Menu
Search
Filters
Close
Menu

Save 20% on select titles with code HIDDEN24 - Shop The Sale Now

51316-7713-Pipeline Integrity Assessment In-Line Inspection and Direct Assessment Anomaly Density

Picture for Pipeline Integrity Assessment In-Line Inspection and Direct Assessment Anomaly Density
Available for download
Product Number: 51316-7713-SG
ISBN: 7713 2016 CP
Author: Shamus McDonnell
Publication Date: 2016
$0.00
$20.00
$20.00
As identified during a public meeting on January 27 2015 the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) performed a study to evaluate the need for improvements to gas transmission integrity management (IM) programs and requirements for gas transmission pipelines. This study has concluded that while PHMSA’s gas IM requirements have kept the rate of corrosion failures and material failures of pipe or welds low there is no evidence that the overall occurrence of gas transmission pipeline incidents in HCA pipelines has declined. Furthermore the study suggests that of the four different integrity assessment methods (pressure test direct assessment (DA) in-line inspection (ILI) and other techniques) ILI yields the highest per-mile discovery of pipe anomalies and the use of direct assessment as the sole integrity assessment method has numerous limitations.The NTSB safety study goes on to conclude there are many limitations to direct assessment including that (1) it is limited to the detection of defects attributed to corrosion threats (2) it only covers very short sub-segments of the pipeline (3) it relies on the operator’s selection of specific location for excavation and direct examination and (4) it yields far fewer identifications of anomalies compared to in-line inspection.This paper will examine the above limitations with an emphasis placed on ILI and DA anomaly density. This paper will examine why indirect inspections used within DA’s have provided results that were not always reliable or repeatable. In this paper Wwe will also examine recent improvements to indirect inspections and DA assessments and compare the mile per mile anomaly density of ILI to that of a new indirect inspection technology that is available. Case studies will be presented where ILI and above ground indirect inspection techniques (IIT’s) have been run completed on the same pipeline segments. Pipelines from various locations conditions and age will were be chosen for the case studies.Key words: NTSB Safety Study Direct Assessment DA In-Line Inspection ILI IIT
As identified during a public meeting on January 27 2015 the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) performed a study to evaluate the need for improvements to gas transmission integrity management (IM) programs and requirements for gas transmission pipelines. This study has concluded that while PHMSA’s gas IM requirements have kept the rate of corrosion failures and material failures of pipe or welds low there is no evidence that the overall occurrence of gas transmission pipeline incidents in HCA pipelines has declined. Furthermore the study suggests that of the four different integrity assessment methods (pressure test direct assessment (DA) in-line inspection (ILI) and other techniques) ILI yields the highest per-mile discovery of pipe anomalies and the use of direct assessment as the sole integrity assessment method has numerous limitations.The NTSB safety study goes on to conclude there are many limitations to direct assessment including that (1) it is limited to the detection of defects attributed to corrosion threats (2) it only covers very short sub-segments of the pipeline (3) it relies on the operator’s selection of specific location for excavation and direct examination and (4) it yields far fewer identifications of anomalies compared to in-line inspection.This paper will examine the above limitations with an emphasis placed on ILI and DA anomaly density. This paper will examine why indirect inspections used within DA’s have provided results that were not always reliable or repeatable. In this paper Wwe will also examine recent improvements to indirect inspections and DA assessments and compare the mile per mile anomaly density of ILI to that of a new indirect inspection technology that is available. Case studies will be presented where ILI and above ground indirect inspection techniques (IIT’s) have been run completed on the same pipeline segments. Pipelines from various locations conditions and age will were be chosen for the case studies.Key words: NTSB Safety Study Direct Assessment DA In-Line Inspection ILI IIT
Product tags
Also Purchased
Picture for Correlation of Inline and Aboveground Integrity Data for Comprehensive Pipeline Integrity Management
Available for download

51317--9648-Correlation of Inline and Aboveground Integrity Data for Comprehensive Pipeline Integrity Management

Product Number: 51317--9648-SG
ISBN: 9648 2017 CP
Author: Chukwuma Onuoha
Publication Date: 2017
$20.00

This paper provides comprehensive correlation of inline and aboveground pipeline integrity data geared at ensuring a complete pipeline integrity management program. Case studies are provided to show benefits of inline inspection and direct assessment correlations.

 
Picture for 01621 A PIPELINE INTEGRITY MANA GEMENT PROGRAM
Available for download

01621 A PIPELINE INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM USING IN-LINE INSPECTION RESULTS

Product Number: 51300-01621-SG
ISBN: 01621 2001 CP
Author: Bill L. Flanders and Elden R. Johnson
$20.00
Picture for 11126 Direct Assessment Pipeline Integrity Management
Available for download

11126 Direct Assessment Pipeline Integrity Management

Product Number: 51300-11126-SG
ISBN: 2011 11126 CP
Author: Asokan P. Pillai
Publication Date: 2011
$20.00
Categories
Industry
Recently viewed
Popular tags
View all

Association for Materials Protection and Performance

© AMPP All Rights Reserved.
Membership Terms of Content Use
Contact Customer Support