My ASME VIII Div 2 Vessels Are at

the End of Their Life !

What Now?

IPEIA Conference, BANFF February 2007

Izak J Roux P. Eng.
RAE Engineering & Inspection Ltd
Izak.roux@raeengineering.ca

RAE
 What did the Div 1 vessel said to
the Div 2 vessel after the 10 year
inspection?

RAE
 This is the first day of the rest
of your life!

RAE
 Div 2 Vessels - Overview

1. Introduction
2. Div 2 vs. Div 1 –Philosophy
3. ABSA Requirements
4. Case Study 1 – Separators
5. Case Study 2 – Accumulators HP & LP
6. Owners Strategy
7. Conclusion
RAE
 Introduction

„ Div 2 vessels – we forgot about them

„ Luckily – ABSA remembered
„ What now?
„ Let us Analyze!

RAE
 ASME 8 Div 1 vs. Div 2

„ ASME 8 Div 1
„ Design by committee
„ Div 1 came out of 1900’s public pressure, get it
safe – Margin of safety.
„ Low allowable stress
„ High Safety factor
„ Penalties – welding, inspection
„ Conservative

RAE
 ASME 8 Div 1 vs. Div 2

„ ASME 8 Div 2
„ Design for higher pressure and fatigue
„ Div 2 later technology.
„ Higher allowable stress
„ For fixed location
„ Increased inspection
„ Less Conservative

RAE
 ASME 8 Div 1 vs. Div 2

„ ASME 8 Div 2
„ Stress Analysis –
„ Primary stress
„ Secondary stress
„ Lower Design Factor/Margin of Safety
„ Pressure >3000 psi (20.6 MPa) (for >600psi)
„ Fatigue Analysis > 1000 CYCLES
„ Design Specification

RAE
 ASME 8 Div 1 vs. Div 2

REMEMBER
„ Life is based on anticipated load cycles
„ Operation and maintenance log is required
„ Fatigue evaluation may be required after
useful life by the user
„ User Specification VS Operational
Specification!!

RAE
 Section VIII Division Section VIII Division
1 2
Pressure Limits Normally up to 3000 psig No limits either way, usually 600+ psig
Experimental Normally not required May be required
Stress Analysis
User User or designated agent to provide User's Design Specification with detailed
specifications (see U-2(a)) design requirements (AG-301.1) include
AD 160 for fatigue evaluation
Manufacturer Manufacturer to declare compliance in Manufacturer's Design Report certifying
data report design specification and code compliance
in addition to data report
Professional Normally not required „
Professional Engineers' Certification of
Engineer User's Design Specification as well as
Certification Manufacturer's Design Report
„
Professional Engineer shall be
experienced in pressure vessel design
Safety Relief U Stamp with Addition markings U2 Stamp with Additional marking
Valve including W, P, B, RES; L, UB, DF; RT, HT including HT
Hydrostatic Hydrostatic Test 1.3 (Was 1.5 before the 1.25
Test use of the 3.5 Design Factor in the 1999
Addenda)
 Pressure Cycles in Fatigue

„ Full-range pressure cycles including

start up and shutdown
„ Pressure variation exceeds 20% of the
MAWP
„ Number of Hydro-tests
„ Pressure disturbances

RAE
 ABSA REQUIREMENTS

„ Registration – we have done that

„ Design Specifications vs Operations
„ Wake Up and tell us what have you done
to these Div 2 vessels!!!
„ Operational log- show me!
„ Monitor pressure and temperature

„ Future Life Report

RAE
 ABSA Requirements
„ As per jurisdiction requirements for cyclic
loaded vessels, the pressure and temperature
cycles need to be reviewed and compared
with the fatigue cycles that were anticipated
at the design stage.
„ Owners Specification

„ Manufactures Specification

„ Operating Specification

RAE
 Case Studies
Approached followed for Analysis
„ Check User Requirements/specification

„ Check inspection records

„ Check actual operations –

„ pressure and temperature cycles
„ Shutdowns
„ Number of hydro tests done to date
„ Repairs
„ Possible change in product – change in corrosion rate

RAE
 Case Study 1 - Separator

Background
„ Horizontal vessels, 76 mm thickness

„ These vessels been in service since 1996

„ Cyclic service

„ Pressure cycle and Temperature Cycle

„ Sweet service

RAE
 Case Study 1 - Separator

RAE
 Case Study 1 - Separator

„ Diameter 78 in (1980 mm)

„ Length 30 ft (9145 mm)
„ Wall Thickness 3.0 in (76 mm)
„ MAWP 1650 psi (11.38 MPa)
„ Operating Temp. 100 F (38 °C)

RAE
 Case Study 1 - Separator

OPERATIONAL CYCLE (TYPICAL)

„ Data Reference Dec 2000 to Apr 2001
„ Maximum Pressure 1472 psi (10.1 MPa)

„ Minimum Pressure 228 psi (1.6 MPa)

„ Maximum Temp. 100 °F (38 °C)
„ Minimum Temp. 45 °F (7 °C)

RAE
 Pressure (psi)

RAE
12
/4
/
12 200

0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
/1 0
8/
20
00
1/
1/
2
1/ 001
15
/2
1/ 001
29
/2
2/ 001
12
/2
2/ 001
26
/2

Date
3/ 001
12
/2
3/ 001
26
/2
0
4/ 01
9/
2
Separator V-2002 Pressure Cycle

4/ 001
23
/2
00
1
Separator – Pressure data
 Pressure (psi)

RAE
12
/4
/
12 200

1200
1400
1600

0
200
400
600
800
1000
/1 0
8/
20
1/ 00
1/
2
1/ 001
15
/2
1/ 001
29
/2
2/ 001
12
/2
2/ 001
26
/2

Date
3/ 001
12
/2
3/ 001
26
/2
00
4/ 1
9/
2
Separator V-2001 Pressure Cycle

4/ 001
23
/2
00
1
Separator – Pressure data
RAE
Temperature (F)

12
/4
/

100.0
120.0

0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
12 200
/1 0
8/
20
1/ 00
1/
2
1/ 001
15
/2
1/ 001
29
/2
2/ 001
12
/2
2/ 001
26
/2

Date
3/ 001
12
/2
3/ 001
26
/2
0
4/ 01
9/
2
4/ 001
23
Separator V-2001 Tem perature Cycle

/2
00
1
Separator – Temp data
 Case Study 1 - Separator

Fatigue Analysis
„ Low cycle „ 1 per year
„ Number of cycles for „ = 274 cycles
10 years operation
„ Fatigue Analysis „ = Exempted

RAE
 Case Study 1 - Separator

Conclusions

„ Separators will see >1000 cycles in 40

years
„ Better recording of temp. & pressure
cycles – review changes annually
„ De-rate to Div 1 may be considered
RAE
 Case Study 2 - Accumulators

„ Low and High Pressure

Accumulators
„ Fabricated in 1986
„ The vessels are in cyclic service
„ Fatigue life of 20 years
„ Design to ASME VIII Division 2.
continued

RAE
Low Pressure (left) & High Pressure (right)
 Case Study 2 - Accumulators
„ LP Accumulator
„ Dia – 72 in
„ Height – 22’ 7”
„ MAWP – 769 psi
„ Temp – 69 ºC
„ C.A – 0.0 in
„ Wall thickness =1.63 in
„ Tmin = 1.62 in
RAE
„ HP Accumulator
„ Dia – 34 in
„ Height – 26’
„ MAWP – 3937 psi
„ Temp – 38 ºC
„ C.A. – 0.065 in
„ Wall thickness = 4.45 in
„ Tmin = 4.43 in
 Operating Data for Low Pressure Accumulator

Criterion Low Pressure Accumulators

Maximum Pressure 737 psi (5.0 MPa)

Minimum Pressure 469 psi (3.2 MPa)

Ambient Temperature 65 0F (18 0C)

No. of effective cycles Refer to Appendix A

Design Life 150000 cycles/year for 20 years

No. of Hydro test 4

RAE
Operating Data for High Pressure Accumulator

Criterion High Pressure Accumulators

Maximum Pressure 3645 psi (25.1 MPa)

Minimum Pressure 3297 psi (22.7 MPa)

Ambient Temperature 65 0F (18 0C)

No. of effective cycles Refer to Appendix B

Design Life 150000 cycles/year for 20 years

No. of Hydro test 5

RAE
 Case Study 2 - Accumulators

OPERATIONS
„ Records – complete, linked to production
records
„ History of the operating log is available in
the plant. Typical operating data history
was received from the plant.
„ Press cycle is fixed – small variation

RAE
 LP cycles

RAE
 HP Cycles

RAE
 Case Study 2 - Accumulators

Inspection Records
„ Detailed inspections well recorded

„ UT Surveys done in 2003 and 2005

„ Used same 200 x 200mm grid

„ Detail internal inspection in 2006

RAE
Case Study 2 - Accumulators
Criterion LP Accumulator
MAWP 769 psi (5.30 MPa)
Corrosion Allowance nil
Minimum required thickness for 1.62 in (41.2 mm)
Cylindrical Shell
Nominal Thickness Cylindrical Shell 1.63 in (41.3 mm)

UT Thickness Cylindrical Shell 1.638 in (41.6 mm)

Minimum required thickness for 1.58 in (40.22 mm)

Elliptical Head
Nominal Thickness for Elliptical Head 1.63 in (41.3 mm)

UT Thickness for Elliptical Head 1.64 in (41.66 mm)

 Case Study 2 - Accumulators
Criterion HP Accumulator
MAWP 3937 psi (27.15 MPa)
Corrosion Allowance 0.0625 in (1.6 mm)
Minimum required thickness for Cylindrical 4.43 in (112.7 mm)
Shell
Nominal Thickness for Cylindrical Shell 4.50 in (114.3 mm)

UT Thickness for Cylindrical Shell 4.5 in (114.3 mm)

Minimum required thickness for 1.95 in (49.68 mm)

Hemispherical Head
Nominal Thickness Hemispherical Head 2.141 in (54.4 mm)

UT Thickness Hemispherical Head 2.291 in (58.2 mm).

 Case Study 2 - Accumulators

„ UT Inspection
„ HP Accumulator
„ No Manway

RAE
 Case Study 2 - Accumulators

„ Finite Element Models used for both

vessels

RAE
 Case Study 2 - Accumulators

„ LP FEM Model

RAE
 Case Study 2 - Accumulators

„ HP FEM Model

RAE
 Case Study 2 - Accumulators

„ Analysis
„ LP Accumulator
„ Membrane Stress

RAE
 Case Study 2 - Accumulators

LP Accumulator

Primary & Secondary

Stress Intensity

RAE
 Case Study 2 - Accumulators

„ HP Accumulator
„ Peak Stress Intensity

RAE
 Case Study 2 - Accumulators

„ Results Fatigue damage

RAE
 Cumulative Damage for LP
Accumulator next 10 years

Major area of discontinuity LP Vessel

No. of Cycles 4500000

Pressure Difference for cycles 268 psi (1.85 MPa)

Alternating Stress Intensity 11840 psi (81.64 MPa)

Cumulative Damage 0.90

Cumulative Damage HP Accumulator for next 20 years
Condition I
Pressure Difference for cycles 3937 psi (27.15 MPa)
No. of Cycles 200
Correct Cumulative Alternating Stress Intensity 8751.79 psi (60.34 MPa)
Cumulative Damage 2.85E-08
Condition II
Pressure Difference for cycles 348 psi (2.40 MPa)
No. of Cycles 7008000
Correct Cumulative Alternating Stress Intensity 773.59 psi (5.33 MPa)

Cumulative Damage 7.008E-05

Condition III
Pressure Difference for cycles 5905 psi (40.71 MPa)
No. of Cycles 5
Correct Cumulative Alternating Stress Intensity 13126.58 psi (90.51 MPa)
Cumulative Damage 5.00E-06
Total Cumulative Damage 7.511E-05
 Case Study 2 - Accumulators

Conclusions
„ Advantages
„ Full history of pressure and temperature
cycles
„ Detailed inspection reports – UT surveys
„ Identified inspection areas to monitor
„ Manway and nozzles

RAE
 Case Study 2 - Accumulators

„ Benefits
„ Extended life 10 years for LP
„ Extended life 20 years for HP

„ Surprise
„ LP has shorter life than HP

RAE
 Owner’s Strategy

„ Compare User / Fabricator & Operational

specifications annually
„ Review Failure Mechanisms –insp. plan
„ Understand the vessels aging –
„ is it only fatigue
„ pressure cycles or temperature cycles.

„ Can I stay below 1000 cycles?

RAE
 Owner’s Strategy

„ Small change in operations can extend the

life.
„ Cumulative damage
„ start-up,
„ Hydro tests

„ pressure cycles – max, min and avg.

„ Record everything – keep good records

RAE
 Owner’s Strategy

„ Remember

“If it is not written down, it does not

exist.”

24
RAE

RAE
 Owners Strategy

„ Div 2 or Div 1
„ Do you really need to go there?
„ Is fatigue an issue?
„ Is high pressure an issue?
„ It do not have to be a problem – need a
integrity strategy for life.

RAE
 Conclusion
„ A letter from ABSA should not be a
surprise
„ Owner should manage Div 2 vessel
„ Engineering should check operational duty
cycle and compare with design cycle – do
not wait 10 years
„ Operations should monitor and record all
stress cycles – pressure and temperature

RAE
 Conclusion

„ Chief inspector bring all info on record and

track usage – communicate with
operations and engineering
„ Any change in operational conditions
should go through MOC and check
influence on design specification and
update

RAE
 User’s Responsibility

„ User Design’s Specification – To specify

whether a fatigue analysis shall be made
for cyclic service
„ Certification of User’s Design specification
– A Professional Engineer shall certify to
the compliance of the requirements

RAE
 Manufacture’s Responsibility
„ Compliance with Requirements – Manufacturer
shall certify with Data Report
„ Manufacturer’s Design Report :
„ Design Calculation
„ Drawing
„ Certification of Manufacturer’s Design Report – A
Professional Engineer shall certify

RAE
 Conclusion

„ Final
factors in the life of an
ASME 8 Div 2 Vessel
„ Safety

„ Reliability

„ Ownership

RAE
 THE END

Thank You!

ANY QUESTIONS?
Izak.roux@raeengineering.ca

RAE