Safety/Loss

Prevention
J. THARAKAN, Suncor Energy Products,
Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Flare header failure: An investigation

A 60-in. flare header suffered three identical failures with
buckling and cracking at the circumferential weld at the bottom
of the pipe. The failures are believed to have originated during
hot reliefs.
The flare header handles liquid, vapor and gas intermittently
relieved from various process units. The flare header runs horizontally for a length of 3 km and has a built slope of 1 in 500 for
free draining. The hottest relief is from the coker unit, which
could be at a maximum temperature of 815F.
The flare header was designed to ASME B 31.3, non-severe
cyclic service with a design pressure of 50 psig at 815F. It was
fabricated using 0.375-in. thick carbon steel plate with nonpost-weld-heat-treated welds. The header was also heat traced
and insulated.
FIG. 1 depicts the failure locations. All failures were within about 60 ft on either side of the tie-in from the sulfur unit
(sulfur lateral).
FIG. 2 shows a typical buckling and cracking failure at the bottom of the circumferential weld on the flare header.
Points to ponder. At the time of investigation, the failed areas
were enclosed with leak containment devices (LCDs) installed
to arrest leaks on a temporary basis. Therefore, closer observation of the failure wasnt possible.
Buckling occurs due to compressive stress (or compressive
strain) and cracking is caused by tensile stress. Therefore, it appeared strange how both could occur at the same location. Another boggling question was which occurred first, the buckling
or the cracking?
The welds are, in general, stronger than the pipe. Why would
the girth weld area buckle, as opposed to the pipe itself?
Why were all the failures occurring at the vicinity of the sulfur lateral? The buckling at the bottom section of the pipe could
Sliding
support (typ.)

Axial
restraint

Sulfur
relief

Vertical
restraint

be associated with a bending of the pipe in the vertical plane.

The pipe is designed to move in the horizontal plane during
thermal growth. Why should it move in the vertical plane?
Movement of the pipe in the vertical direction can result
if there is a temperature difference between the top and bottom of the pipe. Therefore, it was suspected that there could be
some insulating deposit at the bottom of the flare header near
the sulfur lateral.
Onstream inspections. Gamma ray scanning ruled out the

presence of internal deposits in the flare header. Scanning results from the welds and the pipe near the sulfur lateral eliminated environmental cracking and thinning.
Visual inspection of the 60-in. header revealed:
The pipe developed an ovality due to a support reaction
at the vicinity of the saddle supports

FIG. 2. Typical buckling and cracking failure at the bottom of the

circumferential weld on the flare header.

Guide

Failure-1

Failure-3

To are
knockout pot

Failure-2

110 ft
60-in. are
header

From coker
unit

FIG. 1. Failure locations: All failures were within about 60 ft on either

side of the tie-in from the sulfur unit (sulfur lateral).

FIG. 3. Evidence of vertical movement of the pipe.

Hydrocarbon Processing|MAY 2013105

Safety/Loss Prevention
The pipe was not touching one of the bottom supports (1in. gap), due to a permanent deformation in the vertical plane
The lone Y- stop that prevented upward movement of the
line was forced open (see FIG. 3)
There was no ovalization at the long radius bends
There was no sign of excessive axial or lateral movement
There were no fretting marks on supports, that could be
associated with vibration.
The first three observations led to the conclusion that the
flare header must have undergone thermal movement in the
vertical plane.
0.07000
0.06000
0.05000

0.04000
0.03000
0.02000
0.01000
0.00000
-0.01000

50

100
D/t ratio

150

200

FIG. 4. D/t ratio vs. strain limit, c.

Design observations. Several design features were observed

during the investigation. The saddle support for the 60-in. flare
header had an angle of contact of 72. This is less than the minimum angle of contact of 120 for saddles for horizontal pressure
vessels. The flare header was not designed for hydro-fill conditions. Some pipe spans that exceeded 40 ft, coupled with deficiency in saddle design, caused high local stress and ovalization
of the pipe near supports, as confirmed with stress analysis.
The pipe thickness (t) was too thin for its outside diameter
(D), i.e., it had a large D/t ratio of 160, as against the industry
norm of 120. In FIG. 4, it can be seen that when the D/t ratio
increases, the allowable strain limit decreases.
Strain limit. When a pipe is bent by the application of an external moment, it tends to develop changes in cross-section.
The outer radius develops flattening and inner radius kinks
inward (buckling).
Strain limit is often used to assess the bending capability of
pipe. As shown in FIG. 4, the strain limit decreases with an increase
in the D/t ratio. The strain referred to here is the mechanical
strain that produces stresses. Free thermal expansion produces
thermal strain without stressing the material. In a piping system,
restraints always limit free thermal expansion; therefore, some
mechanical strain is also induced during thermal expansion.
Gresnigts equations are the basis of FIG. 4.1
c = 0.5 t/(D-t) 0.0025 for (D-t)/t < 120
c= 0.2 t/(D-t) for a (D-t)/t 120

MOVE OVER GC

AIM

HIGHER

THE FUTURE OF ON LINE GAS ANALYSIS IS HERE

HIT YOUR FURNACE COMBUSTION

TARGETS WITH THE SERVOTOUGH LASERSP

EFFECTIVE COMBUSTION CONTROL IS CRITICAL

TO EFFICIENT ETHYLENE PRODUCTION.

The NEW SERVOTOUGH SpectraScan

With fast response TDLS technology that monitors

closer to the burn, the SERVOTOUGH LaserSPs
unique ue gas analysis solution reduces fuels costs
and CO2 emissions. You cant get a faster response.

The SERVOTOUGH SpectraScan is a breakthrough in

measurement speed for light hydrocarbons C1-C5+.
A stand-alone solution with superior technology
and benets, the SpectraScan changes everything.

FIND OUT HOW YOU COULD IMPROVE THE

EFFICIENCY OF ETHYLENE PRODUCTION

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE REVOLUTION

IN HYDROCARBON GAS ANALYSIS

SERVOMEX.COM/LASERSP

SERVOMEX.COM/SPECTRASCAN

DOWNLOAD THE WHITE PAPER FROM:

OR TO REQUEST ONE, EMAIL: LASERSP@SERVOMEX.COM

DOWNLOAD THE WHITE PAPER FROM:

OR TO REQUEST ONE, EMAIL: SPECTRASCAN@SERVOMEX.COM

S E RVO M E X .CO M

106MAY 2013|HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Select 175 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

A MEASURABLE ADVANTAGE

Safety/Loss Prevention

Thermal bowing. The flare header is designed for flexibility at 815F. As per the design, it is expected to move only in
the horizontal plane while undergoing thermal expansion. A
movement in the vertical plane has to counter the gravity loads;
however, the several conditions have led to thermal bowing of
the flare header in the vertical plane:
Occasional temperature difference between the top and
bottom half of the horizontal flare header
Ovalization of the pipe, which reduced the stiffness of the
pipe in the vertical direction, compared to the horizontal direction
To accommodate growth, the pipe tends to bend in the direction of least stiffness.
The reason for the circumferential thermal gradient is not
well understood. Within the horizontal flare header, there could
be a two-phase flow of hot fluid, with the film-heat transfer coefficient being different for the liquid flow and the vapor flow.
This difference can cause a temperature gradient between the
bottom and top of the pipe. Another possibility is the intermittent and partial flow of liquid, hotter or colder than the mean line
temperature; it could create a circumferential thermal gradient.
FIG. 5 shows thermal bowing of a pipe due to circumferential
thermal gradient. The pipe will bend with outer curvature at
the hotter region. The nature and extent of stresses generated
is dependent on the boundary condition. In this example, the
vertical restraint opposes free thermal bowing. The region of
the pipe where actual displacement is less than needed for free
thermal expansion would be in compression and if reversed,
in tension. Therefore, the hotter half of the pipe will be under
compression and the colder half in tension.

The cracking occurred after the buckling damage. For cracking, tensile stress is required, and this must have resulted during straightening of the pipe when thermal gradients receded
or when reversed.
About 150 ft on either side of the sulfur lateral was deemed
as the only area where all the following conditions required for
local buckling co-existed:
High temperature due to downstream coker unit relief
Restraints that opposed thermal bowing
Large D/t ratio
Pre-existing ovality due to large local stresses near saddle
supports.
Repairs carried out. After thorough evaluation, repair strategy improvement began. Key improvements included:
Vertical
restraint

D/t is not the lone parameter limiting the bending capacity

of pipe. The other factors are:
Nonhomogeneity or the presence of imperfections in the
material
Initial out-of-roundness
Loading conditions
Residual stress
Strength of the material in the longitudinal and circumferential directions
Shape of the stressstrain diagram.

Cold sidetensile stress

Hot sidecompressive stress

Sliding support

FIG. 5. Thermal bowing of pipe due to circumferential thermal gradient.

Initial conclusions. The preliminary investigation concluded that the failure was initiated by local buckling at zones of
compressive strain when thermal bowing occurred in the flare
header. The vertical restraint amplified the stresses at the region of Failure 1. At failure locations 2 and 3, the sulfur lateral
restrained the rotation and lifting of the 60-in. header, thereby
increasing the stresses.
The large pipe D/t ratio is the root cause of local buckling.
From FIG. 4, the strain limit = 0.00126 for the flare header with
a D/t ratio of 160. This translates to a stress of 35.3 ksi (1 ksi
= 1,000 psi), which is lower than a yield stress of 38 ksi. Imperfections and residual stress at the circumferential weld lower
the strain limit, thus explaining how all three failures occurred
at the circumferential welds.
Hoop tensile stress opposes inward buckling of the pipe.
The flare header operating pressure does not exceed 10 psig
and this low value added negligible hoop tensile stress to
counter buckling.
Select 173 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS

107

Safety/Loss Prevention
A 300-ft section encompassing the failure was replaced
with a thicker pipe
The D/t ratio for the replacement section was 96
The saddle supports for the replaced section were redesigned with an angle of contact of 120
The vertical restraint was modified to a sliding support
Skin thermocouples were installed at the top and bottom
of the pipe
The new welds were post-weld-heat-treated to reduce residual stress and to safeguard against environmental cracking.

FIG. 6. Failed section of 60-in. flare header.

Metallurgical examination. A close inspection of the flare

header section removed for metallurgical inspection is shown
in FIG. 6. Metallurgical observations included:
Metallurgy of the pipe and weld were verified and found
to match with the original design specification
No weld defects were detected; two of the failures were
on shop welds and one was on a field weld
No sign of fatigue or environmental cracking was found
on the specimens examined
The bottom portion of the pipe, at the weld, buckled inward and the cracks originated at the buckled area
The cracking was due to ductile overload
The crack originated at the toe of the weld from the OD
surface of the pipe at the buckled region.
Skin temperature readings taken from the top and bottom
of the pipe after replacement revealed a circumferential ther-

GAS DESULPHURISATION
WITH THIOPAQ O&G:
STABLE & COST EFFECTIVE
Award winning technology for sulphur removal
and sulphur recovery from gas streams. Take the
quick scan at www.paqell.com/scan and receive
instant feedback about how THIOPAQ O&G technology
matches with your desulphurisation requirements!

www.paqell.com
015-0047 Adv Hydrocabon 180x125mmn 13112012 v4 def.indd
108
MAY 2013|HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Select
174 at www.HydrocarbonProcessing.com/RS
1

13-11-12 16:48

Safety/Loss Prevention
mal gradient of 150F. In general, the pipe is hotter at the bottom; however, in some instances, the temperature gradient is
reversed, with the top of the pipe being hotter.
Discussions. Vertical movement of the pipe causing lift-off
from support will add gravity loads to the pipe. Thermal bowing will negate the free draining capability of the line, leading to
localized liquid pooling and associated issues. Thermal bowing
is not common with process plant piping, and when it occurs,
it is a difficult problem to correct. Most failures due to thermal
bowing are fatigue cracking at the circumferential welds. Buckling due to thermal bowing is extremely rare due to installing
pipes with favorable D/t ratio. The 60-in. flare header had both
a very large D/t ratio and a loading/displacement condition
that increased vulnerability to buckling.
When large lateral displacements are imposed on piping,
failure generally manifests as localized buckling. Buckling is
a failure due to instability and it causes process of achieving
equilibrium between external loads, internal resistance and
boundary restraint. Strain-based design is typically adopted for
displacement controlled designs. Examples are subsea piping
or buried lines with large ground movements.
In a piping flexibility analysis, the displacement stress range
is compared with the allowable stress range. This is essentially
a check against potential fatigue failure due to cyclic tensile
stress. Compressive stress or strain limit checks are not part
of a piping flexibility analysis. Piping stress analysis softwares

treat pipe as a beam and cannot predict local buckling of the

shell elements.
Large D/t ratio also increases susceptibility to failures due
to acoustic induced vibration (AIV). AIV is caused by high
sound pressure levels inside flare headers during significant
relief scenarios. AIV failures typically develop at small bore tieins to the flare header.
Findings. If the D/t ratio of the pipe exceeds 100, these precautions apply:
When the pipeline is subjected to large bending moments, external pressure or axial compression, strain-based design/buckling assessment using finite element analysis (FEA)
should be performed
Equations for stress intensity factors given in ASME
B31.3 are valid only for D/t 100
During flexibility analysis, corrected stress intensity factors estimated through FEA should be used
Flare headers should be designed with a dead load that
includes one quarter full of liquid
Saddle supports for piping with a large D/t ratio require
design considerations like pressure vessel saddles (Zick analysis)
The D/t ratio for flare headers should be less than 120.
1

LITERATURE CITED
Gresnigt, A. M. and R. J. Van Foeken, Local buckling of UOE and seamless steel
pipes, 11th International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Stavanger,
Norway, June 2011.

JULY 3031, 2013

Norris Conference Centers CityCentre Houston, Texas

GulfPub.com/GTL

Hydrocarbon Processing Introduces the Inaugural

Gas-to-Liquids Technology Forum
Gulf Publishing Companys inaugural Gas-to-Liquids (GTL) Technology Forum will investigate the technology and
trends at work as GTL usage and projects become increasingly popular. The two-day technology conference will
feature industry keynotes and presentations from GTL technology experts.
GTL is poised to become an increasingly important part of the North American energy industry. As the natural
gas boom in North America continues and new technologies emerge to reduce costs, company interest is
increasingand so is investment. Project announcements and planning from industry innovators like Sasol, Shell
and BP are beginning to ramp up in this energy niche.
GTL Technology Forum is your chance to connect with top operators and technology leaders from across the
global hydrocarbon processing industry. Sponsorship at this event will benet the following types of companies
active in the GTL sector: GTL technology providers, GTL engineering companies, major and independent
operators, catalyst companies, specialized equipment manufacturers, turbine specialists and others.
For more information, contact your local Hydrocarbon Processing sales representative or Bret Ronk,
publisher, at +1 (713) 520-4421 or Bret.Ronk@GulfPub.com.

Hydrocarbon Processing|MAY 2013109