800 Operations and Maintenance

Abstract
This section discusses several topics related to pipeline operations and maintenance. It is not a comprehensive description of the organization and procedures for operating and maintaining a pipeline system. Contents 810 811 812 813 814 820 821 822 823 824 830 831 832 833 834 835 840 850 860 861 862 Safety Regulations and Codes Spill Contingency Plan Damage to the Line Hot Lines Gas Hydrates Hydrate Prediction Hydrate Prevention Hydrate Removal Hydrates Bibliography Risk Assessment, In-Service Inspection and Testing Risk Assessment Electronic Inspection Pigs Corrosion Coupons Hydrostatic Testing Coating Quality Leak Detection by Physical Methods Hot Tapping Pipeline Repairs Special Repair Fittings Clock Spring Fiberglass Coils 800-22 800-23 800-23 800-11 800-5 Page 800-3

Chevron Corporation

800-1

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

863 870 880 890

Full Encirclement Sleeves Maintenance Program in Areas of Unstable Soils or Earthquakes 800-35 In-Service Line Lowering References 800-35 800-37

July 1999

800-2

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

810 Safety
811 Regulations and Codes
Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 191, 192, and 195 and ANSI/ASME Codes B31.4 and B31.8 have subparts or chapters devoted to pipeline operating and maintenance procedures and records. Broadly, these require: written plans for normal and emergency procedures, periodic updating of procedures, operation in compliance with procedures, records, training of personnel, and education of authorities and the public regarding hazards and emergency action programs. State regulations may have further requirements. These are generally described and are minimum standards. Examples of written plans for normal and emergency pipeline procedures can be obtained from the Operations Section of Chevron Pipe Line Company. Appendix D includes: Pipeline Operating ProceduresAbnormal and Emergency Situations, Standard No. 4.2 of Chevron Pipe Line Company, New Orleans Division; 7-24-87. Table of Contents and general section of Operation and Maintenance Plan Guidelines for DOT-regulated Gas Pipelines, CUSA Eastern Region; 11-85.

812 Spill Contingency Plan

Governmental regulations and permit conditions require preparation of written plans and procedures for dealing with accidental spills from liquid pipelines. A comprehensive spill contingency plan must be included with the pipeline operating and maintenance procedures. The contingency plan and procedures should comply with 33 CFR 153, Navigable Waters, and 40 CFR 112, Protection of the Environment. A spill contingency plan needs to consider a wide variety of factors: Geographical elementstopography, surface conditions, soil type, drainage pattern, accessibility, etc. Environmental conditionsweather, hydrology, rare and endangered species, developed areas Pipeline system elementspumping rates and controls, line draindown volumes, block valve locations, and closing response times

The response procedures for each major surface drainage pattern area incorporated in the plan need to cover: Organization of the spill response teamCompany personnel plus local officials and contractors as appropriate Procedure to locate and assess the spill and initiate control and cleanup procedures

Chevron Corporation

800-3

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

Notification of government and local authorities and public relations information Procedure to control or limit the amount spilled, evaluating threats to public safety and sensitive areas Procedure to clean up and restore contaminated ground, shorelines, and water surfaces Availability and location of equipment, materials, and labor crews needed for all response actions Documentation of the spill incident, response, cleanup, and restoration Training plan and safety coordination Procedure for handling damage claims

For consultation on preparation of spill contingency plans, contact Chevron Pipe Line Company or a Company Health, Environment, and Loss Prevention representative.

813 Damage to the Line

Risk of damage to a pipeline by activities of others can be minimized by: Surface markers, identifying the location of the line and giving information regarding the proper Company contact to notify before proceeding with work Frequent surveillance of the route, on the ground and by air, to observe activities by others and changes in ground conditionsnew construction, maintenance work, agricultural cultivation and grading, canal maintenance, erosion, land slips and slides, etc.over or near the pipeline or progressing toward the line from another area Participation with Underground Service Alert Center or equivalent agency established to coordinate notifications regarding work on underground facilities Regular contacts with owners, authorities and contractors regularly working in the vicinity of the line to learn about planned and forthcoming construction that might jeopardize the pipeline

814 Hot Lines

Lines that carry hot fluids and are designed as restrained lines to limit expansion movements should be closely monitored at bends along the route to detect unexpected expansion problems. This is particularly critical at the initial warm-up of a new pipeline in hot service, whether from a wellhead, compressor station, or heatedoil heating station, because pipe-soil friction values may not have developed to values used in design calculations. Also, warm-up and cool-down cycles over a period of time may result in progressive movement of the buried line toward the surface of the ground, reducing the effect of cover over the pipe. All overbends,

July 1999

800-4

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

tight sidebends, sidebends with large angles of deflections, and buried-to-aboveground transitions should be inspected. Temperatures of fluids entering the pipeline should not exceed the design maximum, in order to avoid risk of severe consequences of coating damage, pipe buckling in compression, and popping out of the ground due to insufficient restraint by the soil.

820 Gas Hydrates

Gas hydrates are very complex, solid crystalline compounds formed when hydrocarbon gases containing water are cooled. Hydrates can form at temperatures well above the freezing point of water. Hydrate formation is a function of gas composition, water content, temperature, and pressure. In general, higher water content, higher pressure, and lower temperature promote hydrate formation. Gas hydrates appear like ice or closely packed snow. The crystals will accumulate on the walls of pipe, especially at elbows and orifices and other restrictions. Hydrate plugs are as strong as ice plugs and more difficult to remove since they require higher temperatures to melt.

821 Hydrate Prediction

The engineer must be able to predict hydrate formation. Hydrates must be considered whenever one is handling hydrocarbon gases containing water. Hydrates may be a problem in the following situations: High-pressure gas lines where the gas is cooled in transit Valves or other throttling devices that cool gas by expansion High-pressure process lines

In these and many other instances, it is important that the engineer be able to predict the hydrate formation temperature in order to: Determine whether special precautions are necessary to prevent hydrates Determine whether installation of a gas dehydrator or gas heater, insulation of lines and equipment, or other plant modifications represent the economical way of preventing hydrates Prepare specifications for heaters, dehydrators, and other special equipment required

Charts are available that allow the prediction of hydrate formation based on gas composition, pressure, temperature and water content. The reader should refer to the references at the end of this section or to the Engineering Data Book, Volume 2, Gas Processors Suppliers Association (GPSA), for more complete information and charts. The solubility of water in various hydrocarbon liquids varies substantially, and the effects of composition increase with pressure. High gravity gases are less linear in

Chevron Corporation

800-5

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

their solubility behavior. When the gas contains more than about 5% CO2 and/or H2S, one should correct for the acid gas components, especially above 700 psia. Figure 800-1 shows one correlation for lean, sweet natural gases containing more than 70% methane and small amounts of heavy ends. This figure has been widely used for gas dehydrator design and is adequate for most first approximations. In the figure, hydrates will probably form in conditions below and to the left of the hydrate formation line. For systems that are more complicated, a more rigorous treatment should be performed. The methods in the GPSA Data Book offer correction factors for most deviations from normal. However, for best results, a gas compositional modeling computer program, such as PPROP (available on the VM System), should be used. Hydrates most commonly form when wet gas is expanded. Figures 800-2 to 800-7 correlate gas gravity with permissible gas expansion without forming hydrates. As in Figure 800-1, they are first approximations only.

822 Hydrate Prevention

Because water is necessary to form hydrates, prevention of hydrates is most effectively accomplished by removing the free water. This may be done in two ways: dehydration inhibition

Dehydration is generally preferable because it removes the water from the gas stream. The higher capital cost must be weighed against the continuous cost of inhibition chemicals. Inhibition is usually accomplished by injection of methanol or a glycol into the gas stream to preferentially absorb the water. Methanol is expensive but effective and preferred at cryogenic conditions. Ethylene glycol is less expensive and more easily recoverable, except at low temperatures where its viscosity is very high. It is also less soluble in the liquid hydrocarbons that tend to occur in producing field gas systems. Diethylene and triethylene glycol can also be used. The glycols can be recovered and regenerated for reuse. Inhibitors are injected into gas lines easily with low cost equipment. However, to be effective the inhibitor must be present at every point where the gas is cooled to its hydrate temperature.

July 1999

800-6

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

Fig. 800-1

Water Content of Hydrocarbon Gas

Chevron Corporation

800-7

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

Fig. 800-2

Pressure-Temperature Curves for Predicting Hydrate Formation

Fig. 800-3

Permissible Expansion of a 0.6 Gravity Natural Gas without Hydrate Formation

Fig. 800-4

Permissible Expansion of a 0.7 Gravity Natural Gas without Hydrate Formation

Fig. 800-5

Permissible Expansion of a 0.8 Gravity Natural Gas without Hydrate Formation

July 1999

800-8

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

Fig. 800-6

Permissible Expansion of a 0.9 Gravity Natural Gas without Hydrate Formation

Fig. 800-7

Permissible Expansion of a 0.1 Gravity Natural Gas without Hydrate Formation

The minimum inhibitor concentration necessary to prevent freezing in the free water phase is given by the Hammerschmidt equation: KHI d = ------------------------------------100 MW MWI
(Eq. 800-1)

where: d = difference between gas hydrate temperature and system temperature, F KH = 4000 for glycols = 2335 for methanol I = inhibitor ratio, lbm/MMSCF MW = molecular weight of inhibitor The total quantity of inhibitor injected must also be sufficient to inhibit the vapor phase and provide for the solubility of the inhibitor in any liquid hydrocarbons. Significant quantities of methanol will vaporize, while glycol will not. The total quantity of inhibitor needed in the vapor phase may be three times that needed for the water phase.

Chevron Corporation

800-9

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

823 Hydrate Removal

Once formed, hydrates are often very difficult to remove. Hydrates that form in pipelines must be treated carefully. The method of removal depends on the specific situation. Aboveground piping can usually be heated easily. Different methods of applying heat include: Torches which are quick and effective but cannot be used in hazardous areas. Steam, glycol, or electric tracing, if available, heat more slowly than torches but are safer. Directly applied steam may be available. An induction heating coil may be desirable. Lines that can be taken out of service may be depressurised; since pressure contributes to hydrate formation, depressuring the pipeline will often let the hydrate sublime. This is the simplest method for lines that can be taken out of service. When service must be maintained, large amounts of inhibitor (methanol is preferred) may be injected. Sometimes the application of increased pressure will loosen and blow out the hydrates. One must be careful not to exceed the maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) of the pipeline. For problem blockages in short gathering lines, try depressuring and then circulating hot oil to heat the hydrate and the pipe. Pressure is often applied in conjunction with the hot oil. Again, be careful not to exceed the MAOP or maximum temperature of the pipeline or its coating. In extreme cases, the only solution is to sectionalize the pipeline by hot-tapping to locate and remove the hydrate plug.

824 Hydrates Bibliography

The following published reports are available on the subject of hydrates: 1. 2. 3. Gas Hydrates and Their Relation to the Operation of Natural-Gas Pipe Lines United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Mines, Monograph 8. Natural Gas HydratesTechnical Data Book, Hydrocarbon Research, Inc., Curves E-16.300 to E-16.304, inclusive. Donald L. Katz, Prediction of Conditions for Hydrate Formation in Natural Gases, (Technical Publication No. 1748 of the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers). Petroleum Technology. June 1944. Pryor, Arthur W. Memorandum on the subject Study of Possible Hydrate Formation at McDonald Island Pipe Line No. 2 Control Station. November 8, 1949. Ingersoll, W. L. Memorandum on the subject Use of Alcohol to Prevent Hydrate Formation. March 9, 1950.

4.

5.

July 1999

800-10

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

830 Risk Assessment, In-Service Inspection and Testing

Pipelines, by their nature, are difficult to inspect, hard to protect and can run through sensitive areas. Like other facilities, pipelines can be crucial to local production. They may contain hazardous materials. Long and/or large diameter pipelines are a large capital investment. Consequences resulting from an incident can be quite severe. The risk associated with pipelines, therefore, is among the highest in the Company. Risk assessment (see Section 831) helps Operators quantify and manage the risks associated with pipelines. In-service inspection and testing are prudent measures that should be taken for verifying the integrity of an operating pipeline system over the years. The following topics are discussed further in sections 832 through 835: Wall thickness inspection by electronic inspection pigs Corrosion coupons inspections Hydrostatic testing Coating quality inspection Cathodic protection surveys

The Department of Transportation requires that the operator of a pipeline system prepare an operations and maintenance plan (see 49 CFR 195.402 and 192.605), but specific inspection and testing measures and frequency are not defined. Each pipeline operating organization should therefore develop a program suitable for its particular facility. Other than where federal or state regulations mandate specific inspection and testing intervals, the program should be tailored to the individual pipeline system.

831 Risk Assessment

The purpose of this section is to help Operators quantify and manage the risks associated with pipelines.

What is Risk?
An incident is an occurrence that negatively impacts business. Pipeline incidents include, but are not limited to, oil spills, gas leaks, injury, lost revenue, and negative press coverage. Operators must determine the likelihood of an incident occurring and understand the potential consequences. These two elements combined, consequence and likelihood, represent the risk. Once the risks are clear, the Operator chooses whether to: take action to prevent the incident from occurring; attempt to mitigate the consequences; or monitor for impending failure.

Preventing an incident is preferred unless the cost to do so is excessive compared to the consequences.

Chevron Corporation

800-11

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

It is our strategic goal to be a safe, socially responsible and profitable operator. Risk assessment helps us achieve these goals.

What is Risk Assessment?

An incident is rated as high risk if it is extremely likely to occur and would result in severe consequences. An incident is rated as low risk if it is unlikely to occur and would result in only minor consequences. See Figure 800-8.
Fig. 800-8 Typical Risk Matrix

Once risk is determined and rated, the Operator can choose to: Prevent the incident from occurring or reduce the probability of occurrence. This is a good way to reduce risk and should be considered first. Monitor for impending failure. Sometimes this is more practical. Inspection for corrosion is an example of monitoring a risk. Because all pipelines eventually corrode, we monitor corrosion in order to predict a leak and take action before it occurs. It is more practical to monitor for corrosion than to replace the line every ten years. Mitigate consequences. Mitigation starts with the assumption that the incident will occur. Projected consequences are then reduced through pre-planning. Oil spill drills and initial route selection are examples of mitigating consequences.

July 1999

800-12

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

Methods Used for Assessing Risk

Commercial and internal models for risk assessment exist: 1. Kent Muhlbauers Pipeline Risk Management Manual: A Systematic Approach to Loss Prevention and Risk Assessment This is the only commercial model widely recognized and used. The Operator answers a list of standard questions provided. A numerical weighting system is applied to the answers and the resulting numerical score indicates the degree of risk calculated. Mr. Muhlbauer has recently published Win95 software to assist users in performing risk assessments using his method. While many Operators use this system, little documented confirmation of results exists. Perhaps the benefit comes mainly from the questions provided, which stimulate thought and help in prioritizing pipelines. However, his approach has not been widely adopted within the Company. 2. The CPL Risk Assessment Process This standardized method, practiced by Chevron Pipe Line Company (CPL), is used to determine yearly expense allocations to obtain the highest overall risk reduction. It relies on local experts and experience to judge both the likelihood and consequence of an incident. Refer to the following section for details.

CPL Risk Assessment Process

A key factor in the success of this program is the use of dedicated facilitators who help all sites implement risk assessment the same way. This results in conclusions that are consistent and comparable among sites. The process starts with a visual inspection of the lines from beginning to end. After the visual inspection, a group consisting of the best local expertise gathers to begin risk assessment. Membership of the group is important. Accurate analysis depends on experienced judgment on relative probabilities. Inexperienced opinion results in inaccurate assessments. The risk assessment process consists of the following: Phase 1 - generating scenario, estimating likelihood of occurrence and severity of consequences Phase 2 - reviewing current risk reduction activities and new project nominations Phase 3 - determining cost of proposed prevention/mitigation projects

CPL Risk Assessment Process - Phase 1

Generating the Scenario. An experienced site person describes the pipeline using a drawing or map highlighting all major impact areas (schools, streams, freeways, etc.). Physical properties, repair history and process limits are reviewed. The group brainstorms failure scenarios. The facilitators use a master list of pipeline failure causes to prompt the group and to make sure all known scenarios are considered.

Chevron Corporation

800-13

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

Estimating the Likelihood of Occurrence. The group then creates risk maps based on the generated scenarios. More than one risk map may be needed. Figure 800-9 shows an example of the risk associated with a pipe located near a high school. Should it leak due to internal corrosion, what would be the risk? The group concluded that no one would suffer injury and that the negative consequence would be limited to a precautionary evacuation and bad press coverage. Experienced team members judged a once in ten-year probability of a leak as being appropriately conservative. Then the group estimates the probability of a small vs. a large leak, and the probability of a precautionary evacuation.
Fig. 800-9 Risk Map for a Leak Near a High School

Estimating the Severity of Consequences. The group then estimates the severity of consequences for each risk map. Using the Consequence Criteria in Figure 800-10, the group considers each category as it relates to the risk map and rates it as high, medium or low.
Fig. 800-10 CPL Consequence Criteria Categories

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Public and Worker Health and Safety Environmental Resources Public Concerns Regulatory Compliance Financial Performance

July 1999

800-14

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

Fig. 800-10 CPL Consequence Criteria Categories

6. 7. 8.
NOTE:

Customer Satisfaction Employee Commitment Strategic Alignment

This list is specific to CPL. Other operating Companies can and do choose different criteria. What is key, however, is that there is only one set of criteria within an Operating Company.

For each category, several questions are asked with respect to current status of risk mitigation practices. It is typical that several risk prevention and mitigation strategies are already in place. Review of these helps the group estimate realistic consequences and probabilities. After doing a few risk maps and consequence evaluations, typical patterns begin to emerge and the process speeds up considerably. Once all the scenarios are evaluated, the probability and consequence data is mapped onto a single chart (Figure 800-11).
Fig. 800-11 Sample Risk Map

CPL Risk Assessment Process - Phase 2

Reviewing Current Risk Reduction Activities / New Project Nominations. At the second meeting, the group focuses on selecting scenarios that merit further discussion and developing projects that help prevent or mitigate potential incidents. Usually, the scenarios with the worst consequences and highest likeligood of occur-

Chevron Corporation

800-15

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

ring are considered first. In many cases, preventing one cause can reduce the risk for several scenarios. The group estimates the costs of implementing risk reduction strategies and then estimates the level of risk reduction achieved if a strategy is implemented.

CPL Risk Assessment Process - Phase 3

Determining Cost of Proposed Prevention/Mitigation Projects. The final phase of the process consists of outlining the cost of implementation and benefit achieved. The group completes a standardized form for each project which allows it to be easily compared to other risk reduction efforts currently in place. The result is a final Benefit-to-Cost ratio used for project ranking. The CPL process standardizes risk evaluations and ensures that the most serious risks receive priority funding. It is an efficient process that provides a large return for a small investment.

CPL Risk Assessment Process - Resources for More Information

Steve Walston, CPL the Woodlands, CTN, 281 363-7204, (stww) Chris Baumbauer. CPL San Ramon, CTN 510 842-6807, (ccba) CPL Risk Management Home Page http://www-cpl.chevron.com/cplrm1/

832 Electronic Inspection Pigs

Electronic intelligent pigs (smart pigs) are the most effective way to assess pipeline integrity for corrosion defects. Although smart pig runs can be quite expensive, they provide a detailed survey of almost 100% of the pipe wall while searching for areas of metal loss or cracking. Smart pigs can be used while a pipeline is either in or out of service: When a pipe is in service, force to push the pig down the line comes from pressure drop across the pig. When a line is out of service, tethered smart pigs are pulled through the pipe using a wire line (or tether).

After the run, data is retrieved from the pig and analyzed.

Inspection Methods
Smart pigs primarily use one of two methods for inspection Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL) or Ultrasonic (UT): MFL can be used in either oil or gas lines. When using MFL tools in gas lines it can be difficult to control the speed of the tool. Gas bypass is available on some tools to control the speed and minimize impact on production. Ultrasonics are easiest to use in liquid systems (UT needs a liquid couplant to work). However, UT tools can be adapted for gas lines by sequencing the tool in a liquid pill between two cleaning pigs.

July 1999

800-16

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

Recent developments in UT have seen tools developed for detecting external stress corrosion cracking and tools with a gas bypass to minimize production impact on high volume lines. Specialized MFL and UT tools are designed to: use in sour service maximize travel distance negotiate tight bends. optimized to allow pigging through multiple line sizes in hot systems optimized for very thick wall pipe, or very thin wall pipe map out the line using inertial referencing (often called geopigs) size the ID or look for dents (often called caliper pigs)

Line Design May Preclude Pigging

Original line design may preclude smart pigging. Some lines, however, may be modified to make them piggable without spending a great deal of money. Lines may be poor candidates for intelligent pigging under the following circumstances: The line contains bends with a radius of 1.5D or less. Note some of the newer tools have been configured to allow pigging down to and including 1.5D bends. The line contains miter joints over 10 degrees. Miter joints are unusual except on very old lines. The line contains unbarred branch connections. Depending on branch size, orientation, flow direction and control over pig speed, smart pigging may be possible. The line contains reduced port valves (often done on older lines to save money on valve costs). Line diameter changes by one or more standard pipe sizes. Again, depending on specifics, smart pigging may be possible. The line does not have pig launching or receiving capability. Note there are pipeline service companies that will rent horizontal and vertical pig traps for smart pigging use.

High vs. Conventional Resolution Smart Pigs

Inspection sensitivity depends on the number of sensor heads in the tool: Smart pigs that use more sensor heads (making them highly sensitive) and give quantitative wall thickness data are commonly called high resolution tools. Tools that use fewer sensor heads are called conventional resolution tools. These tools provide qualitative data. Conventional resolution pigs are considerably less expensive than high resolution.

Conventional resolution tools can be cost effective where the line is in relatively good condition with few areas in need of repair and where repair cost is low.

Chevron Corporation

800-17

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

Conventional resolution tools have been used where the accessibility for cut out is good. For example, in CCR in some lines where conventional resolution tools were used, all defects greater than 30% of wall loss were cut out. However, conventional resolution tools, even when run by a reputable vendor, can miss problems. This occurred at least once. A significant site of external corrosion was missed and a multi-million dollar spill resulted. The cause is suspected to have been thick, tight magnetic OD corrosion scale saturated with high conductivity water. These conditions are thought to have allowed the scale to carry more magnetic flux, making the pipe wall look thicker than it really was. This line is now inspected using a high resolution ultrasonic pig at a cost premium of five times over the prior conventional resolution technique. Conventional resolution results are higher in false positives than high resolution tools. If cost to repair is very high, like subsea lines, high resolution tools may be justified. High failure costs may also justify use of high resolution to obtain the maximum protection against a multi-million dollar incident. Tethered tools are typically used on shorter sections in lines where just a river crossing, for example, may have a high failure consequence. Short, high consequence inspections like these can be done at reasonable cost. Tethered tools have now been developed for use to impact the riser section of offshore platform pipelines. Key to getting the most value from a smart pig is working closely with the vendor to ensure that all of the many details are communicated correctly and acted upon. Overlooking or not handling correctly just one detail can potentially cause a pig to stick in the line. Once a pig is stuck, the line must be shut down, the pig located and cut out of the pipe, and both the line and the pig must be repaired. Usually, unpleasant discussions with Operations follows such an event. Avoid this situation by working with the vendor who will suggest a preparation plan of cleaning and sizing pigs to prevent such problems. Chevron Pipelines procedure for pigging lists many of the details Chevron must supply to the vendor (see Additional Resources). After a successful run, review the results and verify that they are consistent with known features and corrosion hot spots. Interpretation errors have been known to occur. Figures 800-12 through 800-14 further detail characteristics of specific types of intelligent pigs.
Fig. 800-12 ultrasonic vs MFL Metal Loss Inspection Tools (1 of 2) Ultrasonic Requires a fluid couplant Direct measurement Tends to be best at detection of defects less than 60% of pipe wall Generally works best on pipelines with a wall thickness greater than a half inch MFL No fluid couplant required No direct measurement Tends to be best at detection of defects greater than 30% of pipe wall Generally works best on pipelines with a wall thickness less than a half inch

July 1999

800-18

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

Fig. 800-12 ultrasonic vs MFL Metal Loss Inspection Tools (2 of 2) Ultrasonic May not detect corrosion damage or accurately measure depth of corrosion pits where remaining pipe wall has been reduced to less than 100 mils (2.54 mm) Requires the removal of internal scale in order for ultrasonic sensors to work properly Best tool for monitoring corrosion rate and detecting internal corrosion activity MFL May not detect corrosion pitting less than 30% of the pipe wall

Not as sensitive to internal scale as an Ultrasonic tool Ability to monitor corrosion rate is limited due to measurement accuracy limitations

Fig. 800-13 Conventional vs Advanced MFL Tools Conventional MFL Fewer sensors therefore lower defect resolution Requires special analysis to get estimated corrosion pit length, depth and shape information Cannot tell if corrosion damage is internal or external, however corrosion signature sometimes can be used to make an educated guess More economical inspection cost but more physical inspections may be required to determine the condition of the pipeline Long sections of pipeline can be inspected in one run Advanced MFL More sensors therefore greater defect resolution Requires special analysis to get estimated corrosion pit length, depth and shape information Has sensors to determine if the corrosion is external or internal but the process is not 100% accurate Higher inspection cost but improved accuracy may reduce the number of repairs required resulting in lower overall project costs Battery or data storage limitations may result in several runs on long sections to get a complete survey

Fig. 800-14 Tethered vs Self-Contained Tools Tethered Real time data transfer Requires no fluid to pump Controlled logging speed At least 2 passes May have to cut the pipe 3 km runs Self-Contained Memory storage Requires fluid to pump Speed altered by fluid fluctuations Only one pass possible May not have to cut the pipe ~ 100 km runs

Chevron Corporation

800-19

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

Data Developed by Smart Pigging

The amount of data developed by smart pigging is measured in gigabytes. The computer revolution is just barely keeping up in its ability to analyze data in a timely fashion. The latest technique developed to improve piggable distance is the use of real time data filtering on board the pig. Desktop computers have made a big improvement in the ability to review results of high resolution tools. The major high resolution vendors now deliver the data on floppy or compact disk with special application software which allows the client to manipulate the information or combine it with other data bases. The software can also automatically perform strength calculations based on the inferred shape and depth parameters. It then prioritizes the defect areas based on maximum allowed operating pressure at the defect. However, a waiting period of a month or more is still common before the results of the run are analyzed by the vendor and returned.

Chevrons Experience With Smart Pigs

Chevron has many varied experiences with smart pigs: Chevron Canada commonly uses tethered tools to inspect short but high consequence sections. Western Atlas is their vendor of choice. CCR also uses the Tuboscope conventional resolution tool. Chevron Pipeline regularly runs both high and conventional resolution pigs. They have set up alliance contracting with PII, formerly British Gas, for high resolution and with Tuboscope for conventional resolution. Chevron Marketing Hawaii runs a high resolution Pipetronix UT tool on the hot Black Oil line. CNAEP Western Region is required by the MMS and California State Lands Commission (SLC) to run intelligent pigs on the offshore California lines. They split the work about 70/30 between high and conventional resolution tools.

Resources
Experience is important in assuring good performance of intelligent pigs. Below are web sites and contact names for more information. 1. PII (Formerly British Gas) Web Site http://www.pii.co.uk/ Contact - Keith Grimes at (713) 849-6307 in Houston 2. Pipetronix Web Site http://www.pipetronix.com Contact - Neb Uzelac at (905) 738-7559 in Ontario Canada 3. Tuboscope Web Site http://www.tuboscope.com/ Contact - James Simek at (713) 799-8158 in Houston

July 1999

800-20

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

4.

Chevron Pipeline Smart Pigging Procedure MIP 305 http://www-cpl.chevron.com/techserv/documents/mip/mip305/97_MIP305.doc Contact - Mark Hildebrand at CTN/363-7152 / E-mail: HILM

5.

CRTC Pipeline Integrity Web Resource http://www-crtc.chevron.com/MEE/pipeline/AssessIntegrity/Measure/Pigging/smartpig.htm Contact - Sam Mishael at CTN/510 242-1726 / E-mail SMIS

833 Corrosion Coupons

For corrosive fluids, for which a specific corrosion allowance has been provided in determining the pipe wall thickness, it may be advisable to install corrosion coupons at points in the system representative of flow conditions and where they can be isolated and removed. These would normally be in the station or terminal piping or on flowing branch lines, rather than on the main pipeline. Where the piping must be kept in operation while removing or replacing coupons, a valved by-pass can be provided. If necessary to install a coupon in the main line, devices are available for withdrawing and re-inserting the coupon with the line in service. The Materials and Engineering Analysis Division of the Engineering Technology Department can be consulted regarding the need and type of coupon and method for placing it in the flowing stream. Also see the Corrosion Prevention and Metallurgy Manual for a description of devices for installing corrosion coupons.

834 Hydrostatic Testing

Two types of pressure testing of operating liquid lines are: Testing after displacing lines with water at hydrotest pressures at 1.25 times the maximum allowable operating pressure. Line pack or standup testing with the fluid normally handled after isolating the section, at a pressure not exceeding the maximum operating pressure

The maximum allowable operating pressure should be determined taking into consideration actual normal and abnormal operating pressures, limitations by design codes for pipe grades and wall thickness, and limitations by valves, flanges or other line appurtenances. Operating demands usually limit the time available for testing. Therefore, the test procedure must be well planned, giving consideration to all aspects and contingencies. All needed facilities, including communications, should be ready, as well as materials and construction equipment in event of a leak or a break. When testing in wet weather or wet areas, using a water-soluble dye in the test water may be warranted for identifying leak locations. Disposal of displacement water must be arranged to comply with environmental restrictions.

Chevron Corporation

800-21

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

Lines that have been idle for over 3 months and up to a year should have a satisfactory standup test before returning to service. A line that has been idle for a year or more should be hydrostatically tested with water to 1.25 times the maximum operating pressure before returning to service. Guidelines for testing operating pipelines are available from Chevron Pipe Line Company. These guidelines recommend that lines tested periodically be held at test pressure for at least 4 hours. Also see Section 770 for discussion of completion testing of new pipelines.

835 Coating Quality

Overall quality of pipe coating to effectively protect the pipe from corrosion is indicated by cathodic protection surveys at frequent intervals and by monitoring the current from rectifiers needed to maintain cathodic protection on the pipeline. If areas of severe coating failures and defects are suspected, coating holidays can be located with equipment such as the Pearson null-method detector manufactured by Tinker & Rasor, San Gabriel, CA, providing the pipe is buried in relatively moist soil conditions. The Pipe-CAMP PCS-2000 equipment recently developed and used in Australia is claimed to have greater sensitivity and ability to detect defects in dry and rocky soil and under pavement; it is available through US agents, such as Farwest Corrosion Control, Gardena, CA.

840 Leak Detection by Physical Methods

SCADA leak detection systems will trigger the need for corrective action or repairs and may indicate the general area of the suspected leak. To precisely locate a pipeline leak, however, on-the-ground detection methods must be used. These include: Visual observation by air or on the ground for evidence of line stock or effect on vegetation Combustible gas detectors Injection of odorants into gas and odor detectors Sonic instrumentation Pressure-wavefront instrumentation

Heath Consultants, Stoughton, MA Goldak, Glendale, CA, and Metrotech, Mountain View, CA, offer instruments and equipment for leak detection. Information on leak detection for gas lines is presented in ANSI/ASME Code B31.8, Appendix M, Gas Leakage Control Criteria. Appendix M relates to gas distribution piping, not transmission pipe lines, so judgment should be used in considering the action criteria outlined in Section 5 of Appendix M.

July 1999

800-22

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

850 Hot Tapping

Hot tapping of pipelines is similar to both hot tapping of process piping and pipeline sleeve repair welding. For more details on hot tapping equipment and procedures see Section 500 of the Piping Manual. The Piping Manual includes a checklist of the questions to be asked and preparations to make before preforming a hot tap.

Wall Thickness
Pipelines with a wall thickness of 0.188 inch and above can be hot tapped with low hydrogen electrodes without risk of burn-through. Thinner wall thicknesses require special procedures. See Section 500 of the Piping Manual. Wall thickness at the point of hot tap should be checked by ultrasonic testing.

Welding Procedure
Low Hydrogen Electrodes. Only welding procedures and welders qualified with low hydrogen electrodes (vertical up) should be used for hot taps and repair welds on live pipelines. Low hydrogen electrodes have both a lower risk of burning through and of weld cracking. Welding Electrode Selection. For high strength pipe, the electrode strength must be selected to match the pipe strength.

Pipe Grade
Special welding considerations are not required for the high strength X grades (X56 and above). These grades of steel have chemistries that are designed to be very weldable. A weld rod with sufficient strength should be selected for these grades.

Inspection
Preweld Inspection. Prior to hot tapping, the wall thickness at the proposed hot tap location should be checked with an ultrasonic thickness gauge. Postweld Inspection. Following completion of the hot tap welding, a visual inspection and magnetic particle inspection of the attachment welds should be done. Inspection methods and procedures are explained in Section 700 of this manual.

860 Pipeline Repairs

When pipeline repairs are required because of corrosion, defects, or damage to the pipe, the Company preference is to replace the section of pipe requiring repair. This generally entails cutting out the affected section and installing a new piece of pipe (pup). The circumferential welds to install the pup piece are straightforward pipeline welds that can be inspected by standard radiographic practices and the pipeline can be returned to service in good condition. However, this practice requires shutting down the pipeline. When schedule considerations make this impractical, other repair methods have to be employed, such as Plidco sleeves and Stopple fittings, Clock Spring fiberglass coils, or full encirclement welded sleeves.

Chevron Corporation

800-23

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

861 Special Repair Fittings

The various Plidco fittings described in Section 365 are useful in maintenance repairs to damaged or corroded pipe, particularly Plidco Weld & Ends couplings. A pair of these fittings with a length of replacement line pipe can be used to quickly repair a leak or install a prefabricated line valve or branch assembly, without requiring any hot work until the line is back in service. The section of pipe containing the leak, or at the location of the new prefabricated assembly, is removed by cold-cutting, taking proper action to control drainage from the line. Before making a cut, the bonding cable should be clamped to the line to electrically bond across the gap. A Weld & Ends coupling is then slipped over each exposed end of the line; the replacement pipe section is positioned to fill the gap; the couplings are then centered on the joints and the clamping and thrust screws tightened to seal the connections. See Figure 800-15.
Fig. 800-15 Repair with Weld & Ends

Also useful are Stopple fittings, used with sandwich valves and Stopple plugging machines, such as furnished by T. D. Williamson, Tulsa, OK. These are installed before cutting out a sectional pipe and will plug the line to avoid draining the line. T. D. Williamsons Lock-O-Ring flanges can be provided on the Stopple fittings and for flanges on hot-tapped tees for temporary by-pass lines; Lock-O-Ring plugs can be inserted after line modifications are made, so that it is not necessary to leave branch valves on the line. Refer to the T. D. Williamson catalog for details of use and installation.

862 Clock Spring Fiberglass Coils

Description
The Clock Spring fiberglass coil was introduced in the mid 1980s as a cost saving repair method for pipelines suffering from localized external corrosion. It can be installed while the line is still in operation. Clock Springs are typically a 12" wide by 0.06" thick cured sheet of polyester resin reinforced by glass filaments composite wrap. The cured composite wrap comes in one continuous piece that is wound around the pipe, typically 8 times. Adhesive glues the multiple layers into a -inch thick monolithic wrap. Before the adhesive sets, the layers are tightened to the required compressive load by cinching down on

July 1999

800-24

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

the last wrap, causing all the layers to wind around the pipe more tightly. This tightening process is similar to winding up a spring-driven watch or clock, thus the name Clock Spring. Companies wishing to use Clock Springs for Gas Transmission must inform Federal and local agencies prior to installing the repair per the current waiver. The Waiver is expected to be lifted in 1999 at which time the notification clause will likely be dropped.

Appropriate Use
Clock Spring repairs can be made on lines ranging from 6" to 52" in diameter. should only be used on lines having externally corroded areas where wall loss is less than 80% of wall thickness. The standard product is limited, by the manufacturer, to applications where continuous temperature is 130F or less, with transients not to exceed 180F. A modified version using different resins and adhesives is rated to 180F continuous with transients not to exceed 210 F.

Inappropriate Use
Clock Spring repairs should not be used to repair internal corrosion. for leak prevention from through-wall internal pitting. to cover linear crack-like defects such as stress corrosion cracking. to cover gouges. when there is concern of the pipe pulling apart.

Determining If Clock Springs are Appropriate

GRIWRAP, a software package developed by the Gas Research Institute, must be used to verify design appropriateness prior to making pipeline repairs using Clock Springs. Either GRI or the Clock Springs manufacturer will run the software which weighs site-specific variables such as type of pipe, grade of steel, existing pressure, and amount of corrosion present against the reinforcing properties of Clock Springs. The software will indicate whether or not the use of Clock Springs is appropriate for a particular pipeline repair. The design protocol is based on static accelerated aging tests of the material at 140F, selecting a design stress appropriate for a 50 year life and then halving the value. The tests were performed in water with pHs ranging from 4 to 10. This design basis methodology is typical for fiberglass pipe and so represents a historically proven process.

Basis for Design

In laboratory burst tests on X-60 pipe, Clock Spring repairs with no service time were found to contain up to 240% of maximum allowable operating pressure

Chevron Corporation

800-25

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

(MAOP) without bursting. In these tests, defects were machined into pipes and Clock Springs were wrapped around the affected areas. Pipes burst in the bare steel outside of the repaired area. Over 70 Clock Springs with service exposures up to six years have been excavated and inspected by GRI. No changes were observed at the site, and subsequent lab chemical analysis and mechanical testing detected no difference from the original material composition and performance. The DOT waiver on gas transmission lines requires a small number of installed Clock Springs to be monitored by GRI to verify aging properties. There is no such requirement on liquid service lines. Clock Spring repairs are considered permanent and good for at least 20 years. The Canadian National Energy Board Standard for gas and liquid pipelines, Z662, also accepts Clock Springs as a permanent repair as of July 11, 1997. In April 1998, GRI submitted to DOT a recommendation to lift the waiver for Gas Transmission service as aging properties have been sufficiently verified by field experience.

Preparation for Use

1. 2. Obtain assessment of the external corrosion. Determine confidence in the assessment. Many methods are used to detect areas of corrosion, one of which is intelligent pigging. The major pigging vendors provide a Fitness for Service assessment of the corroded areas found. Until confidence in the contractor and his technique is established, perform confirmation digs to verify corrosion. Manual ultrasonic thickness measurement of the pipe wall in the ditch will confirm that wall loss is not more than 80% and that the area in general matches the profile predicted by the pig. 3. Clean the pipe before applying a Clock Spring. Clean means all loose materials and all thick or soft coatings have been removed. Sand blasting to SSPC SP3 is the most common method of preparation. However, if coal tar has been used, it is usually necessary to also perform a solvent wash to remove the residual. Only thin and hard coatings, like Fusion Bonded Epoxy (FBE), may be left on the pipe. 4. Fill the externally corroded area with pit-filler compound prior to wrapping the Clock Spring. If welds exist in the area to be covered, the pit-filler compound should also cover the welds to provide a smooth load bearing surface for the Clock Spring.

July 1999

800-26

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

Installation
Clock Spring installation requires no welding and can be accomplished while the line is in service. For buried lines, a few inches of clearance are required beneath the pipe in order to facilitate wrapping. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Locate the adhesive pad attached to one end of the Clock Spring and apply it to the pipe. Apply adhesive to the pipe and then to each wrap as the Clock Spring is wound around the pipe. Eight wraps are recommended, giving a final thickness of 1/2". Cinch down the wraps to squeeze out excess adhesive from between the windings. Adhesive will ooze out from between the wraps. Apply additional adhesive to fully cover the " edge thickness all around the pipe. Allow adhesive to cure 2-4 hours. The Clock Spring forms a monolithic sleeve which has a higher tensile strength than the surrounding steel. For buried pipelines, the manufacturer recommends covering the Clock Spring with the tape wrap or shrink sleeve that will be used to protect the adjacent pipe, filling out the corners of the Clock Spring repair to create a smooth transition for the coating. This prevents the coating from tearing if there is any pipe movement.

Intelligent Pigging Marker. A common installation detail is the use of a few wraps of steel shipping bands, directly on the pipe on both sides of the Clock Spring, where they will be covered by the adhesive. This is an inexpensive way to provide a marker for Magnetic Flux Leakage Intelligent Pigs. The manufacturer will typically provide the straps at no charge in the shipping kit if asked. Avoiding Adhesive Failures. Approximately 20 adhesive failures have occurred in the 29,000+ applications of Clock Springs. These failures were caused by one of the following: Catalyst was stored for too long and became deactivated. Catalyst was stored at too high a temperature and became deactivated. Adhesive did not cure before going to hydrotest. An incorrect amount of catalyst was used, or temperatures changed, and the adhesive either did not set, or set too quickly.

The catalyst used today is labeled with an expiration date and instructions to keep it refrigerated. It also has a longer shelf life than the catalyst used several years ago. For overseas installations, the manufacturers policy dictates that it will not ship the catalyst until receiving notification that installation is imminent. Chevron Pipe Line Co.s first installation in California had to be reinstalled because the catalyst cured too fast the first time due to the rapid temperature rise of the surrounding air on a hot, sunny day.

Chevron Corporation

800-27

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

In 1993, the Clock Springs manufacturer began refusing installations where customers would not agree to use certified installers. The certified installer requirement was picked up by DOT in their waiver for Gas Transmission applications. Certification is not difficult to acquire and the Manufacturer is happy to provide the training.

Affect on Cathodic Protection

The " thick composite repair is well sealed, so there is minimal moisture transport through the layers. Consequently, no significant corrosion has been observed on the 70 repairs that have been excavated and evaluated. Testing did find a slight drop in voltage from impressed current cathodic protection systems beneath Clock Spring wraps. Voltage drops off significantly but only temporarily after the repair is completed. After a short incubation time, the voltage beneath the repaired area typically returns to near normal. A permanent loss of about 100mV can be expected on a line with a nominal 1250mV potential.

Quality Control
The manufacturer verifies strength properties at a frequency of one in every 200 springs made. To test strength, a 3" wide layer is made and split in a spreader. Failure must be above the minimum strength requirement and must fail across the fibers. Delamination is cause for rejection of the preceding two hundred windings.

Cost
The October 9, 1995 edition of Oil & Gas Journal published a survey showing the cost of installing Clock Spring was 60% of the cost of a Type A welded steel sleeve (no circumferential weld), and 40% of the cost of installing a Type B welded steel sleeve (including a circumferential weld). Chevron Pipe Line Co. analysis suggests that welded steel sleeves are comparable in cost. A process penalty for slowdown or downtime is needed to justify the use of Clock Springs.

Chevron Experience
Chevrons experience with Clock Spring repairs has so far been limited. Seven Clock Spring repairs have been in service in the Gulf of Mexico (Eugene Island) for one year with no problems. The repairs were made in the splash zone of riser piping, and so can be considered a severe test. Prior to the repairs, the piping was being operated at reduced pressure due to external corrosion. More Gulf of Mexico repairs are planned if the Eugene Island repairs pass visual inspection during Summer 1998. In April 1998, Chevron Pipe Line Co. installed several clock spring repairs over corroded areas found by intelligent pigging in the central valley of California.

More Information
Information is available through M&EE or the manufacturer:

July 1999

800-28

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

Clock Spring 14107 Interdrive West Houston, TX 77032. M&EEs contact at Clock Spring: Norm Block (800) 471-0060 or (281) 590-8491.

863 Full Encirclement Sleeves

Many of the considerations applicable to hot tapping discussed in Section 850 also apply to pipeline repairs that are made using full encirclement sleeves. Full encirclement sleeves are recommended for repairs because, when properly installed, they are load bearing, and Type B sleeves (fillet welded endssee Figure 800-16) are pressure retaining for through-wall defects. The practice of using partial sleeves (half soles) is restricted by the codes to lower strength, older materials and has generally been discontinued because of the stress intensification along the longitudinal fillet welds and the greater risk of failure if a surface defect such as an undercut or toe crack has been left.
Fig. 800-16 Types of Full Encirclement Sleeves Evaluated

Chevron Corporation

800-29

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

Another application of full encirclement sleeves has been the attachment of anode leads when greater than a No. 15 Cadweld charge is required because of the risk of copper contamination and cracking on the surface of the pipe. Direct attachment of the anode leads to the pipe has been permitted for Cadwelds using a No. 15 or smaller charge. Because full encirclement sleeves are generally used to repair pipelines that cannot be taken out of service, their use must be given the same considerations as required for hot tapping. These are: Stability of the product in the pipeline during welding and risk of explosive reaction (e.g., spontaneous decomposition of ethylene) Minimum thickness to avoid burnthrough (0.188 inch) Reducing the operating pressure (generally to two-thirds or less) during repair for personnel safety and to allow the sleeve to share hoop stress at operating pressure. This is frequently not possible with liquids that convert into a vapor at lower pressures (e.g., liquid petroleum gas and carbon dioxide) Risk of hydrogen cracking in the heat-affected zone for sour service operating conditions

Welding Procedures
API RP 1107 covers Recommended Pipe Line Maintenance Welding Practices for qualification of welding procedures and welders for full encirclement sleeves. Welding procedures qualified to API RP 1107 are valid within the range of essential variables of their qualification. The test assembly for procedure qualification is shown in Figure 800-17. Changes in essential variables requiring requalification are: Change in welding process Change in pipe, fitting, and repair materials. Materials are grouped into three categories: a. b. c. SMYS of 42 ksi or less SMYS of more than 42 ksi but less than 65 ksi SMYS of more than 65 ksi (each grade requires separate qualification)

Change in joint design Change in position, except qualification in the 6G positions (45 degrees from horizontal) qualifies for all positions Change in material thickness group: a. b. c. Less than 3/16 inch 3/16 inch to 3/4 inch inclusive Over 3/4 inch

July 1999

800-30

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

Fig. 800-17 Procedure Qualification Test Assembly for Position 6G

Change in filler metal or shielding (change from cellulosic to low hydrogen or more than one electrode size) Change in direction of welding (vertical uphill versus vertical downhill) Change in travel speed range or time lapse between passes

Welder Qualification
Welder qualification requirements for pipeline welding are discussed in Section 750. The multiple qualification test does not qualify for sleeve welding performed with low hydrogen (E7018) electrodes as recommended later on in this section. The use of low hydrogen electrodes requires a separate welder qualification test (a separate welding procedure qualification test is also required) which consists of welding with the pipe and sleeve positioned 45 degrees from the horizontal (see Figure 800-18). Essential variables requiring requalification are: Change in process Change in direction of welding (vertical uphill versus vertical downhill)

Chevron Corporation

800-31

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

Change from cellulosic to low hydrogen electrodes Change in diameter group except qualification on NPS 12 pipe qualifies for all pipe diameters Change in nominal wall thickness group (same as procedure)

Fig. 800-18 Welder Qualification Test Assembly

Sleeve Design
Several options exist regarding the design of full encirclement sleeves. Choices exist for the welding of the ends of the sleeves and the joint design of the longitudinal seams (see Types A and B sleeves in Figure 800-16)[1]. Sleeves with the ends not welded are referred to as Type A sleeves. Type B sleeves have welded ends. Longitudinal seams are either butt welded or lap welded using a butt strap. The Company practice is to weld the ends (Type B sleeve) in order to retain pressure and prevent corrosion in the crevice between the sleeve and the pipe. The use of lap-welded joints is not recommended because tests [1] have shown them to be inferior to butt-welded sleeves. The joint preparation for the butt welds in the sleeve should be beveled and have a gap sufficient to be able to obtain a full penetration

July 1999

800-32

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

weld. Full penetration sleeve welds will penetrate into the carrier pipe. In cases where local wall thinning causes the wall thickness under the sleeve welds to be less than 0.188 inch, a thin mild steel backing strip (1/16 inch) should be used to help prevent burnthrough. These should be slipped underneath the sleeve as shown in Figure 800-19. Backing strip material should be weldable and compatible with the pipeline material. Materials other than mild steel should not be used.
Fig. 800-19 Longitudinal Sleeve Weld with Backup Strip

In all cases, a sleeve should be fit as tightly as possible against the pipe in order to provide structural strength. Sleeve thickness should provide sufficient strength to at least match the line pipe strength or system flange rating pressure, whichever is limiting. Where line pipe is limiting, sleeve thickness can be calculated as follows:

(Eq. 800-2)

where: Ts = minimum sleeve thickness, in. Tp = nominal pipe thickness, in. Sp = SMYS for pipe, psi Ss = SMYS for sleeve, psi D = pipe outside diameter, in. If flange rating pressure Pf is limiting,

Chevron Corporation

800-33

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

(Eq. 800-3)

In either case, the sleeve thickness should not be less than the pipe wall thickness.

Welding
From the section on hot tapping, it can be noted that welding sleeves on pipelines containing fluids can produce faster quench rates in the welds and heat-affected zones. Depending upon the grade and carbon equivalent (C.E.) of the pipe, calculated by the following, C.E. = C + Mn/6 + (Cr + Mo + V)/5 + (Cu + Ni)/15
(Eq. 800-4)

heat-affected zone hardness can rise above the threshold where cracking can occur if hydrogen is present from the weld metal. This is called hydrogen-assisted cracking and is generally thought to require a microhardness above about 350 Vickers (Rc 35) in the heat-affected zone, high tensile stress, and a source of hydrogen for it to occur. Heat-affected zone hardness is difficult to control because, more frequently than not, pipeline materials, thicknesses, and fluids being carried will combine to produce fast cooling rates and high hardness. Residual stresses are inherent to the welding process and also difficult to reduce. Of the three variables, only hydrogen can be controlled to reduce the risk of cracking. This can be done through the use of a welding procedure using low hydrogen electrodes (E7018). An additional feature of using low hydrogen electrodes is their characteristic of less penetration than obtained with cellulosic electrodes (e.g., E6010 and E7010) conventionally used for pipeline welding. This provides an additional margin of safety to avoid burnthrough when welding on thinner materials.

Dents
When full encirclement sleeves are used to repair dents, the space between the dent and the sleeve should be filled with a hardenable material like an epoxy resin so there is good contact between the pipe and the sleeve. One method is to apply the epoxy resin to the dent with a trowel and then contour it to the original pipe circumference before the sleeve is installed and welded in place. Care should be taken to assure that the void between the sleeve and the pipe is completely filled.

Inspection
The fillet welds at the ends of full encirclement sleeves have been the site of underbead cracking which was the cause of at least one recent pipeline failure [2]. While the use of cellulosic electrodes and higher strength pipe (X52) were separated out as the main causes of cracking, it was brought out that inspection of these welds should be routinely done even with low hydrogen electrodes. Inspection should be by visual examination and magnetic particle inspection. Particular attention should be given to looking for cracks along the toe of the fillet on the pipeline side.

July 1999

800-34

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

870 Maintenance Program in Areas of Unstable Soils or Earthquakes

Nearly all pipeline systems are required to have normal operating and emergency contingency plans. These plans specify immediate operating action in event of landslide, subsidence, or earthquake. In addition to normal maintenance surveillance, the following measures are suggested for areas of unstable soils and seismic risk: As-built documentation should be on hand so that any changes from design or design assumptions are recognized, documented, and evaluated for their effect on pipeline integrity The inspection plan should include a recognition of the key components of design, to ensure the integrity of the line, and a program for monitoring these components Measurement surveys should be conducted periodically to detect changes in field conditions and in the line A contingency repair plan should be prepared for corrective actions for situations of varying degrees of severity. It should identify (1) recurring problems requiring routine periodic correction, (2) problems that may arise for which standard procedures can be implemented without engineering involvement, and (3) critical problems requiring engineering investigation and resolution. Necessary materials and construction equipment to make repairs on an urgent basis should be available near the areas of risk A postevent monitoring plan with checklist for reporting as soon as possible whether damage is severe or relatively minor. The initial inspection checklist should identify specific system components and ground conditions that are good indicators of damage. Ground condition indicators include: ground cracks; misalignment of roads, trees, fences, pole lines, railroad tracks, etc.; ground sags, sinkholes, or uplifts; signs of damage to other nearby utility lines. As soon as possible after strong events, a thorough investigation should be made by responsible operations and technical personnel to determine the condition of the pipeline, safety of resuming operations, and necessary corrective repairs or replacement

In making repairs to a line damaged by ground displacement, precautions should be taken in cutting the pipe to avoid fire or injury in case of likely sudden release of high-strain energy stored in the line. Precautions should also be taken for possible hydrocarbon spills in the soil and for unstable ground conditions.

880 In-Service Line Lowering

When land surface grading is to be done over an existing pipeline, such as for a new highway or other new land use, that will expose the pipeline either to mechanical damage and/or excessive stresses from wheel loads, measures must be taken to protect the pipeline, preferably without removing the line from service. One method consists of lowering the pipeline into a deeper trench so that it will be positioned farther below the new graded surface. The rationale for lowering is that in its new,

Chevron Corporation

800-35

July 1999

800 Operations and Maintenance

Pipeline Manual

deeper position the pipeline will experience stresses from wheel loads that are acceptably small and that the pipeline will be safe from mechanical damage during the grading and excavation. Guidelines for safely lowering pipelines without taking them out of service were established by a Batelle Columbus Laboratories study published in 1985, undertaken jointly by the Office of Pipeline Safety Regulation of the U.S. Department of Transportation, ASME, and API [3]. The study presents detailed guidelines for conducting a pipeline lowering operation, equations for predicting the lowering induced stresses; it establishes reasonable limits on the lowering-induced stresses, so that the pipeline will not be damaged or ruptured due to lowering operations. The study is not an endorsement of lowering as a method of addressing the safety of an existing pipeline, but provides guidance to pipeline operators or contractors who choose lowering as their preferred alternative. Elements to be considered in lowering a line are: Factors that affect loweringthe pipe, the pipeline and its condition, terrain, soil, and stress Safetypressure reduction, excavation safety, response to emergencies, protection of personnel and the public Stressesexisting stress in the pipeline, lowering induced stresses, measuring and calculating stresses, support spacing, safe limits on stresses Failure modesruptures, leaks, or buckles from improper lowering operations ProceduresInitial review, trench types and profiles, lowering alternatives, measuring stresses, minimizing temporary stresses, inspection

The following computer programs are available from Chevron Pipeline Co., San Francisco. PDROP. Calculates trench length, maximum pipeline stress, and added stress for free deflection of a pipeline TRENCHZ. Calculates trench length and profile during lowering while keeping below a given stress limit SUPPORT. Calculates the range of distance between pipeline supports required to minimize the stress in the pipeline during lowering PLIFT. Calculates the lift-off lengths, maximum stress, and force required to lift the center of the pipeline to the specified height. (This program can be used to determine initial pipeline stress) These programs have been validated. However, the TRENCHZ program may not produce exact results in every situation, especially with small diameter pipelines, due to the inaccuracy of the PC FORTRAN in calculating soil/pipeline interaction stresses. The accuracy level is adequate for most pipeline applications.

July 1999

800-36

Chevron Corporation

Pipeline Manual

800 Operations and Maintenance

890 References
1. 2. 3. Kiefner, J. F., Repair of Line Pipe Defects by Full Encirclement Sleeves , Welding Journal, June 1977. U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Pipeline Safety. Alert Notice. March 13, 1987. Kiefner, J. F., T. A. Wall, N. D. Ghadiali, K. Prabhat, and E. C. Rodabaugh, Guidelines for Lowering Pipelines While in Service, Batelle Columbus Laboratories, February 25, 1985.

Chevron Corporation

800-37

July 1999