You are on page 1of 11

Proceedings of the 2012 9th International Pipeline Conference IPC2012 September 24-28, 2012, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

IPC2012-90173

TECHNICAL CHALLENGES OF A HIGH PRESSURE HEAVY WALL HOT TAP CONNECTION ON THE BORD GIS IREANN BRIGHOUSE BAY PROJECT
Adrian Cotter Bord Gis ireann Cork, Ireland Peter Boothby MACAW Engineering Ltd. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

ABSTRACT The UK onshore high pressure gas export terminal at Brighouse Bay in south west Scotland is a key strategic facility for Bord Gis ireann currently providing the predominant source of gas supply to Ireland via two interconnector pipelines that cross the Irish sea. A high design pressure of 150 barg combined with a low minimum design temperature (-30C) has led to the use of heavy wall thickness station pipework, i.e. 508 mm outside diameter x 38.1 mm wall thickness ASTM A333 grade 6 (240MPa yield strength) seamless pipe. A requirement for a new hot tap connection at Brighouse Bay to improve security of supply identified several issues that needed to be addressed. Firstly, the normal UK requirement for 2 x carrier pipe thickness for the shell of the full encirclement split tee for the main branch connection could not be achieved due to the impracticality of rolling 76.2 mm thickness material to an internal diameter of only 508 mm to match the carrier pipe. Consequently there was concern that the area replacement ratio achieved by use of a thinner fitting may not be adequate for any additional site specific system loading despite meeting the ASME B31.3 code. Furthermore, the pressurised circumferential fillet welds made between the split tee and the carrier pipe may not be of sufficient size in view of the restricted leg length and hence resultant reduced fillet weld throat thickness. The parameters for the Brighouse Bay pipework in term of pipe material specification, pipe wall thickness and design pressure were also outside the range for which the existing UK hot tap welding procedure had been qualified. Hence a hot tap simulation assembly would need to be fabricated to qualify the welding procedure. In addition, the 38.1mm thickness Brighouse Bay pipework required PWHT in accordance with the ASME B 31.3 design code, but PWHT was not feasible for the hot tap connection. Hence there would be a need to demonstrate adequate toughness and fitness for purpose in the as welded condition. The paper describes the detailed

approach taken to address these concerns which included preliminary on-site material sampling and NDE, evaluation and assessment of the project pipe and fitting materials requirements, pipework stress analysis, finite element analysis and engineering critical assessment of the split tee connection, and hot tap weld procedure qualification. The paper concludes by describing the successful hot tap installation phase of the project. INTRODUCTION Following the discovery of natural gas off the south coast of Ireland, Bord Gis ireann (BGE) was formed in 1976 to develop Irelands natural gas industry. BGE is a commercial state body and is majority owned by the Irish government. The company is headquartered in Cork City and currently employs over 1,000 staff. The Bord Gis Networks division (BGN) owns and operates 13,299km of gas pipelines and associated installations in the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland and Scotland. The BGN transmission network (Figure 1) ties into the UK national grid at Moffat in South West Scotland. An adjacent BGN compressor station at Beattock filters, meters, odorises and compresses gas into the 85 barg South West Scotland onshore system. This pipeline system terminates at Brighouse Bay compressor station where the gas is further compressed and fed at pressures up to 150 barg into two sub-sea interconnector pipelines IC1 and IC2 which cross the Irish Sea before coming ashore at Loughshinny and Gormanston, just north of Dublin on the east coast of Ireland. The Brighouse Bay compressor station and interconnector pipelines are of vital strategic importance to Irelands energy security, supplying 93% of its total gas demand. Additionally a branch from IC2 supplies the entire gas demand for the Isle of Man. At Brighouse Bay the station inlet header splits and flows into two separate compressor trains, which feed gas into the two sub-sea interconnectors IC1 and IC2. Continuity measures

Copyright 2012 by ASME

(security of supply) require, in the case of an emergency (or if the need to shut down a compressor train arises), that flow be maintained to both IC1 and IC2. Prior to this project, a by-pass existed between the station inlet header and the IC1 outlet header, but no such by-pass existed for IC2. The purpose of this project was to construct a by-pass (red line in Figure 2) by vertical hot-tapping into the existing IC1 by-pass and constructing a tie-in to an existing blank flanged ball valve, which formed part of the IC2 outlet header as shown in Figure 2.

Moffat/Beattock

Brighouse Bay

IC2 IC1

Isle of Man

Figure 2: Schematic showing extent of the IC2 by-pass works

Further investigation made it apparent that the majority of the design effort on this project would be material focused. A detailed design basis document was prepared which highlighted the following issues: The governing Hot Tap specification only covered fittings up to 100 barg whereas the tee would need to be designed for 150 barg. Some records showed the pipe being hot tapped as ASTM A333, Grade 6, whereas as-built drawings indicated ASTM A670. The pipe being hot tapped was seamless and therefore it was likely that indications similar to those found on the previous hot tap could be encountered. The low design temperature of -30C requiring Charpy properties at -50C meant specifying and procuring materials to ASTM standards, which was outside the BGN norm.

Figure 1: Bord Gis ireann transmission pipeline network

ENGINEERING APPROACH Prior to this project, all detailed design work in relation to the three compressor stations on the Bord Gais Network was carried out by external consultants; however for this project a decision was taken to carry out this design work in-house. An initial review of drawings highlighted an available 500NB blanked off ball valve on the IC2 outlet header as a potential tie-in point, thereby negating the requirement for a second hot tap. A hot tap location on IC1 was then identified. Review of existing records showed that a similar hot tap had been carried out further upstream on IC1 a number of years previously and issues had arisen in relation to material identification and pipe condition. At the time, conflicting records raised uncertainty regarding the carrier pipe material grade and a pre-construction examination of the pipe had highlighted the presence of surface indications. Given the close proximity of the previous hot tap to the newly proposed hot tap, it was reasonable to assume that this project could encounter similar problems.

At this stage, the services of MACAW Engineering were employed to aid in the management of these material related issues. After an initial assessment of the proposed design, it was agreed that the following project methodology would be followed for a fitness for purpose (FFP) study of the intended design and for optimization of the construction activities:

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Fitness for purpose assessment 1. Inspection of the hot tap location, including: a. Material sampling to confirm the steel chemical composition and grade of the IC1 carrier pipe. b. Assessment of surface indications on the carrier pipe at the hot tap location. Design and procurement of the hot tap full encirclement split tee. Specification and procurement of the associated pipe work. Stress analysis of the proposed pipe work. Finite element analysis and engineering critical assessment of the hot tap design.

2. 3. 4. 5.

Construction activities 1. Development of the welding procedures to be used during construction including weld procedure qualification and testing. Hazard and operability (HAZOP) study to assess the impact that the proposed design would have on the operation of the station. Due the wall thickness of the carrier pipe and the associated weight of the coupon it was considered prudent that a test hot tap be conducted by the contractor to prove the intended methodology and ensure that the coupon could be readily retrieved and not dropped into the pipe. This test was carried out at the National Grid Pipeline Maintenance Centre at Ambergate in the UK and was witnessed by the BGN project team. As the works were to be carried out in a fully operational compressor station a hazard construction (HAZCON) study was also carried out prior to construction. The session was conducted on-site and was attended by the BGN design team, the BGN senior pipeline inspector, the relevant compressor station operational staff and the contractor responsible for construction. This proved to be a highly beneficial step in the process resulting in several design improvements to facilitate ease of construction, which ensured buy-in to the construction methodology by all stakeholders.

2.

3.

4.

only 508 mm to match the carrier pipe outside diameter. The requirement for 2x carrier pipe wall thickness is a company specific requirement detailed in BGE/WS/03[1] and is based on the development of optimised hot tap construction procedures in the UK over the past 40 years. The company specifications containing these procedures are now supplementary to the British Standard BS 6990[2] since its introduction in 1989. Consequently there was concern that the area replacement ratio achieved by use of a thinner fitting may not be adequate for any additional site specific system loading despite meeting the implemented design code, ASME B31.3[3]. Furthermore, the pressurised circumferential fillet welds made between the split tee and the carrier pipe may not be of sufficient size in view of the restricted leg length and hence resultant reduced fillet weld throat thickness. In addition, the 38.1mm thickness Brighouse Bay pipework required Post Weld Heat Treatment (PWHT) in accordance with the ASME B31.3 design code, but PWHT was not feasible for the hot tap connection. Hence there was a need to demonstrate adequate toughness and fitness for purpose in the as welded condition. The approach taken to address these technical concerns was based on a methodology previously developed for National Grid in the UK[4]. This included pipework stress analysis, finite element analysis and engineering critical assessment of the full encirclement split tee connection. An additional factor on this project was the Brighouse Bay pipework which in terms of pipe material specification, pipe wall thickness and design pressure was outside the range for which the existing UK hot tap welding procedure had been qualified. Hence a full scale hot tap simulation fabrication was considered necessary to qualify the welding procedure. Preliminary on-site material sampling and NDE, evaluation and assessment of the project pipe and fitting materials requirements were additionally undertaken on the project. These aspects are discussed in the following sections of the paper. PRELIMINARY ON-SITE MATERIAL SAMPLING AND NDE As previously mentioned, surface indications were identified on the seamless carrier pipe at the time of the original IC1 hot tap. Investigation carried out at that time, including taking boat samples to provide material for metallographic assessment, revealed the indications to be shallow surface laps arising during pipe manufacture. In view of the proximity of the proposed new hot tap to the existing hot tap location, it was anticipated that similar surface indications might be encountered. Consequently a procedure for identification of and remedial action for surface defects in the pipe at proposed hot tap location was developed and implemented during preliminary works. This procedure included grinding in small (i.e. 0.5mm) depth increments in conjunction with frequent non destructive testing evaluation, up to a predetermined maximum excavation depth determined by engineering critical assessment. In the event the surface indications were removed after less than

PROJECT TECHNCIAL CHALLENGES A high design pressure of 150 barg combined with a low minimum design temperature for the Brighouse Bay Compressor Station has led to the use of heavy wall thickness station pipework, i.e. 508 mm outside diameter x 38.1 mm wall thickness ASTM A333 grade 6 (240MPa yield strength) seamless pipe when the site was originally constructed. The requirement for a new hot tap connection at Brighouse Bay identified several issues that needed to be addressed. Firstly, the normal UK requirement for 2 x carrier pipe thickness for the shell of the full encirclement split tee for the main branch connection could not be achieved due to the impracticality of rolling 76.2 mm thickness material to an internal diameter of

Copyright 2012 by ASME

2mm grinding which is within the allowances specified in Section 10 of the ASTM A333[5] pipe standard. In view of previously identified uncertainties over the precise grade of material of the 20 diameter seamless carrier pipe, the chemical composition of the pipe was confirmed by on-site material sampling both at the existing IC1 hot tap location and at the proposed new IC2 hot tap location. The chemical analyses were compared with mill certificates and also with new pipe procured for the IC2 hot tap project (see Table 1). The carbon content of the pipe at the proposed IC2 location was lower than that at IC1 (i.e. 0.08 compared with 0.14) resulting in a lower carbon equivalent value (i.e. 0.29 compared with 0.35). This was considered beneficial in terms of reducing the likelihood of high HAZ hardness arising in the carrier pipe during hot tap welding. The new pipe procured for the project was of higher carbon equivalent. Again this was again considered beneficial as it was to be used for weld procedure qualification testing. C % Si % Mn % P % S % Cr %

20 Pipe IC1 location IC2 location New pipe Pipe IC1 location IC2 location New pipe

encirclement split tee. The outcome of these changes was the achievement of a high area replacement ratio (i.e. 1.85), thereby exceeding a preferred UK requirement of 1.5. The NL2 classification confers Charpy impact properties at -50C. This was considered important in view of the need to demonstrate adequate fracture toughness in the material due to the fact that PWHT would not be an option for hot tap welding. Finally, maximising the shell thickness would allow a circumferential fillet weld leg length of 50mm to be achieved. A quantity of 20 diameter x 38.1 mm wall thickness ASTM A333 grade 6 seamless pipe was required for the pipework spool being fabricated as part of the IC2 hot tap project. This pipe was manufactured by the Z-Group Valcovny Trub Pilger mill at Chomutov in the Czech Republic. A review of the manufacturing procedure specification and NDT procedures was undertaken and a pre-production meeting held at the pipe mill. The pipe was manufactured in accordance with the approved manufacturing, inspection and test plan as verified by BGN appointed third party inspection. Other pipework materials required for the project included 20 diameter bends and flanges and small diameter pipe and welded branch fittings. PIPEWORK STRESS ANALYSIS A stress analysis of the new pipework containing the proposed IC2 hot tap connection at Brighouse Bay was performed to determine if the pipework met the code check limits in ASME B31.3 and to provide input data for the finite element analysis (FEA). The analysis, performed using Caesar II[7], was conducted for a design temperature range of -30C to +55C and for an outlet pipework design pressure of 150 barg. Load cases were developed in line with the recommendations of the UK Institution of Gas Engineers and Managers code of practice IGE/TD/12[8] and comprised a total of 42 different loading combinations. The pipework configuration included in the analysis is shown in Figure 3. A substantial part of the model was made up of existing pipework, both above and below ground. This was included to provide appropriate boundary conditions for the new sections of pipework. The straight lengths of 20 pipes associated with the existing hot tap IC1, and the new hot tap IC2, were modelled to analyse the effect on expansion and contraction on the new bypass. Input data for the stress analysis was obtained from available records supplemented by a site visit undertaken to gather additional information about the pipework and take wall thickness measurements.

0.14 0.25 1.00 0.010 0.004 0.11 0.08 0.24 0.98 0.009 0.004 0.11 0.17 0.40 0.84 0.010 0.007 0.16 Cu % Ni % Nb % V % Al % IIW %

0.14 0.08 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 0.35 0,14 0.08 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 0.29 0.14 0.09 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.38

Table 1: Seamless pipe chemical composition

The original radiography reports for the girth welds adjacent to the proposed location of the new IC2 hot tap were examined and in addition, the welds were re-inspected using manual phased array ultrasonic inspection to confirm the absence of defects. PROJECT PIPE AND FITTINGS MATERIALS REQUIREMENTS From an early stage in the project, discussions were held with the full encirclement split tee manufacturer TDW in order to ensure that the split tee fitting was optimised in terms of thickness, strength and toughness properties whilst acknowledging the manufacturing limitations associated with forming a heavy wall fitting to match the relatively small carrier pipe diameter. These discussions lead to an increase in shell wall thickness from 45 to 50mm and to a change from EN 10028-3[6] grade P355NL1 to grade P460 NL2 for the full

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Criteria

Result

Node

Figure 3: Pipework modeled by Caesar II stress analysis

The applied stress in the existing pipework revealed a range of 12.3MPa to 187.3MPa. The stress levels, compared as a percentage to the allowable limits set out in ASME B31.3 covered the range 4.7% to 73.3% and all were below the allowable limit. The lowest stress ratio is associated with the fatigue case of annual commissioning/decommissioning, and the highest stress ratio for the sustained load case at the design outlet pressure of 150 barg. From the fatigue analysis the maximum cumulative usage ratio was 0.00 which being less than 1.0 is therefore acceptable. The forces and moments acting on the hot tap tee in three planes were calculated. The maximum deflections in the x, y and z directions were 59mm, 93mm and 123mm respectively, occurring remote from the hot tap, which again were all compliant with ASME B31.3. A summary of the stress analysis results is given in Table 2.

Maximum Shakedown Stress 22.5 % 410 Fatigue Annual 5.5 % 840 Decommissioning Fatigue Compressor Operation 4.7 % 410 Fatigue Winter Diurnal 5.9 % 410 Fatigue Summer Diurnal 5.2 % 410 Fatigue Cumulative Usage 0.00 840 Normal Sustained Stress 87.2 % 1205 Maximum deflection in the X -59 mm 1340 Direction Maximum Deflection in the Y -93 mm 1070 Direction Maximum Deflection in the Z -123 mm 1340 Direction Force Range in X direction at -17073 N to 660 new hot tap +22181 N Force Range in Y direction at -66113 N to 660 new hot tap +61176 N Force Range in Z direction at -3127 N to 660 new hot tap +4998N Moment Range around X -29796 N.m to 660 direction at new hot tap +26997 N.m Moment Range around Y -14374 N.m to 660 direction at new hot tap +16325 N.m Moment Range around Z -51530 N.m to 660 direction at new hot tap +53082 N.m Notes: 1. % values indicate ratio of actual to allowable stress 2. n/a = not applicable 3. node 660 is the hot tap location

B31.3 Compliance n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Table 2: Summary of stress analysis results

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS A FEA was carried out to define the peak stresses in the IC2 hot tap fitting and to provide the necessary inputs for an ECA undertaken on the hot tap circumferential fillet welds to determine critical defect sizes. The FEA analysis was performed with stresses assessed under sustained, shakedown and fatigue load cases. The peak stresses, and subsequently linearized stresses, were compared to the limits in ASME B31.3. The FEA model was created using the pre and post processor FEMAP and analysed using ABAQUS[9]. The pipe and fitting body were modelled using Hex20 elements and the welds modelled in Penta12. A variable element size was used with the finest mesh adopted for the welds and areas immediately adjacent to the fitting, with progressively larger elements used in areas remote from the welds. The forces and moments from the CAESAR II stress analysis discussed in the previous section were used as inputs for the FEA. The internal surfaces of the model were loaded with the appropriate pressure, and the forces/moments were applied at cut ends of the pipework remote from the fitting. This approach allowed any local stress variations at the loading location to be kept remote from component being analysed. The allowable stresses for the sustained and cyclic shakedown cases in ASME B31.3 are shown in Table 3.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Flange

Carrier pipe 165.5 137.9 137.9 183.4

Split tee 298.7 177.0 177.0 235.4

Weld

SMYS/1.5 UTS/3.0 Normal sustained loads S Occasional loads = 1.33 S

238.7 151.7 151.7 201.7

298.7 177.0 177.0 235.4

Allowable stress intensity 151.7 137.9 177.0 177.0 Sm = S General primary membrane 151.7 137.9 177.0 177.0 stress Local primary membrane 227.5 206.8 265.5 265.5 stress General or local primary 227.5 206.8 265.5 265.5 membrane stress + bending Primary plus secondary stress 455.0 413.7 531.0 531.0 intensity range Notes: 1. Allowable stress limits from ASME B31.3 and ASME VIII[10] Division 2 for normal loads (K = 1.0, Table AD-150.1) 2. Values for weld conservatively based on split tee properties Table 3: Allowable stress for the hot tap tee

The component material properties used in the assessment are detailed in Table 4. For the purpose of comparing the calculated peak stress to the code limits, Tresca based stress intensity values were determined. An example of the predicted stress due to sustained loading is presented in Figure 4. The maximum peak stresses for the full encirclement split tee crotch weld obtained from the finite element analysis are presented in Table 5, and all four load cases fail to meet the requirements of B31.3. The peak stresses were then linearized according to the stress classification lines (SCL) shown in Figure 5 to take account of the sectional load carrying capability of the tee. The resultant linearized stresses in the tee and circumferential weld were all acceptable with respect to ASME B31.3.
Flange X52 358 Pipe A333-6 240 Split tee P460 NL2 448 Weld E8018G 448

Figure 4: FEA model for sustained load case (Lc7) Load case Description Maximum Tresca stress (MPa) 419.0 500.7 432.0 432.0 Allowable stress (MPa) 137.9 183.4 413.7 413.7 Fail Fail Fail Fail Pass/Fail

LC7 LC16 LC27 LC32

SUS OCC EXP EXP

Sustained Hydrotest Shakedown Shakedown

Specified minimum yield strength, SMYS (MPa) Specified minimum tensile strength, SMUTS (MPa) Youngs modulus E (MPa) Poissons ratio Equivalent material toughness, Kmat, at -30C (MPam)

455
05

414
05

531
05

531
05

2.1E 0.3 -

2.1E 0.3 79.6

2.1E 0.3 82.9

2.1E 0.3 106

Table 5: Split tee and fillet weld peak stress values

Table 4: Material properties used in the FEA and ECA

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Figure 5: Split tee stress classification lines

The calculated fatigue damage results of the analysis based on the four fatigue load cases are presented in Table 6. Fatigue lives are based on the as calculated peak stress ranges and not the linearized values, which is the accepted approach for fatigue analysis. The fatigue curves used are based on smooth barg fatigue curves for low Carbon steels, with a weld reduction factor of 3 based on the ASME VIII Boiler & Pressure vessel code[10]. The cumulative fatigue damage is 0.202, which is below the limit of 1.0 in ASME B31.3, indicating minimal risk of failure due to fatigue under these operating conditions.
Load case Lc39 Lc40 Lc41 Lc42 Load type Fatigue Fatigue Fatigue Fatigue Description Maximum stress (MPa) 344.5 46.2 20.7 17.3 Damage 1.900E-1 1.200E-5 1.300E-5 2.200E-7 2.020E-1

Fatigue 40 cycles Fatigue compressor operating 1000 cycles Fatigue winter diurnal 8000 cycles Fatigue summer diurnal 6000 cycles

ENGINEERING CRITICAL ASSESSMENT The engineering critical assessment (ECA) was carried out out using the Option 2 approach of the British Energy Generation R6 procedure[11]. This uses a failure assessment diagram approach and is very similar to the Level 2 analysis of the widely used British Standard BS 7910[12]. Critical crack sizes were determined for the circumferential fillet weld between the full encirclement split tee and the carrier pipe which was the main area of concern. The minimum tensile properties in Table 3 for the carrier pipe, full encirclement split tee and weld metal were used in the calculations. The minimum values of the fracture toughness at 30C were calculated from the available minimum values of Charpy impact energy using the lower shelf Charpy toughness correlation in Annex J of BS 7910. Two load cases were considered and these comprised the design pressure, dead weight, and external load for both minimum and maximum design temperature. The peak stresses for these load cases occur at the top dead centre of the circumferential fillet welds at each end of the full encirclement split tee. There are six planes for both circumferential fillet welds where defects could occur (see Figure 6). The first and second planes, P1 and P2, are the cross sections through the pipe wall thickness at the fillet weld toe and root respectively. The third plane, P3, is the throat of the fillet weld. The fourth plane, P4 is across the buttering run fusion plane and the fifth plane, P5, is the external surface of the fillet. The sixth plane, P6, is through the fusion plane of the fillet weld and the hot tap tee. A list of the R6-Code geometry codes and assessed defects relating to the six defect planes investigated is shown in Table 7. A summary of the calculated critical defect sizes is shown in Table 8. All defects were considered to be surface breaking; the critical sizes will be conservative for buried defects.

Cumulative damage: Table 6: FEA fatigue analysis results

FEA Summary After linearization, the maximum membrane and membrane plus bending Tresca stress for Sustained loading are below the allowable values. After linearization, the maximum membrane and membrane plus bending Tresca stress for Shakedown loading are below the allowable values. The maximum calculated cumulative fatigue damage at the worst location due to the specified Fatigue load cases is 0.2. This value is much lower than the Code limit value of 1.0. On the basis of these conclusions, the 20 x 20 full encirclement split tee is satisfactory against the requirements of ASME B31.3-2003.

Figure 6: Split tee stress classification lines (SCL) for ECA

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Plane P1 P2 P3

Geometry code in R6 215 215 9 25

Description Fully circumferential crack outside a thin cylinder subject to user defined loading Fully circumferential crack outside a thin cylinder subject to user defined loading Extended surface crack in a finite width plate subject to arbitrary stress Elliptical surface crack of 40mm in a finite width plate, subject to arbitrary stress Extended surface crack in a finite width plate subject to arbitrary stress Elliptical surface crack equal to the full length of the plane, 73.9mm, in a finite plate width, subject to arbitrary stress Full circumferential crack inside a thin cylinder, subject to user defined loading Circumferential elliptical surface crack inside a thin cylinder assuming a crack length of 40mm, subject to user-defined loading

calculated critical values are considered either likely to be detected during the various inspection stages of fabrication, or are considered unlikely to occur during welding of the circumferential fillet welds. ECA Summary The Engineering Critical Assessment of the circumferential fillet welds between the full encirclement split tee and the carrier pipe shows that the calculated critical crack sizes are likely to be detected during inspection. The calculated critical crack size for the worst case, on the radial interface plane between the circumferential fillet weld and the full encirclement split tee, is a fully circumferential surface crack of 3.81 mm depth. PIPEWORK & HOT TAP WELD PROCEDURE QUALIFICATION As part of an on-going task to qualify the BGE hot tap welding procedure specification to cover the full range of pipe sizes, grades and gas flow conditions on its natural gas transmission and distribution network, the decision was taken to carry out weld procedure qualification on a full scale sleeved pipe assembly on the IC2 hot tap project. This was considered particularly important in view of the specific parameters associated with this project, namely a 150barg design pressure and 20diameter x 38.1mm wall thickness ASTM A333 grade 6 seamless pipe which differed substantially from the rest of the BGE network. The IC2 hot tap qualification was simplified to a degree because it was envisaged that the hot tap would be performed at a time when there would be minimal flow and hence there was no need to simulate the cooling effect of flowing gas as part of the qualification test. The hot tap simulation test involved 20 diameter x 38.1mm ASTM A333 grade 6 seamless project pipe and 50mm thick EN 10028 part 3 P460NL2 shell material produced from the same cast as the hot tap tee. Welding was carefully controlled to simulate the procedure to be used on the IC2 project. E8018G vertical down welding consumables were used for hot tap welding. A detailed specification for mechanical testing of the completed assembly was prepared. Testing performed on both the longitudinal seam welds and the circumferential fillet welds included chemical analysis, weld metal and HAZ Charpy impact testing at -30C and -45C, macro / hardness surveys and metallographic examination. In addition for the longitudinal seam welds transverse and all weld tensile testing was carried out. A summary of the mechanical test results is given in Tables 9 & 10. Macrophotographs of the longitudinal seam and circumferential fillet welds from the simulation hot tap qualification are shown in Figures 7 & 8 and demonstrate the high quality of welding achieved. The maximum hardness levels arising were 401 HV10 max. in the cap HAZ region of the longitudinal seam weld and 387 HV10 max. in the cap HAZ (shell side) region of the circumferential fillet weld.

P4 P5

9 25

P6

213 214

Table 7: R6 geometry codes & assessed defect details

ECA plane P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6

R6 Geometry 215 215 9 25(1) 9 25(2) 213 214(3)

Critical defect height (mm) Hot (+55C) Cold (-30C) 6.2 6.2 12.0 12.0 4.6 4.6 10.4 10.4 9.9 10.0 8.9 8.9 3.8 3.8 9.4 9.4

Notes: (1) Elliptical crack with assumed major axis 2c = 40 mm. (2) Elliptical crack with assumed major axis 2c = 73.9 mm (diagonal of the fillet weld section) Table 8: Critical defect size summary for circ. fillet welds

The critical defect sizes can be seen to be very similar for both the hot and cold conditions. This is due to fact that the same Kmat value derived from the Charpy toughness at -30C was conservatively used for both conditions because the Charpy toughness applicable to the hot temperature was not known. In reality the toughness at +55C will be higher and on the upper shelf of the transition curve, therefore the Kmat would be significantly higher. The smallest critical defect size occurs for plane P6 i.e. 3.8mm depth for fully circumferential crack. The next smallest critical defect size occurs for plane P3 i.e. 4.6mm depth for fully circumferential crack. The critical sizes for shorter elliptical shaped defects more likely to be encountered are markedly greater than these levels. Based on the assumptions, input data and calculations made, it is judged that the circumferential fillet welds between the full encirclement split tee and the carrier pipe pass the ECA. For all the six planes evaluated, defect sizes above the

Copyright 2012 by ASME

All weld Trans weld

Rp0.2 (MPa) 405 -

Rm (MPa) 618 613 618

El (%) 24 -

R of A (%) 66 -

Note: Trans weld tensile specimens broke in weld


Table 9: Hot tap weld tensile results

Size: 10mm x 10mm Test temperature (C)

Energy (J) -30 Min 48 62 46 68 110 -45 Av. 121 76 95 95 123


Figure 7: Macrosection of hot tap longitudinal seam weld

Min Av. Long FL 94 147 seam WM 124 130 Circ Pipe FL 55 68 weld Shell FL 67 85 WM 98 109 Note: FL = fusion line, WM = weld metal

Table 10: Summary of hot tap weld Charpy results

In addition to the as welded hot tap simulation procedure qualification test, it was necessary to qualify PWHT weld procedures for the 20 pipe to pipe and pipe to fitting girth welds and also to qualify small diameter pipe & welded branch fittings welding procedures, to cover the associated pipework fabrication work involved on the project. The welding procedures used for the pipework fabrication involved the use of an E6010 consumable for the root pass, an E8010P1 hot pass, followed by E8018G vertical down low hydrogen electrode for the filling and capping passes. The extent of welding procedure qualification undertaken for the project was considered both exceptional and challenging, due in part to the preheat and post weld heat treatment requirements and the degree of monitoring and measurement carried out at both the procedure qualification and construction stages, in particular for the hot tap welding.

Figure 8: Macrosection of hot tap circumferential fillet weld

ON-SITE INSTALLATION OF THE IC2 HOT TAP AND ASSOCIATED PIPEWORK FABRICATION On-site installation of the IC2 pipework and hot tap connection took place during the period 18th to 30th October 2010. Completion by the end of October was essential to avoid the high gas flow rates anticipated over the winter. There was consequently no scope for slippage on the project. Successful completion within in the available time frame was assured by careful planning, the preparation and use of documented working procedures covering all aspects of the operation, and the time dedicated to weld procedure qualification which included for example addressing the potential need for a double post weld heat treatment cycle in the event of repair.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

A trial fit-up of the pipework spool with the upper shell of the full encirclement split tee attached was carried out on site prior to hot tap welding (Figure 9). The flange was then unbolted and the spool taken away leaving the tee in position on the carrier pipe in preparation for welding.

Figure 10: Split tee showing support clamps & preheat set-up

Figure 9: On-site fit-up of fabricated pipework spool

The minimum preheat requirement for both pipework fabrication and hot tap welding was 150C. The method of preheating adopted was electrical resistance heating. No propane used. The choice of electrical resistance heating, dictated by the material thicknesses involved, prevented access for conventional yoke type clamps. Instead the full encirclement split tee was temporarily attached to the carrier pipe using a specially designed clamp and support system. (Figure 10). The full encirclement split tee was welded to the line in accordance with BGE hot tap welding specification BGE\WS\03, which is the company specific hot tap welding standard supplementary to BS6990. The simultaneous welding of the two longitudinal seams took 12 hours. The circumferential fillet welds including the buttering passes were made up of approximately 170 passes and took 22 hours each to complete. The full encirclement hot tap split tee on completion of welding and MPI inspection is shown in Figure 11. The pressure in the line at the time of hot tap welding was reduced to 10 barg. The line could not be isolated however as subject to operational demands there remained a potential requirement for the pressure to be raised pressure to 120 barg at short notice. Prior to commencement of the hot tap operation the integrity of the completed welds and fittings was proved by a nitrogen pressure test that included the hot tap valve, drilling machine and the full encirclement split tee. The test was carried out at line pressure and held for a duration of 4 hours.

Figure 11: Hot tap split tee on completion of welding

CONCLUDING REMARKS The Bord Gis ireann Brighouse Bay Compressor Station is a critical asset that processes 93% of Irelands natural gas supply. The Brighouse Bay IC2 hot tap, required to improve security of gas supply, was a technically challenging project that was designed and managed by the BGE Networks Division Transmission design team. The many technical challenges described in the paper were mainly associated with the high design pressure (150 barg) and low minimum design temperature (-30C) for the site leading to the use of heavy wall thickness station pipework. Preliminary on site investigation & remedial work confirmed the carrier pipe grade and quality. The full encirclement split

10

Copyright 2012 by ASME

tee design and material properties were optimised through discussions with the manufacturer. The full encirclement split tee and associated pipework has been confirmed to be code compliant by stress analysis and finite element analysis. An engineering critical assessment has confirmed the integrity of full encirclement hot tap split tee fillet welds. Finally qualification of welding procedures for the hot tap connection and associated pipework fabrication has been undertaken. All issues were successfully resolved and the fabrication and installation phase to the project that was completed in October 2010. The success of the project was assured by careful planning, the preparation of documented procedures covering all aspect of the work, HAZCON & HAZOP studies, the detailed technical assessments conducted, and the good working relationships established between the various parties involved on the project. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors wish to thank Bord Gis ireann for kind permission to publish this paper. The authors are indebted to BGE senior welding inspector, Mick Cummins, for his detailed technical involvement throughout the project. The stress analysis was undertaken by Advanced Engineering Solutions Ltd. The FEA and ECA were conducted by TRaC. The construction contractor for the IC2 hot tap installation and associated pipework fabrication was Murphy International. REFERENCES [1] BGE\WS\03 Specification for welding fittings to pressurised natural gas pipework, 2009. [2] BS6990 British Standard Welding on steel pipes containing process fluids or their residuals, 1989. [3] ASME B31.3 ASME code for pressure piping B31 Process piping 2006. [4] Jandu C S et al Fitness for purpose assessment of encirclement split tees, Proceedings of onshore pipelines conference, Paris, October 2000. [5] ASTM A333 Standard specification for seamless and welded steel pipe for low-temperature service, 2010. [6] EN 10028-3 Flat products made of steels for pressure purposes, weldable fine grain steels, normalised, 2009. [7] CAESER II Pipe line stress analysis program v. 5.20.3 build 100715. [8] IGE/TD/12 Ed 2 Pipework stress analysis for gas industry plant, Institution of gas engineers and managers, 2003 (and amendments 2005). [9] ABAQUS Version 6.9-2, Build 2009_07_1010.30.58.92676, Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp, Rising Sun Mills, USA. [10] ASME VIII Guidebook for the design of ASME VIII pressure vessels, 2010.

[11] R6-code version 4.4001, Prohram updated 24/04/2010, Assessment of the integrity of structures containing defects, British Energy Generation Ltd, 2010. [12] BS7910 British Standard Guide to methods for assessing the acceptability of flaws in metallic structures, 1999.

11

Copyright 2012 by ASME