Hague. The project, known as the Deep Water JIP, is led by four major oil companies.
Coflexip and Wellstream are two of the dominant producers of non-bonded flexible risers (bonded pipes are currently not in the picture for deepwater risers). Another emerging heavyweight is NKT (Furukawa). Lotveit went on to outline this trio's current R & D work.
The market leader for deepwater, large diameter and high pressure applications is Coflexip, which favors a five-layered construction for its pipe. The innermost section is a carcass, providing collapse resistance. This is normally cold formed from stainless steel (316L), although Coflexip is working on alternate, T-shaped carcasses made from aluminum or ferritic stainless steel.
A key thrust of its development has been the middle layer hoop spirals. Main aim has been to increase the pressure rating and to improve service life. Traditionally, the hoop spiral has a Z-shaped cross-section (Zeta). However, a new hoop spiral wire geometry has been developed, called T-wire, which has been used in several test pipes but has so far not been installed offshore.
Advantages of the T-wire geometry are said to be:
  • Larger and stronger hoop spirals can be made
  • Less susceptible to initiation of fatigue cracks than the Zeta. In accelerated tests, it has been shown to improve service life of Coflexip risers.
The T-wire is currently being tested by the Deep Water JIP. To date, thicknesses up to 14mm have been examined, and wires up to 16 or even 18mm may also shortly be tested. This will increase substantially the pressure rating of large-bore Coflexip risers. A further increase in capacity is achieved through use of a secondary hoop spiral outside the T-wire.
T-wire's main impact will be in extreme pressures and dynamic risers. However, long length production of Coflexip risers with T-shaped wires will likely involve substantial investments, meaning that the cost of these risers will be relatively high.
Tension armors in the company's risers are normally made of rectangular steel wires. To increase the depth range of flexible pipes, Coflexip has qualified tension armors of reduced weight composite material. One composite riser has been installed offshore Brazil and is still in operation.
However, the cost of composite-reinforced systems is higher than a steel-reinforced pipe. They are only justifiable, therefore, at great depths where traditional pipes are too heavy. Maximum depth for a steel-reinforced flexible riser in a free-hanging configuration is typically 1,000 meters. For greater water depths, riser weight is critical and there composite may become attractive again, according to Lotveit.
During 1994-95, a number of failures occurred in risers in high temperature service (above 80C). Both Coflexip and Wellstream responded by re-evaluating their designs, making significant changes. This work is still some way from completion.
Coflexip had considered 20 different designs before selecting a prototype for testing. A 20 meter test pipe and a second sample with the old end fittings were both manufactured and tested by cycling the temperature from ambient to 130C. The new end fitting included a steel sleeve inserted under the main fluid barrier in order to control accurately the diameter and circularity of the barrier close to the main pressure seal.
While the failure rate of the old design in tests confirmed misgivings, the new sample did not perform perfectly either. Coflexip then designed and built five new pipes with different end fittings, incorporating different methods of PVDF layer termination. Since June 1995 when the first set of tests were completed, the second series of pipes have proven these end fittings to be stable.
One customer was sufficiently convinced to accept the first dynamic jumper with a new end fitting design, for short-term service (two to five years) in the Far East. This has been in service since last October. Following further tests, Coflexip is now predicting 20 years of service life.
Sources : http://www.rigzone.com/training/insight.asp?insight_id=308&c_id=17

http://www.offshore-mag.com/articles/print/volume-56/issue-4/news/general-interest/deepwater-risers-steel-catenary-flexible-risers-battle-for-technical-supremacy.html

Deepwater Pipelines

Deepwater Pipelines : Taking the Challenge to New Depth
To ensure continuity of supply, E&P companies have to consider opportunities in ever increasing water depths. Assisting this are new technological advances, including pipeline manufacture and design that increase the technical feasibility of deepwater developments.

Deepwater pipeline challenges

Conventional pipeline design, although concerned with many factors, is dominated generally by the need to withstand an internal pressure. The higher the pressure that products can be passed down the line, the higher the flow rate and greater the revenue potential. However, factors critical for deepwater pipelines become dominated by the need to resist external pressure, particularly during installation.

Local infield lines, such as subsea umbilicals, risers, and flowlines (SURF) usually are modest challenges as they are small in diameter and inherently resistant to hydrostatic collapse. In smaller sizes, these lines generally are produced as seamless pipe which is readily available and generally economical.

However, deepwater trunklines and long-distance tiebacks present a greater challenge. To increase subsea production these lines tend to be larger in diameter with a thicker pipe wall to withstand the hydrostatic pressure and bending as it is laid to the seabed.

Typically these lines are often 16 in. to 20 in. (40 cm to 50 cm) in diameter, which presents a further complication as the pipe sizes lie at the top end of economical production for seamless (Pilger) pipes. The Pilger process can produce the thick walled pipe required for these developments but often the manufacturing process is slow, the cost of material high, and the pipe lengths short. As a result, the most economical method to manufacture these lines is the UOE process. The increasingly stringent industry demands have driven this design toward its practical limits of manufacture and installation.

Corus Tubes has responded by manufacturing UOE double submerged arc welded (DSAW) linepipe to the deepest pipelines in the world. This pipe overcomes significant challenges associated with deepwater developments and facilitated a number of pioneering projects such as Bluestream and Perdido.

In the UOE process, steel plate is pressed into a “U” and then into an “O” shape and then is expanded circumferentially. Wall thickness and diameter requirements for deepwater trunkline pipe continue to be challenging for manufacturing economics and installation capabilities.


While few producers manufacture UOE pipes at 16- to 20-in. outside diameter, this manufacturing method is quicker to market and more cost-effective than seamless alternatives. Corus Tubes’ process seeks to optimize the design of the material and minimize the wall thickness to:
  • Reduce material cost
  • Reduce welding cost
  • Reduce installation time
  • Reduce pipe weight for logistics and submerged pipe weight considerations
  • Increase design scope enabling a wider range of deepwater developments.




Det Norske Veritas (DNV) says the acceptability of a pipeline design for a given water depth is determined by means of standard equations that measure the relationship between OD, wall thickness, pipe shape, and material compressive strength.

Pipe shape

Finished pipe shape is optimized by balancing the manufacturing parameters, pipe compression, and expansion. The crimp, U-press, and O-press combination ensures that the pipe size is controlled, often beyond most offshore specifications. Enhanced pipe “roundness”, wall thickness, and diameter tolerance removes uncertainty in the design and production stages and allows pipe wall thickness optimization.

Compressive strength

Pipe manufactured by the UOE process undergoes various strain cycles, both tensile and compressive. The combination of these cycles affects the overall behavior of the material in compression. This is indicated in the equation given in the offshore design standard DNV OS F101 by the presence of the Fabrication Factor αfab. For standard UOE processes, the term represents a de-rating of 15% in the compressive strength as a result of the material response to the strain cycles during forming, known as the Bauschinger Effect.


This diagram represents the relationship between stress and strain when a material is placed in tension (top right quadrant) and then into compression (bottom left quadrant). When material is first placed in tension, such that it is deformed plastically, the yield stress in compression is reduced (compare this with the projected compressive strength in the bottom left quadrant had the pre-tension not been applied).

When material is first placed in tension such that it is deformed plastically, the yield stress in compression is reduced. This originally was reported by Bauschinger in 1881. It is relevant to pipe making because during the forming process the material is placed in tension during expansion. Following this, the material is dispatched for installation, where the pipe sees compressive stress from the pressure of the seawater. Conventionally, the 15% reduction in compressive strength compensates for the Bauschinger Effect.

Since the early 1990s, Corus Tubes has observed that the results it obtained from the forming process often yielded higher compressive strengths than those obtained from the standard equations. Research and process development leads to a greater understanding of the metallurgical transformations during pipe forming. It is possible to reverse the Bauschinger Effect to deliver pipe with compressive strengths higher than conventionally expected.

Three things influence the final pipe mechanical properties in compression:

1. Choice of plate feedstock. The strength of the final pipe is a function of the chemistry and grain structure of the mother plate from which it is fabricated. All aspects of plate manufacture, the chemistry, rolling schedule as well as cooling rates ensure that the final plate properties change to give the required pipe characteristics.

2. Choice of mill compression and expansion parameters. By optimizing the various compression and expansion cycles, a set of manufacturing conditions can be determined to enhance collapse performance to potentially reduce pipe wall thickness in future deepwater applications.

3. Controlled low temperature heat treatment. With the correct plate chemistry it is possible to deliver a lift in compression strength through the application of a low temperature heat treatment. This final part of the process can be measured and assured only if the correct attention has been paid to the previous manufacturing stages.

A number of groundbreaking projects have pushed the boundaries of deepwater exploration and production, and enhanced understanding of pipeline capabilities and limits. In 2000, ExxonMobil used 64 km (40 mi) of line pipe for the Hoover/Diana project which reached depths of 1,450 m (4,800 ft). This also was the first time that small diameter pipe from Corus Tubes’ UOE mill in Hartlepool, UK, was supplied to the deepwater Gulf of Mexico market.

In 2001, Corus Tubes supplied 94 km (45,000 metric tons [49,604 tons]) of three-layer polypropylene coated, high grade, sour service linepipe and bends for the technically challenging Bluestream project which supplies gas from Russia to Turkey under the Black Sea. Corus also was selected to provide pipe for the deepest section of the pipeline at 2,150 m (7,054 ft) water depth.

Corus Tubes recently supplied line pipe to the Perdido Norte project in the Gulf of Mexico. Williams commissioned the production of small diameter UOE pipe and approximately 312 km (194 mi) of uncoated steel line pipe for ultra deepwater depths from 3,500-8,300 ft (1,067-2,530 m) with a rugged seabed terrain. The pipe, manufactured to withstand a service rating equivalent to ANSI 1500, is one of the deepest pipelines in the world.

One section of the pipeline transfers hydrocarbons from the FPS host in Alaminos Canyon block 857 and terminates in East Breaks block 994 (78 mi [126 km]). The gas pipeline terminates at Williams Seahawk pipeline in East Breaks block 599 (106 mi [171 km]). The 18-in. (46-cm) diameter pipe was manufactured in wall thicknesses ranging from 19.1 mm to 27.0 mm (¾ in. to 1 in.).

Further to the experiences on Perdido, Corus has produced a thicker pipe at 18-in. diameter for the Petrobras Tupi project. The pipe has a wall thickness of 31.75 mm (1 ¼ in.) and lies in a water depth of 2,200 m (7,218 ft) offshore Brazil. While this project is not the deepest, it represents a milestone in pipe forming. This is the thickest UOE pipe ever manufactured at 18-in. diameter (note as the diameter of a pipe reduces and thickness increases, the levels of strain and power required to forming it increases).

Tupi is a testimony to the complexity of deepwater pipe design. While collapse at these water depths is a critical design state, there also were concerns about corrosion, since the Tupi production has some small amounts of contaminants in the exportation gas (about 5% CO2 and a very small amount of H2S). Even though the exported gas should be dehydrated, the CO2 raises concerns about pipe corrosion and is managed by increasing the nominal wall thickness to account for loss of material during life. At the end of the pipe life it still must withstand the pressure at the seabed even with a reduced wall thickness.

The H2S, although not expected in the exported gas, could cause cracking to occur in steels where the grain structure and cleanliness is not optimized. In addition, high levels of forming strain can exacerbate the situation. Corus Tubes applied its knowledge of steel production and pipe forming to ensure that the plate it procured from Dillinger Hutte and Voest Alpine provided ultimate resistance to H2S corrosion.

Pipelines in deepwater require the tightest dimensional tolerances to maximize resistance to collapse and to maximize girth weld fatigue resistance. Furthermore, pipelines from 16-in. to 28-in. (71-cm) are seen as the future for deepwater export pipeline systems.


Pipeline Integrity Management

There are many different definitions of pipeline integrity management (PIM), including those listed within API 1160 and ASME B31.8S.
As a simple and understood-by-all definition, the following is proposed: “a system to ensure that a pipeline network is safe, reliable, sustainable and optimised.”
Bureau Veritas’ PIM step-by-step approach is comprised of the following six stages:
  • Policy and strategy: where are you now, where do you want to go and what should you put in place to reach your target?
  • Methodology: do you want/need to use a risk-based, threat-based or consequence-based approach or something else?
  • Data: start thinking about data collection and modelling only once the policy and strategy, and methodology have been identified.
  • Systems and tools: once policy and strategy have been defined, methodology has been selected and data gathered, select the most appropriate tool to use (simple or sophisticated software).
  • Study and analysis: the tools will enable an assessment of the pipeline network and definition of your inspection plans.
  • Inspection and expertise: after implementing the inspection plans, specific expertise should be used to analyse the inspection results. The knowledge gained will then be used during the regular PIM review.
Company policy and methodology is key
As a first step, it is important to properly define the roots of the PIM approach chosen. Local constraints, in-house specific requirements, international guidelines and adequacy will help set up the basis of the methodology to be developed.
The most appropriate approach will be found by referencing the local regulatory body’s policy (safety/inspections-oriented or risk/threat mitigation-oriented) along with common practices and existing procedures, the assets’ typology and age, the existing international best practices, and the level of in-house expertise. Several approaches may be considered, such as qualitative versus quantitative, threat-based versus damage-based, and probabilistic versus deterministic.
The identification of expected results (primary target) should be properly specified: restricted impact on the environment, corrosion-related failure prevention, inspection strategy, and means of mitigation. This will ensure that the PIM is set up in-line with the project targets.
The PIM methodology can then be chosen and tailored to the specific case.
A PIM approach that may be suitable for one operator may not be acceptable for another operator.
Only once the methodology is developed and understood by all project stakeholders can the data and tool issues be properly addressed.

Data and tools: you don’t need a video game
Data management is a crucial task within the PIM process. It should provide a complete system capable of delivering the right data in the right shape, at the right place and for the right purpose. This requires very organised and step-wise work.
By defining the PIM strategy, key performance indicators can be identified and data requirements can be defined. This refers to the format, accuracy, and frequency requirements of the data. It is also beneficial to think mid-term about PIM requirements, for example, consider the tools that will be used and any modifications that might be planned to the asset.
Finally, it is advised that data quality control/quality assurance is performed to obtain the ‘green light’ before processing data into the PIM process.
The same applies to the tools to be used. While there is a temptation to use a very ‘high tech’ tool, the most important consideration is for an easy-to-use tool that will monitor the health of the pipeline network and point out pipeline segments which require mitigation or inspection due to their threat or risk levels.
Depending on the pipeline’s length, a Microsoft Excel macro could be sufficient. However, an automated and integrated tool is necessary for longer pipelines or complicated networks.

Study and analysis: from integrity assessment to inspection plans
Now with an operational and clear pipeline database along with a PIM tool, the chosen PIM methodology can be implemented. The PIM tool will enable the first integrity assessment to be carried out – ‘first’ because PIM is a continuous loop where previous results are used to improve the following assessments. Following this, a ‘pipeline prioritisation’ can be obtained, which will form the basis to analyse and understand the pipeline network's condition. Frrom here, the PIM can be expanded to include a mitigation plan plus inspection plan.
Here an important question arises: what actions should be performed in order to reduce the threat/risk level on the pipeline? Should the inspection frequency be increased, a mitigation action applied, or both? The decision should rely on the inspection and mitigation policies defined in the first step of the PIM process.

Inspection and expertise: method qualification and trustworthy results
Undoubtedly, one of the most visible steps of the PIM process is the inspection itself. There are many inspection techniques for pipelines but the most widely used are magnetic-flux leakage and ultrasonic testing. The in-line inspection provider should be selected very carefully, evaluating their qualification by referring to the specific requirements of the project.
The most critical part of this process is the analysis of results and the expertise required to obtain crucial information on the actual condition of the pipeline.
An effective PIM should be comparable to a high-quality management system.
This article started by outlining that a PIM is a system allowing operators to ensure that their pipeline networks operate in a safe, reliable, sustainable and optimised way.
If neglected and unused, even the most expensive and ‘high tech’ PIM solution will fail to be beneficial. A PIM needs to be accepted and embedded into the company’s processes.
Therefore, as a conclusion, Bureau Veritas would advise operators to keep in mind that a PIM, like a quality management system, is a continuous process. Therefore it is important to break down the PIM plan into manageable steps.


Acknowledgements
The author and co-authors of this article would like to express their gratitude to their customers, in particular TOTAL (Worldwide), CuuLong Joint Operating Company (CLJOC – Vietnam) and KazTransOil (KTO – Kazakhstan) who have fed Bureau Veritas’s thoughts about PIM and asset integrity management (AIM) in general. Not only have those successful and friendly collaborations inspired Bureau Veritas to develop its AIM ‘step-by-step approach’ but have also allowed a deeper knowledge of AIM which, we trust, will be useful to other pipeline operators.

Source : 

Pipeline Material and Grade Selection

Material Selection
Material selection shall be optimized, considering investment and operational costs, such that Life
Cycle Costs (LCC) are minimized while providing acceptable safety and reliability.
The following key factors apply to materials selection:
  • Primary consideration shall be given to materials with good market availability and documented fabrication and service performance.
  • The number of different material types shall be minimized considering costs, interchangeability and availability of relevant spare parts.
  • Design life.
  • Operating conditions.
  • Experience with materials and corrosion protection methods from conditions with similar corrosivity.
  • System availability requirements.
  • Philosophy applied for maintenance and degree of system redundancy.
  • Weight reduction.
  • Inspection and corrosion monitoring possibilities.
  • Effect of external and internal environment, including compatibility of different materials.
  • Evaluation of failure probabilities, failure modes, criticalities and consequences. Attention shall be paid to any adverse effects material selection may have on human health,
  • Environment, safety and material assets.
  • Environmental issues related to corrosion inhibition and other chemical treatments.
  • For main systems where materials/fabrication represent significant investments and/or operational costs, an LCC analysis shall be basis for material selection (Ref. Annex A).
Material Grade Selection
In this section selection of material grades for rigid pipelines and risers are discussed.
The following factors are to considered in the selection of material grades:
  • cost
  • resistance
  • weight requirement
  • weldability
The higher the grade of steel (up to exotic steels) the more expensive per volume (weight). However, as the cost of producing high grade steels has reduced, the general trend in the industry is use these steel of higher grades.

The choice of material grade used for the pipelines will have cost implications on:
  • fabrication of pipeline
  • installation
  • operation

Pipeline Corrossion

Unprotected pipelines, whether buried in the ground, exposed to the atmosphere, or submerged in water, are susceptible to corrosion. Without proper maintenance, every pipeline system will eventually deteriorate. Corrosion can weaken the structural integrity of a pipeline and make it an unsafe vehicle for transporting potentially hazardous materials. However, technology exists to extend pipeline structural life indefinitely if applied correctly and maintained consistently.

How Do We Control Pipeline Corrosion?

Four common methods used to control corrosion on pipelines are protective coatings and linings, cathodic protection, materials selection, and inhibitors. Coatings and linings are principal tools for defending against corrosion. They are often applied in conjunction with cathodic protection systems to provide the most cost-effective protection for pipelines.
  • Cathodic protection (CP) is a technology that uses direct electrical current to counteract the normal external corrosion of a metal pipeline. CP is used where all or part of a pipeline is buried underground or submerged in water. On new pipelines, CP can help prevent corrosion from starting; on existing pipelines; CP can help stop existing corrosion from getting worse.
  • Materials selection refers to the selection and use of corrosion-resistant materials such as stainless steels, plastics, and special alloys to enhance the life span of a structure such as a pipeline. Materials selection personnel must consider the desired life span of the structure as well as the environment in which the structure will exist. Corrosion inhibitors are substances that, when added to a particular environment, decrease the rate of attack of that environment on a material such as metal or steel reinforced concrete.
  • Corrosion inhibitors can extend the life of pipelines, prevent system shutdowns and failures, and avoid product contamination. Evaluating the environment in which a pipeline is or will be located is very important to corrosion control, no matter which method or combination of methods is used. Modifying the environment immediately surrounding a pipeline, such as reducing moisture or improving drainage, can be a simple and effective way to reduce the potential for corrosion.

Furthermore, using persons trained in corrosion control is crucial to the success of any corrosion mitigation program. When pipeline operators assess risk, corrosion control must be an integral part of their evaluation.

What Is the Solution?

Corrosion control is an ongoing, dynamic process. The keys to effective corrosion control of pipelines are quality design and installation of equipment, use of proper technologies, and ongoing maintenance and monitoring by trained professionals. An effective maintenance and monitoring program can be an operator’s best insurance against preventable corrosion-related problems. Effective corrosion control can extend the useful life of all pipelines. The increased risk of pipeline failure far outweighs the costs associated with installing, monitoring, and maintaining corrosion control systems. Preventing pipelines from deteriorating and failing will save money, preserve the environment, and protect public safety.