On Tuesday 30th May 2023 the branch welcomed David Wickham and Chris Fyfe of AkzoNobel, who gave a talk on Maintenance and Repair Solutions for Damaged or Aged PFP. This was a hybrid Joint ICorr/AMPP event with over 40 Attendees.
The branch was very pleased to be able to return to the Palm Court Hotel on this occasion, a place with which it has so long been associated.
David Wickham is a practising fire and explosion engineer with 24 years’ experience in the field of passive fire protection. He is a Chartek fire engineer / technical manager, Fire Protection, holds a Master’s degree in Fire and Explosion Engineering from the University of Leeds, UK (2002), and is also an ICorr PFP Epoxy Coating Inspector Level 3. David is currently the Fire Protection Technical Manager at International Paint (part of AkzoNobel) a member of the Institution of Fire Engineers (MIFireE), and also a visiting lecturer on the MSc course, presenting on ‘Aspects of Fire Protection in building design’. He is responsible for providing technical support for upstream and downstream oil and gas projects, fire protection in the Built Environment and ‘special projects’ and has particular expertise in the area of ‘fire testing and evaluation of test data’ to support accreditation and certification of products to global fire test standards. Along with fire protection in Maintenance and Repair (M&R), he is currently a project leader looking at solutions for fire protection for battery electrical energy storage systems (BEESS).
Chris Fyfe is a PFP Senior field auditor and coach. As a Chartered Scientist, Senior Corrosion Technologist, and Fellow of the Institute of Corrosion, Chris also holds an AMPP Senior Level 3 coating qualification. He has extensive knowledge of both new build and maintenance projects ranging over 35 years with several operators and has been employed as a surface protection specialist and fabric maintenance coordinator, understanding first-hand the many challenges for maintenance and repair.
Maintenance and Repair Solutions for Damaged or Aged Passive Fire Protection (PFP)
Many facilities have reached, or are reaching, the end of their original design life. However, in many cases, these facilities are required to continue operation beyond this time. This poses many operational health and safety issues, among them the efficacy of in-situ passive fire protection (PFP) that may have been applied when the facility was first commissioned. In many cases, this PFP will have deteriorated to a point where it may not provide the required protection in the event of a fire. Where this damage may be extensive, this can create difficult economic (M&R) decisions to overcome. M&R resources are not limitless, and where repair priorities have been identified, selecting the most efficient repair solution becomes important. The two most important requirements are demonstrable fire resistance performance and application costs (both materials and installation). In many cases, the latter may far outweigh
the former. Costs of installation may have a significant bearing in active process areas subject to limits on operational activities (such as surface preparation).
On older upstream and downstream facilities, in-situ PFP may comprise structural steel encased in dense concrete, Light-Weight Cementous (LWC) or other systems. Where these types of PFP are cracked or damaged, they may expose the substrate, leading to accelerated corrosion, operational integrity concerns, and dropped object hazards, in addition to concerns about continued PFP functionality. The true extent of all underlying corrosion may not be immediately apparent, and removal or replacement is normally the best course of action.
As a company, AkzoNobel recognises how M & R activities surrounding PFP performance are integral to maintaining plant operational safety by allocating limited M and R budgets more effectively. – this includes identifying and prioritising the damage of most concern (fire integrity assessment – what damage level will not meet the site fire scenario) and providing repair materials that: have proven fire resistance performance, and offer ease of installation.
The company has identified various schemes for items that need PFP repair:
• Scheme 1 – PFP adequate for the fire case – repair solution to arrest rate of corrosion.
• Scheme 2a) – Risk of dropped object hazard – repair required to remove the hazard and ensure repair is PFP functional.
• Scheme 2b) – loss of PFP functionality and corrosion concern – tested repair solution that reinstates the PFP and stops advancement of corrosion.
• Scheme 3 – ‘special case’– repair acceptable based on other criteria or requiring specific fire testing.
Examples were given of the putty and mortar products used in the repairs onto primed or prepared surfaces and their characteristics:
• MP: A single component mouldable putty compound.
• SFR: Single component structural grade mesh-free repair mortar.
• No tools required – MP can be applied direct from the pail by hand.
• SFR only mixing with water required – and can be applied direct by hand.
• Both the above products are completely non-hazardous and repairs can be completed without any hot work permits.
For Missing and Cracked PFP – Concrete / LWC:
• SFR product can be used; this product has been both jet and pool fire tested for over 180 minutes.
• MP is an alternative and this is jet and pool fire tested to 120 minutes. The products can fill cracks up to 50 mm wide and voids up to 900 cm2 and are Lloyds / UL verified.
For the repair, the edges of the concrete to which it will bond need to be checked for contaminants, and wire brushing should be used to clean the surfaces. Any exposed steel needs to be cleaned and an approved surface tolerant primer, such as 670HS, applied. Where the base material is concrete, the cementitious edges should be wetted to improve adhesion, and PVA glue should be used as an additive agent to help bond. The Interkote material needs to be brought flush with the concrete for this repair, no wire netting is required.
On Tuesday 28th March 2023, the branch meeting welcomed Dr Kevin McDonald – Sonomatic, with a talk entitled ‘Effective pipework analysis and inspection planning using Digital Twins’.
Kevin is a principal integrity engineer within Sonomatic’s integrity team in Aberdeen. He is a mathematician with a PhD in computing science. He has extensive experience in data analytics and inspection planning for pipework, pressure vessels and pipelines, co-authoring the recommended practice for Non-Intrusive Inspection (NII) as applied to pressure vessels. As well as integrity consulting, he is involved in the technical capability development for Sonomatic’s integrity team with a focus on statistical approaches. Recently, he has been involved in developing a statistics-based method of inspection planning and evaluation applied to subsea pipelines for a major operator.
Effective pipework analysis and inspection planning using digital twins
The integrity of pipework is essential for the safe and reliable operation of process plants. Inspections are traditionally performed at large numbers of individual test points, with results recorded in an inspection database. In general, this data is subject to relatively simple analysis, with the results used in integrity management decisions. However, this traditional approach can be heavily influenced by poor processes, outliers, or errors for example: incorrect entry of results, not recording higher thickness readings than those obtained previously, and inconsistencies in inspection location, are some examples of how error can be introduced into this process. This could lead to poor integrity decisions and misinterpretation of wall thickness trends. Analysis of pipework data, which is in general restricted to the difference between two thickness readings relative to the dates the readings were taken, can then be driven by measurement error.
Kevin proposed a novel alternative is to consider historic datasets as a whole and look at long-term statistical behaviour to consider how corrosion could be affecting pipework. This approach looks at whole datasets to determine behaviour before considering any sub-groupings of data points that are showing similar behaviour. The Sonomatic developed SPiDARS software accommodates many data formats. Boxplots can be used to display the whole of an inspection history in one view. In this example a normalised view allows all schedules of pipe to be compared. Boxplots can also be used to provide a quick overview of long-term trends (up or down) and can show stability over several years or highlight changes graphically that cannot be seen from data alone, due to spreads and errors affecting judgement.
The illustrated example shows a downward long-term trend indicative of increased corrosion activity. It provides context and a jump in the final result, indicating replacement of the pipe. Data can also be grouped for pipes by diameter which can show that larger pipes seem to have more corrosion issues than smaller ones, or by pipe configuration feature type such as bends, caps, reducers, or straight sections to search for trends.
Corrosion rates determined from Non Destructive Testing ( NDT) generally trend toward wall loss percentile values as the principal criteria. Looking at group trends mitigates measurement error and gives more accurate short and long-term corrosion rate estimates. Any point showing a concerning trend can be extrapolated to predict when an alarm limit may be reached. Corrosion rate data can be plotted in different ways to try and identify issues such as localised and unusual corrosion rates. Lots of data on wall thickness measurement may just behave in a linear sense such as presented here for selected years and locations – nothing unusual is shown and general corrosion is happening at expected rates.
Sonomatic have developed 3 different inspection planning methodologies. The Type 2 methodology was further discussed with steps detailed below:
• Define corrosion state (is it what we expect to find)
• Define a corrosion coverage from previous results
• Define extent of corroded material
• Define thresholds of concern (based on historic results)
• Consider points flagged as over/under inspected
• Consider expected corrosion mechanisms that have a bearing on applied technique
• Define detection threshold
• Define probability of detection (POD)
This approach is underpinned by simple and effective access to the data, which is linked to a 3D mini digital twin.
The mini-Twin also hosts a variety of data, as well as individual test points, corrosion maps, and can house inspection histories, photographs, and further data analysis of corrosion rates, fitness for service etc. 3D is used to present data in efficient ways to quickly provide an overview of the health of the pipework circuit, for example inspection frequency, inspection count, corrosion rates, all of which is valuable information for engineers and asset stakeholders.
For identified ‘Dropped Object’ hazards: the item can be encased using GRP wrap + Chartek 7E paste filler at 2mm or an encasement system pipe shell or epoxy box is used with product Chartek/Benarx, for which there are simple procedures (see image below).
Systems were also discussed for upgrading 3 sided beams using either Chartek 2218 at a 6mm thickness level to primed steel areas and overlapping the cementitious edges either side, or alternatively MP can be used and applied to steel surface prepared to SP11 finish. This material can be rolled out at a 30 mm layer thickness that adheres to the prepared steel. This solution is good for support beams for walkway grating supports.
Studies were also presented on fire testing of the repaired products to given standards.
Fire Testing of Repaired Products
The fire performance of both Interkote MP and SFR has shown excellent fire performance (in some cases better) than the in-situ LWC or concrete. IK MP was verified in EPFP testing (TN to update). Technical note F_021 may be deployed to select the best repair solution to meet fire protection requirements.
AkzoNobel’s PFP repair solutions extend the available range of Chartek solutions for maintaining damaged or failing PFP. The focus is on simple repairs to damaged LWC and concrete PFP (EPFP to be added for IK MP) for application simplicity and cost-effectiveness. The intention is to give customers confidence that repair solutions will provide the required fire resistance and repair integrity. All the repair solutions are backed up by third party approvals.
The branch held its AGM on June 27, 2023, and unanimously elected Adesiji Anjorin MSc, BEng, CEng, MICorr, MNSE, COREN of ENGTEQ as its next Branch Chair and Mei Ling Cheah AMPP Certified Corrosion Specialist, BEng MSc PhD CEng CSci FIMMM FICorr, of IMRANND as
its new Vice Chair.
The branch was sorry to see the departure of its 3 times Chair, Dr Muhammad Ejaz, PhD, CEng, FICorr, FIMMM, AMPP Corrosion Specialist, after 13 years of service, and a presentation will be made to him at a later date, once he has settled into his new home in Abu Dhabi.
On the same day, the branch also held an online event entitled – Direct Assessment for Unpiggable Pipelines, which covered both Internal and External Corrosion threats, and was led by Dirk L.Van Oostendorp.
Dirk is Director of Engineering and Technical Services for Corrpro, based in Houston, TX and Van Oostendorp has more than 40 years of global experience in all aspects of pipeline and structural integrity, encompassing cathodic protection, corrosion control, material selection, protective coatings, inspection technologies, and risk assessment. More recent experience includes integrity monitoring, failure analysis, and pipeline integrity issues. He holds undergraduate and graduate degrees in chemical technology and physical chemistry. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry, a Fellow of the Institute of Corrosion, and a NACE Corrosion Specialist. He was a member of the original INGAA-Battelle team that developed what has now become the Direct Assessment Methodology (DAM).
This presentation discussed the four essential steps of the Direct Assessment methodology, highlighted success factors, shared results from actual projects, and assessed the various challenges that can be encountered during implementation.
The majority of North American natural gas transmission pipelines were not constructed to permit inspection using intelligent tools (ultrasonic, magnetic flux leakage). This was due to the lack of launching and receiving facilities, but also throughput requirements, varying (telescopic) diameters, short radius or wrinkle bends, reduced port valves, or branch connections. In order to adequately ensure the structural integrity of these pipelines, some alternative forms of condition determination and evaluation was required. The Interstate Gas Association of America, together with the
Gas Technology Institute, assembled an expert team to address this
issue. The result was the development of an alternate inspection methodology, coined Direct Assessment, which made use of a combination of proven techniques.
Based on Federal laws signed in 2001, pipeline operators in the USA were required to develop a proactive Pipeline Integrity Management Plan (IMP) intended to manage risk and protect the public in areas near operational pipelines. Inline inspection (ILI) was the preferred methodology to inspect pipelines, and hydrostatic testing was the alternative.
AMPP, as the industry representative, was called upon to develop standard procedures to govern the correct implementation of Direct Assessment and provide guidance for practitioners. Early in the development process, it was noted that the methodology needed to be segmented, in order to address differing integrity threats, and External Corrosion Direct Assessment (ECDA), Internal Corrosion Direct Assessment (ICDA), and Stress–Corrosion Cracking Direct Assessment (SCCDA) resulted. NACE initially published RP0502 for ECDA in 2002, and other standard practices for the other methodologies followed. As living documents, these standard practises are subjected to peer review every 4–6 years.
Dirk very clearly explained the details of the processes now being followed and how supplementary investigations may come into play as the assessment proceeds.
Both the AGM and the June presentation were fully recorded and are available at: https://youtu.be/B9_4DHySnmg and at ICorr Aberdeen – YouTube
Abstracts of potential papers for the Aberdeen Technical Programme are always welcome, and anyone wishing to present should correspond with the 2023/2024 Technical Programme Co-ordinator: Adesiji Anjorin firstname.lastname@example.org
Further Information about the Aberdeen Branch, and past presentations, may be found on their website page: Aberdeen Branch – Institute of Corrosion (icorr.org) and to join the Aberdeen Branch mailing list, please contact: email@example.com
The Branch has the following upcoming conference event for which attendance is strictly limited to 50 persons: This Event will include a number of Practical Demonstrations.
On 22nd August, the branch will hold its Corrosion Awareness Day at Rysco, Bridge of Don, Aberdeen, from 9-5pm
Attendees (and their respective companies) will gain an understanding of the fundamentals of corrosion science and engineering; which can give insights into technical corrosion / materials challenges, improve their understanding of corrosion processes, raise their awareness of corrosion management, and provide confidence to attendees when discussing corrosion-related issues and concerns; and sales people will gain insights into the corrosion problems and needs of their customers by enabling relevant technical conversations with clients regarding corrosion issues.
Registration for this Event closes on 15th August 2023.
Please see the ICorr Events Calendar for all the latest information.
ITEM F EXISTING PFP / SUBSTRATE DEFECT / ANOMALY TYPE
Concrete Or Cementiltious PFP / Carbon SteelDropped Object Hazard
Repair System Installation Photos/Drawings Limitations / Notes
& GRP Overwrap a) Damaged/loose concrete/cementitious should be left in place.
b) Cut the GRP material so that there is a minimum 50 mm overlap around the perimeter of the section being wrapped.
c) The GRP should be pulled tight around the damaged PFP and then left to cure. Cure time is dependent on good light levels which should be between 1-2 hours. Any top protective layer should be removed to leave a matt surface finish.
d) Once the GRP is fully , apply Chartek 7E at minimum 2 mm directly to the matt surface of the GRP. No primer required. Refer to the GRP manufacturers manual for application instructions.
Benarx Boxes & Pipe Shells a) Damaged/loose concrete/cementitious should be left in place.
b) The Benarx box/pipe shell can be fitted around the loose PFP and held in place using integral toggle & latch fasteners or stainless steel bands. Installation of Benarx solutions will require accurate measurements to ensure
David Wickham and Chris Fyfe of AkzoNobel.
PFP Interkote Repair Solutions – Site in Belgium.
Failed LWC on vessel skirt.
Cut out defective LWC Simplehand application of KSFR.
Interkote SFR finished repair.
Interkote SFR@50/28mm Concrete/LWC repair –jet fire testbox.
InterkoteSFR –post jet firetest.
IMAGE Left to Right – Aberdeen Committee Members at June AGM – Mei Ling Cheah – New Branch Vice Chair, Yunnan Gao – ICorr Vice President, Nigel Owen – External Secretary, Lian Ling Beh – Internal Secretary, Leela Ramachandran – University Liaison & CPD Officer, Adesiji Anjorin – New Branch Chair and Stephen Tate – ICorr President.
Dirk L. Van Oostendorp, Director of Engineering and Technical Services for Corrpro.