Proceedings of the ASME 2022 13th International Pipeline Conference
IPC2022
Assured Utilization of Vintage Pipelines through Effective Pressure Fluctuation
Management
Senhat Al-Otaibi1, Husain Al-Muslim1
1Saudi Aramco, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
ABSTRACT
New policies driven by climate change concerns have made
the construction of new pipelines more difficult with uncertain
prospects in the years ahead. With expected increasing demand
in hydrocarbon transportation, pipelines operators have no
alternative but to plan for further use of existing vintage
pipelines. These pipelines have inborn flaws such as longitudinal
seam weld defects or environmentally assisted defects such as
stress corrosion cracking (SCC). Therefore, the need to
proactively maintain pipeline integrity and mitigate failure
probability has become essential to meeting customers’ demands
and protecting the public. This paper discusses Saudi Aramco’s
experience in monitoring pressure fluctuation for vintage
pipelines that are susceptible to SCC.
Pressure fluctuation contributes to an increase in crack-like
longitudinal defects that are common in vintage pipelines.
Therefore, a pipeline integrity management program should
consider pressure fluctuation–induced fatigue damage. In
addition, a crack growth prediction model can help determine an
appropriate re-inspection interval. This paper discusses an
innovative approach to evaluating, categorizing, real time
monitoring, and reducing pressure cycle aggressiveness by
reviewing the pressure cycle history in a complex pipeline
network and analyzing several factors contributing to pressure
fluctuation.
There are several pipeline operation modes; the transmission
pipeline pressure cycling index is mostly critical at the pump or
compressor stations and is dependent mainly on the equipment
operations. As upstream gathering pipeline systems most often
have multiple tie-ins at several wellheads, each wellhead
becomes a source of pressure in the pipeline network. Moreover,
pressure fluctuation is a result of different operation activities;
for instance, pigging operations contribute in some cases to up
to 20% pressure fluctuation during each pigging activity.
In this paper, an innovative real-time monitoring method is
utilized to proactively determine which pipelines are subjected
to pressure fluctuation. Meanwhile, cyclic index monitoring was
conducted with a digital tool to facilitate large data processing
utilizing introduced methodologies that are dependent on fatigue
damage rate instead of material strength. More than half a
million data points were processed to identify the cyclic index for
each pipeline segment for one year. A cyclic index categorization
1 Copyright © 2022 by ASME
September 26–30, 2022, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
IPC2022-87009
was introduced; therefore, when the pressure cycling index is
moderate or higher, pipeline operators should investigate the
operational factors to reduce the fluctuation effects. In addition,
a fatigue assessment with the recently developed PRCI MAT-8
fracture mechanics model was conducted to predict remaining
lifetime and determine appropriate inspection intervals. The
technique for assuming the initial flaw size was based on API
1176, which is critical for pipelines with no hydrotesting history.
KEYWORDS: pipelines, pressure fluctuation, SCC, cyclic
index, crack growth, PRCI MAT-8, R-ratio
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Due to current environmental concerns, the construction of
new pipelines has been restricted in many countries. Hence, the
need to utilize vintage pipelines has become vital to meeting the
increasing demand for energy. Vintage pipelines are susceptible
to failure due longitudinal defects such as SCC and seam weld
defects, which are mostly caused by the type of coating used or
poor manufacturing process.
Therefore, an integrity management program for these pipelines
should ideally consider pressure cycling and fatigue analysis to
ensure the safety of the public while these pipelines are in
operation. While pressure cycling can accelerate the growth of
SCC in liquid pipelines, this is less intense in gas pipelines due
to fluid compressibility. Hence, pressure cycle fatigue analysis
(PCFA) is an important part of the integrity management of
pipelines that are subjected to pressure fluctuation during
operation. Pipelines should be screened for pressure cycling
serviceability, and pressure fluctuation should be limited in terms
of magnitude and frequency. To avoid premature failure, PCFA
is conducted based on fracture mechanics models to estimate
cracks and remaining lifetime and to determine appropriate
inspection intervals.
Various fracture mechanics models have been developed by the
pipeline industry. Their use began in 1950 following the brittle
failure incident in the American fleet of Liberty ships. Early
research in fracture mechanics application on pipelines was
conducted at Battelle Laboratories in Columbus, Ohio, which
resulted in the development of the log-Secant method for
longitudinal cracks and became the basis for ASME 31G metal
loss assessment. The pipeline industry has since relied on this
initial work when developing failure models which consider only
the elastic behavior of crack propagation. The first mathematical
model for elastic plastic fracture was devised by Rice in 1968
[1]. The model introduced the J-integral, which is a parameter
for quantifying strain energy. Since then, there have been several
advancements of fracture mechanics thanks to developments in
finite element analysis.
The PRCI PR-460-134506-R01 project was conducted recently
to develop a model that captures the latest fracture mechanics
developments in the pipeline industry [2, 4]. In this paper, the
PRCI MAT-8 model and methodology were utilized to conduct
fatigue analysis as a result of pressure cycling for pipelines that
are susceptible to SCC.
2.0 METHODS
2.1 Real-Time Monitoring Solution
A real-time monitoring solution was developed as a proactive
innovative approach to observing pipeline pressure fluctuation
with instant-processing of pressure data obtained through
supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA). The R-ratio
for a 10-minute interval is calculated based on the ratio of
minimum-to-maximum pressure recorded in this time interval.
An R-ratio close to 1 indicates constant pipeline pressure. R-
ratios can be calculated monthly.
Table 1: R-ratio severity levels
R-ratio Category
1.0 ≥ R ≥ 0.7 Low
0.7 ≥ R ≥ 0.5 Moderate
0.5 ≥ R ≥ 0.1 High
0.1 ≥ R Very High
Alarm is automatically raised when the R-ratio is high or very
high, as shown in Table 1, or when pressure variation is ± 25
psig. Hence, one of the main advantages of this solution is that it
records these events to establish the operational root causes of
frequent pressure fluctuation in order to reduce it.
PCFA is conducted for all pipelines susceptible to SCC.
However, the real-time monitoring solution is used to prioritize
assessments and to re-assess the pipeline when the R-ratio starts
to decrease.
2.2 Cyclic Index
The pipeline industry uses the rainflow analysis for
conventional pressure fluctuation counting [5]. The cyclic index
is a proactive tool for identifying pipelines susceptible to failure
due to fatigue crack growth. In addition, it allows pipeline
operators to take measures to reduce pressure fluctuation, such
as changing operation mode, increasing pump reliability, etc.
TT05 pressure cycling method [6] depends on the material
strength (percent of the specified minimum yield strength
[SMYS]) which the fatigue damage rate is not sensitive to.
Recently, an innovative approach to overcome this
shortcoming was introduced by Anderson, T.[7]
2 Copyright © 2022 by ASME
Hence, the quantitative cyclic index was derived based on the
Paris equation shown below, which was utilized in this paper.
∑ ∆𝜎𝑖𝑚 𝑁𝑖 1 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
𝐶𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑖𝑐 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥 = 𝑚
𝑖
( ) 𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 1, [4]
∆𝜎𝑒𝑞 ∆𝑡
Where
𝑁𝑖 = number of cycles with the corresponding stress amplitude
(∆𝜎𝑖𝑚 )
∆𝜎𝑒𝑞 = constant stress amplitude, 72% of API X52 SMYS. This
grade was selected due to its mid steel grade ranking.
Table 2 below shows the categorization of cycling index
aggressiveness. This assists with prioritizing revalidation of
pipelines that are susceptible to fatigue failure.
Table 2: Cyclic index classification [4]
Cyclical Aggressiveness
Index Classification
0 ≤ CI ≤ 10 Mild
10 to 50 Moderate
50 to 100 Aggressive
>100 Very Aggressive
2.3 Data Collection
2.3.1 Pressure History
The pressure history was collected from the SCADA
system at 1-minute intervals for liquid pipelines for one year, as
per API 1176 [3] recommendations. For each pipeline section,
the data was recorded at the pump discharge and suction for the
same time period. To identify the cyclic index and for fatigue
analysis, more than half of data points were processed
representing one year of pressure history. It should be noted that
the pressure transmitters are often located at pump piping and
have different pipe diameter and thickness than the main
pipeline. The cyclic index is larger when the diameter increases
and lower when the wall thickness decreases.
2.3.2 Data Filtration
Faulty readings were removed from the analysis. Readings
outside the pipeline operating pressure were carefully reviewed
to determine if they were faulty. Typically, a single reading spike
at 1 minute indicates error or calibration, while the spread of
high-pressure readings over several minutes indicates it is true
event. Other checks were for negative and repetitive numbers,
which were also filtered. Data filtration is generally automated
due to the large amount of data, but expert judgment and manual
review of specific outliners are often required. Pipeline physical
properties such as diameter, thickness, and grade were included
for each section.
2.4 Fatigue Analysis
2.4.1 Crack Growth
To determine crack growth and remaining life, the Paris
equation was utilized for stress that exceeded the threshold.
 𝜎𝑡ℎ =
∆𝐾𝑡ℎ
𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 2, [4] The pipeline was assessed for each segment. This case study
𝑌√𝜋𝑎
shows that one segment (see Figure 1) at the pump stations was
designed with a greater wall thickness compared to the rest of
the pipeline.
Where
𝜎𝑡ℎ = threshold stress
Figure 1: Pipeline segments
𝑎 = crack depth
Y = geometry factor
∆𝐾𝑡ℎ = threshold stress intensity value, assumed at 1.8 ksi [8]
In case of threshold-exceeding stress, the damage does
contribute to fatigue failure and the Paris equation was used to
estimate the crack growth rate at each cycle.
Table 3: Results of pipeline fatigue analysis and cyclical index
𝑑𝑎 𝑚
= 𝐶 (∆𝐾) 𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 3, [4] Pump
𝑑𝑁
Location Pump discharge
suction
Where
𝐶 and 𝑚 = material contact PIPELINE SEGMENTS X1 X2 Y1
In this paper,
M=3 NOMINAL PIPE 56 56 56
C = 8.61 x 10−10 [5] DIAMETER – inch (mm) (1,422) (1,422) (1,422)
The average crack growth per time (unit length per unit time) NOMINAL PIPE WALL 0.736 0.511 0.736
𝑑𝑎 ∑(
𝑑𝑎
)𝑁 THICKNESS – inch (mm) (18.7) (12.98) (18.7)
𝑑𝑁 𝑖 𝑖
= 𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 4, [8]
𝑑𝑡 ∆𝑡 PIPE MATERIAL GRADE
Where X65 X65 X65
𝑑𝑎 (e.g., GrB X52, etc.)
( )𝑖 = crack growth for the ith histogram bin
𝑑𝑁
LENGTH (km) 0.37 70.31 0.32
𝑁𝑖 = number of cycles
CYCLIC INDEX 3.23 9.78 2.16
2.4.2 Remaining Lifetime
Time to failure is calculated as shown in the equation CYCLIC INDEX
Mild Mild Mild
below; this is the predicted failure time when the crack reaches CLASSIFICATION
the critical flaw size at operating condition. HYDROTEST psig (MPa) 1,162 1,162 1,162
𝑎 𝑑𝑎
Dated 1986 (8) (8) (8)
𝑡𝑓 = ∫𝑎 𝑓 𝑑𝑎 𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 5, [4]
0 ( ) REMAINING LIFE
𝑑𝑡 221 92 324
(years)
Where
𝑎0 = initial crack growth
𝑎𝑓 = critical crack flaw size The effect of wall thickness can be observed through the
Once remaining lifetime is determined, an appropriate inspection comparison of X1 and X2 segments, which have the same
interval is considered based on probabilistic models or a safety pressure source (pump 1 discharge). The X1 segment has a cyclic
factor to account for the uncertainty of field and material data. A index of 3.23 compared to 9.78 of X2. There are fewer stresses
safety factor of 2 is typically used. that exceeded the threshold stress (𝝈𝒕𝒉 ) described in Eq.2 for the
Remaining lifetime is assessed based on the latest in-line thicker pipeline and hence, the cyclic index is lower. For the
inspection or pipeline hydrotesting, whichever most recent. If pipeline with the same thickness, the cyclic index is highest near
remaining lifetime has to be determined based on the in-line the pressure source (the pump) and decreases along the pipeline.
inspection, the largest crack that cannot be detected by the The pipeline starts at a cyclic index of 3.23 and ends at 2.16. The
inspection tool is considered as the basis in determining the last row in the above table shows the crack remaining fatigue life
remaining lifetime. Meanwhile, in case of hydrotesting, since last hydrotest. An analysis of the pipeline operation found
remaining lifetime is assessed based on the largest defect that has that the main drivers of the pressure cycles were unplanned pump
survived the hydrotest. trips and fluctuation in pressure due to operational needs. For the
latter, different scenarios were reviewed to evaluate their merits
3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION in terms of operational feasibility and positive impact on
The assessment was conducted for 9 liquid pipelines. Two reducing the cyclic index.
case studies representatives of the assessed pipelines are
presented in this paper. Each case study represents one pipeline Case Study 2
segment. This pipeline shows a more aggressive pressure fluctuation. It
has a cyclic index of 15.55 at pump discharge, which drops to
Case Study 1 1.47 just before the next pump station suction. This case study
shows clearly the major effect of pressure fluctuation on crack
fatigue life, as for pipeline segment E1 crack life is 24 years
3 Copyright © 2022 by ASME
compared to 454 years for E2, due to its cyclic index. This • The observed causes of a higher cyclic index include:
estimated remaining fatigue life was based cracks that survive ▪ Frequent pump trips; hence, improving pump
last hydrotest pressure. reliability would reduce pressure fluctuation.
▪ Frequent supply and demand changes.
Table 4: Result of pipeline fatigue analysis and cyclical index • Continuous Cyclic index monitoring offers an opportunity
to identify operational schemes that improve the integrity of
Pump 1 Pump 2 vintage pipelines and extend their life.
Location
discharge suction
REFERENCES
PIPELINE SEGMENTS E1 E2 [1] Rice, J.R. “A Path Independent Integral and the
Approximate Analysis of Strain Concentration by Notches and
NOMINAL PIPE DIAMETER – 56 56 Cracks.” Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 35, 1968, pp. 379–
inch (mm) (1,422) (1,422) 386.
NOMINAL PIPE WALL 0.511 0.736 [2] Anderson, T.L., “Development of a Modern Assessment
THICKNESS (Tn) – inch (mm) (12.98) (18.7) Method for Longitudinal Seam Weld Cracks.” PRCI Project
MAT-8, Pressure Vessel Research Council.
PIPE MATERIAL GRADE [3] API RP 1176 Assessment and Management of Pipeline
X65 X65
(e.g., GrB X52, etc.) Cracking, First Edition, 2016.
[4] Anderson, T.L, “PRCI MAT-8 Assessing Crack-Like
LENGTH (km) 100.333 0.08
Flaws in Longitudinal Seam Welds: A State-of-the-Art Review”
CYCLIC INDEX 15.55 1.47 PR-460-134506. Prepared for Pipeline Research Council
International, Inc, March 31, 2017
CYCLIC INDEX [5] E1049-85, “Standard Practices for Cycle Counting in
Moderate Mild
CLASSIFICATION Fatigue Analysis.” American Society for Testing and Materials,
HYDROTEST Psig (MPa) 1,162 1,162 Philadelphia, PA, 1985.
Dated 1986 (8) (8) [6] TTO Number 5, “Low Frequency ERW and Lap Welded
Longitudinal Seam Evaluation,” Department of Transportation,
REMAINING LIFE April 2004.
24 454
(years) [7] Anderson, T.L., “Innovations in the Integrity
Management of Seam Welds in Cyclic Service” Presented at the
Figure 2: Pipeline segments PPIM Conference, Houston, February 11-12, 2015
[8] API 579-1, 2016 Edition, Fitness for service.

4.0 CONCLUSION
The recently introduced PRCI MAT-8 PCFA was applied in
for pipelines susceptible for SCC. In addition, a newly developed
cyclic index classification was utilized to predict fatigue life and
determine inspection intervals. Two case studies were presented
here, although the assessment included 9 pipelines. Below are
the main takeaways:
• The cyclic index is a proactive indicator of pressure
fluctuation severity. It is influenced by wall thickness and
distance from the pressure source.
• Sudden pressure fluctuation does not equate a high cyclic
index. One of the assessed pipelines was a water pipeline
with bi-weekly scrapping activities, which resulted in
pressure spikes of around 20% during scrapping due to
increased flow for higher scrapper velocity; however, the
cyclic index was shown to be mild.
• The cyclic index considered in this paper only accounts
stresses that result in the fatigue crack growth which found
to be different compared to cyclic index that is dependent on
material strength only.
• Monthly monitoring is recommended for pipelines with a
high cyclic index, as it helps identify operational causes.

4 Copyright © 2022 by ASME