Document No.

GP 06-67
Applicability Group
Date 10 November 2005

Guidance on Practice for

Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

GP 06-67

BP GROUP
ENGINEERING TECHNICAL PRACTICES
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

Forward

This is the first issue of Engineering Technical Practice (ETP) BP GP 06-67. This Guidance on Practice (GP)
is newly created and is not based on heritage documents from the merged BP companies. However, the
following heritage document is relevant:

British Petroleum (BP OUS)

RP 15-1-2 Fired Heater Refractory.

Copyright  2005, BP Group. All rights reserved. The information contained in this
document is subject to the terms and conditions of the agreement or contract under which
the document was supplied to the recipient’s organization. None of the information
contained in this document shall be disclosed outside the recipient’s own organization
without the prior written permission of Director of Engineering, BP Group, unless the
terms of such agreement or contract expressly allow.

Page 2 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

Table of Contents
Page
Forward .......................................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 4
1. Scope .................................................................................................................................... 5
2. Normative references............................................................................................................. 5
3. Terms and definitions............................................................................................................. 6
4. Symbols and abbreviations .................................................................................................... 6
5. Plant layout ............................................................................................................................ 6
6. Pressure vessels ................................................................................................................... 7
7. Piping systems....................................................................................................................... 9
8. Thermal insulation of plant and equipment........................................................................... 11
9. Corrosion monitoring/chemical injection............................................................................... 12
10. Cathodic protection.............................................................................................................. 13
11. Storage tanks....................................................................................................................... 14
12. Heat exchangers.................................................................................................................. 16
13. Cooling systems .................................................................................................................. 16
14. Fired heaters........................................................................................................................ 16
Bibliography .................................................................................................................................. 18

Page 3 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

Introduction

Decisions made during the project Design phase affect corrosion and how it impacts the operation and
integrity management of the equipment in the Operate phase. Major design issues that effect corrosion
and integrity management such as materials selection, manufacturing and fabrication techniques,
equipment layouts, quality control, environmental constraints, and operating limits, are generally dealt
with adequately in other equipment specific and material selection GP documents.

Notwithstanding the comprehensive nature of these GP documents and their heritage predecessors,
field experience has identified a number of reoccurring corrosion and integrity management problems
that are correctable through modifications in design or fabrication practices. This document compiles
these problems and the recommended modifications to design practices to eliminate them.

Page 4 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

1. Scope

a. This GP augments specific GP and GIS documents for the design of equipment, facilities,
and installations.
b. This GP provides guidance applicable to the design of piping and equipment to mitigate or
eliminate corrosion and integrity management difficulties resulting from design decisions.
These difficulties generally do not impact the intended function of the equipment, but they
do impact operability and serviceability. It is applicable to oil refineries, petrochemical and
chemical plants, onshore and offshore/subsea oil and gas production facilities, liquefied
natural gas plants, pipelines, and distribution facilities.
c. The scope does not include well tubulars or well completion designs.
d. The scope of corrosion and integrity management difficulties relevant to this document
include:
1. Inappropriate materials and equipment selection.
2. Accelerated corrosion events resulting directly or indirectly from design deficiencies.
3. Premature replacement of piping and equipment.
4. Equipment interference.
5. Difficulty adopting a full non-intrusive inspection program.
6. Excessive requirements for the use of temporary access techniques to support
operations, maintenance, and inspection activities.

2. Normative references

The following normative documents contain requirements that, through reference in this text,
constitute requirements of this technical practice. For the purpose of this document, only information
related to materials selection and application is intended for reference. For dated references,
subsequent amendments to, or revisions of, any of these publications do not apply. Parties to
agreements based on this technical practice are encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying
the most recent editions of the normative documents indicated below. For undated references, the
latest edition of the normative document referred to applies.

American Petroleum Institute (API)

API RP 651 Cathodic Protection of Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tanks.
API Std 650 Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage.

British Standards Institute (BSI)

BS EN 14015 Specification for the design and manufacture of site built, vertical,
cylindrical, flat-bottomed, above ground, welded, steel tanks for the
storage of liquids at ambient temperature and above.

BP
GP 06-10 Guidance on Practice for Corrosion Management.
GP 06-14 Guidance on Practice for Erosion Control.
GP 06-25 Guidance on Practice for Design for the Prevention of Corrosion under
Insulation and Fireproofing (CUI and CUF).
GP 06-60 Guidance on Practice for Painting Metal Surfaces.
GP 06-70 Guidance on Practice for Corrosion Monitoring.

Page 5 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

GP 35-10 Guidance on Practice for Maintainability.

GP 42-10 Guidance on Practice for Design of Piping System (ASME B31.3).
GIS 42-101 Guidance on Industry Standard for Fabrication, Assembly, Erection, and
Inspection of Carbon, Carbon Manganese, and Low Alloy Steel Pipework
(ASME B31.3).
GP 44-10 Guidance on Practice for Plant Layout.
GIS 46-010 Guidance on Industry Standards for New Pressure Vessels.
GIS 46-020 Guidance on Industry Standards for the Purchase of Pressure Vessels.
GP 48-01 Guidance on Practice for HSSE Review of Projects.
GP 52-10 Guidance on Practice for Insulation.
GIS 58-101 Guidance on Industry Standard for Welded Steel Atmospheric Tanks for
Oil Storage.

Engineering Equipment and Materials User Association (EEMUA)

EEMUA Pub 183 Guide for the Prevention of Bottom Leakage from Vertical Cylindrical
Storage Tanks.

3. Terms and definitions

corrosive service
service in which the estimated carbon steel uninhibited corrosion rate causes the corrosion allowance
to be consumed before the design service life of the equipment is reached.

solid particles
particulate inorganic matter that can cause erosion damage, e.g. sand (silica), certain hard scales (e.g.
magnetite, mill scale), proppants, and catalysts.

4. Symbols and abbreviations

CML Corrosion monitoring location

CRA Corrosion resistant alloy

CUI Corrosion under insulation

NDE Nondestructive examination

5. Plant layout

a. If possible, plants and facilities shall be designed so that equipment, piping, and
components requiring frequent inspection or maintenance as part of a corrosion or integrity
management program are accessible without the need for scaffolding or rope lifting.
Permanent platforms shall be provided for items relevant to this guidance that are 2 m
(6,6 ft) or more above grade or deck level. If these activities are performed on five year
intervals or more frequently then permanent access is required. Refer to GP 35-10, clause 4
and GP 44-10, for additional guidance.
Among the corrosion and integrity management activities that require access to
equipment or components on an ongoing, regular basis are: NDT inspections;
insertion and retrieval of intrusive corrosion monitoring devices; drawing samples
from sampling ports; inspection, function testing, and maintenance of protective
devices; and inspection and testing of corrosion and safety instrumentation. Items,

Page 6 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

particularly piping, that are more than 2 m (6,6 ft) above grade or deck level, or
even more restrictively, that are routed under decks on offshore facilities cannot be
inspected or serviced without access assistance.
If the locations of these items are not accessible from grade or deck level, or from
platforms, then scaffolding must be erected or rope access must be mounted. The
need for scaffolding or rope access has the effect of making these inspections and
maintenance activities more difficult and time consuming. The cost of providing
temporary access may be an order of magnitude or more than the cost of the activity
they facilitate.
b. A minimum of 1 m (3,3 ft) clear working space for inspection activities shall be
maintained around equipment and associated piping. Refer to GP 42-10 and GP 44-10 for
additional guidance.
Care is needed to assure that walkways and platforms designed to provide the
permanent access discussed in clause 5.a do not interfere with clearance needs
elsewhere.
c. Access platform designs shall include seal welding of components including checker plate.
Water traps shall be eliminated.
Stitch wilding creates crevices that cannot be successfully painted and where
corrosion occurs.

6. Pressure vessels

a. Pressure vessels shall have a corrosion risk assessment as an element of the required risk
assessment defined by GP 48-01. Vessel corrosion assessments shall form a part of the
corrosion risk assessment of the overall process system of which they are a part. Refer to
GP 06-10, clause 7 for additional guidance on corrosion risk assessments.
Selection of inappropriate vessel materials or inappropriate internal coating or
cladding has resulted in significant internal corrosion and/or erosion damage in
service. In some instances the damage resulted because the threats and risks were
not well understood or improperly evaluated during the project design phase. A
corrosion risk assessment is a formalized process of identifying the corrosion
threats and assessing their risk. It assures the appropriate technical resources are
included in the evaluation process.
b. To facilitate external ultrasonic NDT inspection, the use of reinforcing pads on vessel
nozzles shall be minimized. Refer to GIS 46-010, clause 7.6.2 for guidance.
During non-intrusive, nondestructive inspection using ultrasonic techniques, the
ultrasonic beam is reflected by the discontinuity created by the interface between the
vessel wall and the pad. As a result the inspection beam cannot penetrate the vessel
wall to the internal surface, which is the surface where corrosion damage should be
detected. Reinforcing pads prevent the assessment of the condition of the internal
vessel wall in the immediate vicinity of the nozzle as well as the assessment of the
associated welds.
c. Small bore piping connections to vessels shall not use threaded or socket fittings. Refer to
GIS 42-101, clause 7.6.1 for guidance.
Small bore threaded connections have a high failure rate due to corrosion. They are
inherently more susceptible to corrosion because the threads are a location for
crevice corrosion and the fittings have thin walls in comparison to the vessel walls.
Socket fittings are also subject to crevice corrosion as well as fatigue failure. The
repair of a failure of one of these fittings requires taking the vessel out of service.

Page 7 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

d. For carbon or low alloy steel vessels in corrosive service in crude oil or natural gas
processing, an internal coating system, as the minimum acceptable corrosion protection,
shall be applied to the shell internal surface and to any carbon or low alloy steel internal
attachments.
1. The coating system shall be approved by the Technical Authority.
2. If the vessel is designed for non-intrusive inspection, the internals shall be resistant to
corrosion, erosion, or other deterioration mechanisms. Refer to GIS 46-010,
clause 7.4 for guidance on non-intrusive inspection.
The possible choices for materials of construction for vessels and their internals
range from bare carbon steel through carbon steel with internal coatings to a series
of increasingly more corrosion resistant options for claddings, weld overlays, or
solid alloys. The choices are based on an assessment of the corrosion risk.
If processing crude oil and natural gas, field experience has shown that damage to
carbon and low alloy steel vessel shells should be the expected norm if corrosion
protection is not employed, even under conditions not classified as corrosive
service. Vessel internals, particularly in vessels processing crude oil, are damaged
by corrosion more often than their associated vessels. If internal protection is
required, the first option from bare steel construction is internal coating. For crude
oil and natural gas processing, this is considered the minimum requirement for
vessels. If the corrosion risk assessment warrants, the degree of corrosion
protection for these vessels may require upgrading to include a mixture of materials
(e.g. a combination of a coated vessel with bolted CRA attachments) or a CRA clad
vessel.
e. Eliminate vessel bridles if possible. If bridles are required, they shall be fabricated from
appropriate CRA materials.
Vessel bridles have a history of failures due to corrosion. They have some of the
same vulnerabilities of threaded fittings. They are particularly vulnerable if bacteria
are present in the process fluids.
f. Fabricate vessel sand washing systems from corrosion resistant materials. The system shall
be designed so that jetting of the shell cannot occur.
Sand washing systems have had a high failure rate due to corrosion and/or
erosion/corrosion if the materials of construction have been non-CRAs. Shell
damage requiring internal repair of the vessel has occurred when the jets from the
sand washing system impinged on the wall of the vessel. If designing to eliminate
impingement is not possible, the shell should be reinforced in the locations of the
impingement.
g. For vertical vessels with manual bottom drains and automatic side shell drain system
where a water layer is frequently or routinely drained off, designers should consider
designs with a siphon drain to draw off water in the bottom head.
If this type of vessel does not have a siphon drain that can fully drain the bottom
head, solids can accumulate in the bottom, potentially causing corrosion in unlined
carbon steel vessels, and/or plugging the manual drains. This has been a particular
problem with small diameter gas processing vessels (0,5 m, 18 in) that are too small
to internally coat.
h. Production vessels in oil and gas processing service shall be designed with DN 50 (NPS 2)
or larger drains.
Vessels with DN 25 (NPS 1) drains have a high incidence of plugging of the drains.
i. Vessel skirts shall have openings to allow access for scheduled periodic NDE inspections
of the lower head. Refer to GIS 46-020 for guidance.

Page 8 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

NDE inspections (ultrasonic thickness testing, crack detection tests) cannot be

conducted if skirts do not allow access to the lower head.

7. Piping systems

a. Piping systems shall have a corrosion risk assessment as an element of the required risk
assessment defined by GP 48-01. Piping system assessments shall form a part of the
corrosion risk assessment of the overall process system of which they are a part. Refer to
GP 06-10, clause 7 for additional guidance on corrosion risk assessments. Piping system
materials selections shall be based on the results of the corrosion risk assessment and life
cycle cost analysis.
Selection of inappropriate piping materials has resulted in significant internal
corrosion and/or erosion damage in service. In some instances the damage resulted
because the threats and risks were not well understood or improperly evaluated
during the project design phase. A corrosion risk assessment is a formalized process
of identifying the corrosion threats and assessing their risk. It assures the
appropriate technical resources are included in the evaluation process.
b. Do not design/fabricate small bore piping connections to vessels using threaded or socket
fittings. Refer to GP 42-10, clause 314 for guidance on connections to vessels and between
selected piping components.
Small bore threaded connections have a high failure rate due to corrosion They are
inherently more susceptible to corrosion because the threads are a location for
crevice corrosion and the fittings have thin walls in comparison to the vessel walls.
Socket fittings are also subject of crevice corrosion as well as fatigue failure. The
repair of a failure of one of these fittings requires taking a vessel or piping system
out of service for repairs.
c. Piping systems shall be designed and operated to avoid damage due to erosion. Refer to
GP 42-10, clause 301.15 for guidance on velocity limits in steel pipes and GP 06-14 for
guidance on flow containing solid particles.
Avoid sharp geometric discontinuities (e.g. vertical drops to tee features) where
turbulence and/or impingement occurs. Under-sizing of piping has been the cause of
piping failures due to erosion even in the absence of solid particles in the flow. Some
piping alloys, such as Cu-Ni, may have more restrictive velocity limits than steel
pipes. Entrained solid particles have caused failure of piping components in as short
a period as a few minutes.
d. Small bore piping (DN 25, NPS 1 or smaller) should be minimized if possible. Refer to
GP 42-10 for guidance.
Small bore piping has higher failure rates than larger pipe. The failure modes are
fatigue, external corrosion, and internal corrosion of dead legs. Small bore piping is
more vulnerable to these phenomena because they have comparatively thinner
walls. Fatigue failures have occurred on small bore piping in many cases because
piping supports have been inadequate.
e. Piping shall be supported to prevent fatigue failure induced by rotating machinery or
pulsing flow. Refer to GP 42-10, clause 301.5 for guidance.
Small diameter branch piping has been particularly vulnerable to fatigue failure.
Cantilevered connections to vessels are also vulnerable to this failure mode.
Supports should be located in two planes. Experience indicates piping inside vessels
or tanks may require supports as well.
f. Avoid attaching pipe supports that interfere with inspections.

Page 9 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

Selected piping components are commonly the sites chosen for NDT ultrasonic
thickness inspection (e.g. tees, elbows, areas of rapid pressure drop). Supports and
dummy legs should not be attached to these components at locations where NDT
inspection is likely (e.g. trunnion supports on externals of bends).
g. Dummy legs, trunnions, and similar attachments should have fully welded end caps and
vent holes at the low points (in the final location).
Line sag can cause water buildup in supports if the vent is not located in the low
point. Rain, or condensation of atmospheric moisture cause by cooling during rain
or other cooling events also can cause internal water build-up and corrosion if the
vent hole is inappropriately positioned. Use of solid structural shapes (I beans, T
beams) can eliminate this concern.
h. High point bleed fixtures installed for commissioning shall be removed as a final
commissioning step.
These bleed points are a maintenance problem. They have no purpose after
commissioning and they frequently fail in service due either to internal or external
corrosion. They cannot be removed without taking the equipment out of service and
they usually cannot be successfully inspected.
i. Piping systems shall be designed to eliminate dead legs to the maximum extent possible.
This problem is largely the result of the location of normally closed valves. The pipe
sections upstream of such valves are subject to increased internal corrosion in the
stagnant fluid conditions. Fitting the valves directly to vessel nozzles mitigates much
of this corrosion. A piping run that descends from a vessel or connection and
subsequently ascends to another vessel or connection can function as a U-tube type
of dead leg if the velocity is insufficient to sweep any water phase out or if there is
normally no flow. These types of configurations should be avoided if low flow or
stagnant flow conditions can be expected during the life of the system.
j. Limit the use of Utilidoors on exterior piping runs in artic climate installations if possible.
The close proximity of piping and utilities combined with the confined space inside
these structures makes inspection of the piping difficult or impossible. An improved
option would be to insulate the piping and provide heat tracing as required.
k. If pipe shoes, sealed rub pads, or sleeves are not included in the design for piping resting
on pipe racks or fixed supports, the piping and pipe rack/pipe support system shall be
included in the corrosion risk assessment. The corrosion/integrity management plan shall
include a program to manage possible corrosion damage to the pipe at the contact points.
Pipe shoes are the preferred method to protect piping from external corrosion
damage due to contact with pipe racks. Piping resting directly on racks or fixed
supports is subject to accelerated corrosion and failure at the contact points.
Expansion and contraction of the pipe combined with possible vibration causes any
paint to be scraped off, exposing the bare steel pipe surface. Water from the
environment (e.g. precipitation, wind blown sea spray, deluge system testing,
housekeeping wash downs, cooling tower drift) is trapped in the crevice created
between the pipe and the surface on which it is resting, creating a local crevice
corrosion cell. Such crevice corrosion cells remain wet longer than adjacent
surfaces. The corrosion cells are at the temperature of the pipe contents, which is
frequently elevated. The resulting corrosion rate is generally many times the rate of
unprotected steel exposed to the same environment, but without the higher
temperature and the crevice. Pipe failures have occurred on racked piping under
these conditions.

Page 10 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

8. Thermal insulation of plant and equipment

a. The use of thermal insulation should be minimized and shall not be installed on any
equipment without an engineering analysis justifying the need.
Corrosion under insulation (CUI) has been a significant threat to systems’ integrity.
CUI is somewhat unpredictable –it is frequently not visually detectable, it is not
readily detectable by NDE inspection methods, and it may occur at locations that
are not judged to be susceptible [1]. Small diameter piping is potentially more
vulnerable because of relatively thin pipe walls. The most effective defense against
CUI is not to insulate.
b. The design shall presume that insulation will become wet. Protective coatings shall be
applied to carbon, low alloy, and austenitic stainless steel equipment to protect against
CUI. Refer to GP 52-10, GP 06-60, and GP 06-25 for guidance.
Installed insulation systems are designed to protect against the entry of water,
however, field experience indicates that at some point in the life of the equipment the
entry of water into the insulation should be expected. Damage to the weather
barriers and deterioration of the calking sealants are frequently the cause. Failure
to restore the water tight integrity of the weather barriers after removal and
reinstallation is also a cause. Corrosion of steel is rapid under the combined
conditions of the presence of liquid water in or under the insulation, high
temperature, and atmospheric oxygen. Insulated equipment operating below the dew
point of ambient temperature air or insulated for protection from freezing is also
susceptible to CUI. Austenitic stainless steel is susceptible to both pitting corrosion
and chloride stress corrosion cracking if chlorides are present in the invading water
and the equipment is operating at elevated temperatures 60°C (140°F) and above.
Applying protective coatings to insulated steel is mandatory to protect against these
corrosion phenomena. Some types of insulation, notably calcium silicate, are
difficult to dry out at temperatures below 150°C (300°F). Any such insulation types
should be avoided. At temperatures above 150°C (300°F) water is usually not
present on a metal surface. However, equipment operated above this temperature
range should be evaluated for possible scenarios if the temperature could descend
into this range if it is taken out of service or the process normally has temperature
cycles spanning these temperatures.
c. The insulation design shall accommodate the need to access the equipment surfaces at
selected locations for NDE inspection activities. To the extent possible, inspection
locations shall be identified during the design process.
Designing the insulation system for inspections requires coordination with the
operators and corrosion and integrity management specialists. Inspection of vessels
may require access to large areas. In such cases flexible insulation blankets
(mattresses) should be specified. For inspection of piping, inspection ports with
tightly fitting caps may be specified. If access to the entire circumference of a pipe is
required, a flexible blanket may be required at that location as well. If removable
blankets are specified, means for resealing them after reinstallation must be
provided.
d. Insulation that can retain moisture shall not be specified for piping buried below grade.
e. Do not extend insulation cladding below grade when burying insulated piping.
Buried cladding shields the underlying pipe from the cathodic protection system.
f. If large concentrations of thermally insulated plant and equipment exist, consideration
should be given to enclosing the equipment in weatherproof shelters to prevent direct
contact from rainfall.

Page 11 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

g. Attention should be paid to designing vessels attachments (e.g. insulation supports,

stiffeners, seals, lifting lugs.) that cannot trap water.
Thin section items such as fireproofing seals can distort slightly from the weld
attachment processes to form water traps.

9. Corrosion monitoring/chemical injection

a. Corrosion Monitoring Locations (CML) shall be selected using the outcome from the
corrosion risk assessment. Refer to GP 06-70 for guidance.
The locations should provide information that is representative of the process. Non-
representative conditions such as the location immediately downstream of a
chemical injection point or in the vicinity of disturbed flow should be avoided. Refer
to GP 06-70 for guidance on locations.
b. Corrosion monitoring locations shall be provided with multiple monitoring fittings.
The preferred configuration is three CML fittings positioned over an interval of
approximately 2 m (6 ft). Multiple fittings provide the flexibility to install different
intrusive corrosion monitoring instruments at the same location simultaneously.
c. If the pipe carries a multiphase flow with a water phase, the corrosion monitoring locations
should be at the 6 o’clock position if practical.
With a water phase at the bottom of the pipe, corrosion is expected at the 6 o’clock
position. To optimize the corrosion information from this location the corrosion
monitoring device must be installed so that it is exposed to the corrosive phase at
the bottom of the pipe. Therefore, the ideal monitoring location is also at the
6 o’clock position. Locating an intrusive probe at the bottom of the pipe can be
disadvantageous if there are any solids present in the stream because the solids can
cause sealing and thread seizure difficulties when installing the probe. Efforts to
move the insertion location slightly off the bottom to the 5 or 7 o’clock position have
had mixed success. The alternative is to locate the insertion position at the top of the
pipe on horizontal runs. In pipes (normally pipelines) that require periodic pigging,
installing any intrusive corrosion monitoring device must be withdrawn before the
pigging activity.
d. The design shall provide adequate clearance at the CML for the corrosion monitoring
device extraction tool while the equipment is in service.
Clearance for some tools can be as much as 2 m (6 ft).
e. Chemical injection systems shall be designed to prevent the direct impingement of
chemicals on the walls of pipes.
There are several commercially available designs for injection quills that achieve
this requirement.
f. Permanent chemical storage, distribution, and injection systems shall be designed from
CRA materials. Chemical storage tanks shall be designed with non-leaking couplings and
flame arrestor vents.
Stainless steel (nominally 316) is satisfactory for the storage, distribution, and
injection systems in this service, however, for newly developed chemicals,
compatibility of the chemical with the alloy in service should be established before
application begins. Note: For hypochlorite systems, non-metallic materials are
normally specified.
g. On offshore facilities, bunkering lines for the transfer of chemicals from delivery vessels to
facility storage tanks shall be permanently installed.

Page 12 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

Permanent transfer lines eliminate the need for temporary deployment of hoses,
their attendant on deck safety hazards, and between-use storage requirements.
h. At gas well sites if there are no processing facilities, at the discretion of the Technical
Authority, the flowline design shall include a water sample boot.
Experience has shown that on small diameter wellhead flowlines a conventional
sample pot does not provide representative water samples because there is no
circulation within the pot. A satisfactory design uses an eccentric pipe section
approximately three times the diameter of the flowline as the water boot section.
This change in diameter reduces the velocity sufficiently to facilitate water dropout
for sampling while allowing the water to be continuously circulated through the
boot.
i. Sample points shall be included in crude oil and gas processing systems in the piping at
points of significant process changes.
Appropriate sampling points should form a part of the corrosion risk management/
corrosion monitoring program. Their locations should be determined using
information developed by the corrosion risk assessment.

10. Cathodic protection

a. Plant designs shall minimize the amount of underground facilities.

The greater the amount of buried piping or other equipment in a plant, generally the
more complex the cathodic protection system must be to be effective. This is
particularly true when steel pilings are present.
b. If possible, designs shall avoid the coupling of dissimilar metal parts when cathodic
protection is not intended.
Direct contact between dissimilar metal parts can create a galvanic couple causing
corrosion of the electrochemically more active metal. Dissimilar metal galvanic
couples should be included in the initial risk assessment. Those that cannot be
eliminated should be included in the integrity management program.
c. Buried piping shall have welded connections if possible. If mechanical joints must be used,
bonded electrical continuity jumpers shall be applied across the joint.
Successful application of cathodic protection is unlikely if mechanical joints are
present. Bonded jumpers across mechanical joints provide the necessary electrical
continuity; however, welded joints are preferred.
d. Cathodic protection cables should be routed through purpose built conduits to reduce the
risk of damage during site maintenance activities.
e. Plant designs shall include sufficient permanent test points to adequately assess the
functioning of the cathodic protection system.
The need for test points includes sites for monitoring buried piping under paved
areas. Paving restricts soil access for cathodic protection testing.
f. Aboveground steel storage tanks shall be evaluated to determine the need for cathodic
protection of the tank bottoms. If cathodic protection is deemed necessary, the design shall
include cathodic protection in the spaces between any impervious liners and the tank
bottoms. Refer to API RP 651, clause 7.2.3.
It is expected that steel tank bottoms resting on soil or prepared aggregate cushions
require cathodic protection. Impervious liners placed beneath tank bottoms prevent
the flow of cathodic protection current to the tank bottom unless the anode system is
positioned in the space between the liner and the bottom.

Page 13 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

g. Plant cathodic protection systems shall be designed to allow for subdivided areas of buried
plant and equipment to be electrically isolated from each other and from the site earthing
(grounding) system(s).
Dividing the plant into electrically isolatable areas allows for improved monitoring
and troubleshooting of the cathodic protection system.

11. Storage tanks

a. Aboveground steel storage tanks resting on soil or aggregate foundations (cushions) shall
be designed with reference electrodes for cathodic protection assessment beneath the tank
bottoms. Refer to API RP 651 clause 9.4, EEMUA Pub 183, clause 6.6.5.
Reference electrodes provide the means to assess the state of corrosion protection
provided by a cathodic protection system to the underside of a tank bottom. It is
difficult and expensive to install reference electrodes after a tank has been
constructed.
b. If tank foundations (cushions) are employed, the foundation particles shall be fine and of
uniform size.
If mixed grade particle sizes are used in the tank foundations, differential aeration
corrosion cells can result where large particles contact the steel tank bottom.
Experience indicates that cathodic protection is generally not effective at preventing
this type of pitting corrosion. Refer to EEMUA Pub 183, clause 5.3.
c. In aggressive environments, including marine environments, tank attachments and
appurtenances shall be designed and fabricated to eliminate areas of known early coating
failure, such as sharp edges and crevices. Sharp edges shall be rounded and attachments
shall be seal welded. Stitch welding attachments and appurtenant structures are not
allowed.
Sharp edges are locations of early coating failure because the coating does not form
a sufficient film thickness over sharp geometric discontinuities. Rounding the edges
greatly extends the coating life. Stitch welding creates crevices between the faying
metal surfaces which cannot be coated and into which water wicks. The resulting
corrosion can cause damage to both the tank shell and the attachment.
d. In aggressive environments, including marine environments, spiral staircases, hand rails,
and gratings shall be designed to be removable and replaceable. These techniques should
be considered for tanks regardless of the service environment.
Even with the most successful coating applications these items have a failure
frequency that often requires replacement during the service life of the tank.
Attaching fully seal welded stringer plates or standoffs to which the stairway can be
bolted allows for removal and replacement or repair without having to take the tank
out of service for hot work on the shell.
Hand rails and gratings also are items where coating failures historically have
resulted in sufficient corrosion to require replacement. In coastal marine
environments galvanizing, in particular, does not have good service experience.
Cups can be welded to the tank structures for removable hand rail legs attached
with pins. Grating can be secured with stainless steel bolts and clips.
e. In aggressive environments, including marine environments, stiffening rings and wind
girders shall be continuously fillet welded both top and bottom. This requirement shall
include roof truss to tank shell welds in fixed roof tanks.
Stitch welding creates crevices that cannot be coated and where uncontrolled
corrosion occurs. Corrosion between roof trusses and tank shells in stitch welded

Page 14 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

construction of fixed roof tanks has caused the welds to crack, separating the trusses
from the shells.
f. Attachments shall be designed and fabricated to drain water adequately. Stiffening rings
and wind girders shall not include the design depicted in Figure 3-20 Detail e in API
Std 650. Inverting this detail is an acceptable design. (Refer to Figure J.1 Detail e,
BS EN 14015 for details.) Rings and girders shall have drain holes with maximum 3,3 ft.
(1 m.) spacing. Toe plates on walkways shall be raised from the walkway structure to
provide for drainage.
These requirements assure that water cannot be trapped in the attached structures,
not only when the tank is fabricated, but during its service life even if there should
be uneven foundation settling, which could result in a low-side trap. The
Figure 3-20 Detail e in API Std 650 configuration cannot automatically drain under
such circumstances unless it is inverted. Close drain hole spacing minimizes water
traps under such conditions.
g. Dished water draw off sumps in tank floors should be used when possible.
Sumps of the type of design shown in Figure 3-18 of API Std 650 promote coating
failure and are difficult to repair and recoat because their geometry hinders the
necessary access to the surfaces, particularly if the draw off pipe is in place.
Figure O.5, BS EN 14015 shows the details of a dished sump. Experience with
dished sumps has shown them to be much easier to maintain.
h. Annular plate seals should be applied.
Annular plate seals can be mastic, mastic-backed metal flashing, or a combination
of both. They can be effective in excluding water from reaching the tank bottom,
however, they have a finite service life, and planning for periodic maintenance or
replacement is required.
i. Tank foundations shall be of sufficient elevation to assure standing water does not reach
the elevation of the annular plates.
This is covered adequately in API 650 and BS EN 14015. Nevertheless, over time a
number of tanks have been found to have occasional standing water pooled over
their annular plates. Under these conditions, any breach in the annular ring sealing
system permits the entry of water under the tank bottom, making underside
corrosion likely.
j. Pontoon hatches shall be fitted with seals.
Hatch seals assure the entry of water into the pontoons and the consequences do not
occur.
k. Foam fire fighting systems design shall consider fabrication from fibreglass reinforced
plastic (FRP).
Carbon steel and some grades of stainless steel piping are rapidly corroded by
intermittent cyclic exposure to fire fighting foam and air. This can be mitigated
somewhat by flushing after each system test, which may provide an economic life
because of the low replacement cost, particularly of steel. However, the concern is
not only with the longevity of the piping, but also with the potential blockage of the
nozzles with corrosion products, a phenomenon almost universally observed in steel
firewater systems on offshore installations. Flushing may not prevent this problem,
because the pipe remains wet inside after the flushing procedure.
FRP has a history of success in this application on storage tanks.
l. External floating roof seal designs in aggressive and marine environments shall have
stainless steel (austenitic grade) compression plates (Ref: GIS 58-101, Annex D).

Page 15 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

Figure D.3 of GIS 58-101 depicts a design with stainless steel compression plates.
In marine environments stainless steel provides long term service whereas,
galvanized compression plates have required replacement during the life of some
tanks in coastal environments.

12. Heat exchangers

Finned cooler tubes in service in aggressive and marine environments where the tube metallurgy is
subject to external corrosion should have protection for the unfinned tube section between the fins and
the tubesheet.

The consensus solution for this is to use an extruded fin, which gives a solid
aluminium layer over the base metal the entire length of the heat exchanger tube
including the unfinned portions, and to seal the gap at the tubesheet.

13. Cooling systems

Consideration shall be given in new plant designs, both onshore and offshore, to avoid or minimise the
use of cooling water, e.g. by use of air cooling. If cooling water systems are unavoidable, closed
circuit designs shall be considered in order to minimise corrosion, i.e. in preference to either once-
through or recirculating cooling tower designs.

Cooling water systems using once-through or recirculating cooling tower designs

require constant operational surveillance and controls to prevent corrosion of
carbon steel components because the water is fully oxygenated. They are also
difficult to keep clean, often resulting in deposition and under-deposit corrosion of
steel and even corrosion resistant alloys, especially at locations of stagnant or low
flow. They also require constant chemical treatment.
In closed circuit designs the closed circuit itself is effectively sealed and can be kept
clean and virtually non-corrosive, with minimal use of make-up water and
chemicals. Heat can be rejected from the closed circuit by air cooling or by a heat
exchanger, typically a titanium plate design with once through cooling water on the
other side.
Use of closed circuit cooling system designs in place of cooling towers also
eliminate the potential nuisance of external corrosion of wet plant equipment caused
by drift from the towers.

14. Fired heaters

When the fuel contains  0,5% (mass) sulfur, the following applies:

a. A protective coating to prevent acid corrosion shall to be applied to the casing.

When sulfur containing fuel is used to fire the heater the casing surface beneath the
fire protection material may be less than the condensation temperature of sulfuric
acid, a byproduct of the combustion process. Acid corrosion of the steel heater
casing will be the result. An appropriate coating can eliminate this threat.
b. Castable materials shall have a total concentration of free alkali, MgO, and iron in the
aggregate of less than 15%.
c. The “facing” of a castable or brick lining shall be “medium weight” or heavier.
d. Block insulation shall not be used when fuel sulphur content exceeds 1%.

Page 16 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

e. When a ceramic fiber blanket is used with fuel with sulphur contents exceeding 10 ppm a
casing coating shall be applied to prevent corrosion.
f. When a ceramic fibre lining is used, fuel with  0,5% sulfur/H2S shall have a stainless
vapour barrier, 50 µm (2 mil), and casing coating. The vapour barrier shall be located
between blanket layers. The foil interface temperature shall be 55°C (100°F) above the gas
condensation temperature.
g. Surfaces to which a shell coating is to be applied for corrosion protection shall be grit
blasted to a near-white finish (SSPC-SP10).
h. Acceptable shell coatings are coal tar epoxy or silicone acrylic copolymer. Shell coatings
service temperatures shall be a minimum of 28°C (50°F) above the calculated temperature
of the shell.
Table X below summarizes casing coating requirements.

Table X - Casing coating requirements based on sulfur content of fuel

> 10 ppm  0,5 wt%

< 10 ppm  1,0 wt%
< 0,5 wt% < 1,0 wt%
Brick/ No coating No coating Casing coating Do not use
Block required required required Brick/ Block
(clause 14.a) (clause 14.d)
Ceramic No coating Casing coating Casing coating Casing coating
Fiber required required required plus required plus
(clause 14.e) vapour barrier vapour barrier
(clause 14.f) (clause 14.f)
Castable No coating No coating Casing coating Casing coating
required required required required
(clause 14.a) (clause 14.a)

Page 17 of 18
10 November 2005 GP 06-67
Guidance on Practice for Design Decisions that Affect Corrosion

Bibliography

[1] NACE Publication, Corrosion Under Wet Thermal Insulation, Houston, TX, 1990.

Page 18 of 18