E-5 RFT Final Report 2021

Petrojam
Kingston, Jamaica
Remote Field Inspection Report
E-5
Virgin Naphtha Splitter Feed / Naphtha Hydrofiner Feed
Exchanger
October 18, 2021
Report Prepared by
Bradford Dozier
bdozier@techcorr.com
Report Submitted to
Brian Case
Brian.Case@petrojam.com
Eddy Current Remote Field Near Field IRIS

Testing Testing Testing Testing
Petrojam October 18, 2021
Kingston, Jamaica
E-5 Virgin Naphtha Splitter Feed / Naphtha
Hydrofiner Feed Exchanger
Inspected By: Bradford Dozier Level IIA
—TABLE OF CONTENTS—
REMOTE FIELD INSPECTION REPORT
1. WORK SCOPE
2. TEST RESULTS
3. OBSERVATIONS
4. RESULTS MAP(s) (Optional Plug and 3-D Maps)
5. ORIENTATION and OBSERVATION PHOTOGRAPHS
6. REMOTE FIELD-TESTING METHOD
7. TEST PARAMETERS
8. EQUIPMENT and TUBE DATA
9. CALIBRATION DATA
APPENDIX
a. Tube Test Data
b. Calibration Graphics
c. Analysis Graphics
d. Standard of Care and Disclaimer
e. Contact Us
Preface
This report has been formatted to present all findings prior to any other content. Supporting content will follow the test
results.
Kingston, Jamaica
REMOTE FIELD INSPECTION REPORT

1. WORK SCOPE
Tech Corr Inspection’s Tubular Group performed Remote Field Testing (RFT) on the E-5
Virgin Naphtha Splitter Feed / Naphtha Hydrofiner Feed Exchanger for Petrojam located
in Kingston, Jamaica on October 18, 2021.
2. TEST RESULTS
97.80% of the tubes were tested. Most of the tubes did not have any relevant defect
indications. One tube was found to have a 56% wall loss indication in an isolated area
near the floating tubesheet. The rest of the tubes with indications had minor to moderate
general corrosion type indications found in random areas along the length of the tubes.
Obstructions due to unknown reasons. Remote field testing (RFT) cannot detect most
flaws at the tubesheets or baffles.
Indications that represent: # of tubes:
Total Number of Tubes (Straight Sections in U-Bend Tubes) 273
Total Number Tubes / Sections Tested 267
No Discernable Defects Detected (NDD) 161 N
10% to 19% wall loss / Minor 84 1
20% to 29% wall loss / Moderate 17 2
50% to 59% wall loss / Severe 1 5
60% to 69% wall loss / Severe 0 6
70% to Through Wall Hole (TWH) / Severe 0 7
Obstructed tubes in the Test Pattern No Test (OBS) 5
Mechanically Plugged Tubes No Test (PLG) 1 ▲
Results of Tubes Tested
NDD
10% to 19%
20% to 29%
30% to 39%
40% to 49%
50% to 59%
60% to 69%
70% to TWH
Kingston, Jamaica
Limitations: The Remote Field Test (RFT) examination method, typically has an
accuracy of + or - 10%, with a maximum tolerance of 19.99%. This accuracy can be
effected by the limitations encountered. When performing any electromagnetic
examination, it is important to understand the variations in the test system and test
specimen, as well as the parameters that effect data output. The following is a list of
some of the forms of variation that are commonly encountered that may have an effect
on the data generated when performing a Remote Field Test.
Tube Cleanliness Localized Permeability Electrical Noise / Interference
Probe Fill Factor Magnetic Deposits Geometry
Dented Area Tubesheet Area Composition Changes
Bulged Area Tube Support Area Temperature Changes
Edge Effect Residual Magnetism Conductivity Changes
3. OBSERVATIONS
Previous Tube Test: Previous inspection in 2018 reported one indication to 55% wall loss.
Tubesheet TS1 (test end): No relevant visual indications.
Tubesheet TS2: No relevant visual indications.
Baffles: N/A in shell
Tube O.D.: N/A in shell
Tube I.D.: Scale. Tube end Damage
Shell: N/A
Other:
4. RESULTS MAP (Following Page)

E-5 RFT Results
VN Splitter Feed / NH Feed Exchanger 97.80% of the tubes were tested.
Most of the tubes did not have any
relevant defect indications. One tube
1 N N N N N N N 1, 7 was found to have a 56% wall loss
indication in an isolated area near the
floating tubesheet. The rest of the
N N N N N N N N N N N 1 tubes with indications had minor to
moderate general corrosion type
N N N N 1 1 1 1 N N N N N 1 indications found in random areas
along the length of the tubes.
N N N 1 1 N N N N N N O N N N N Obstructions due to unknown
reasons. Remote field testing (RFT)
5 N N N N N 1 1 N 2 1 1 N N 1 1 1 5, 16 cannot detect most flaws at the
tubesheets or baffles.
1 N N N N N 1 1 1 1 N 1 1 1 N N N 2
1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 LEGEND KEY
DESCRIPTION SYMBOL QTY

1 1 O 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 TOTAL HOLES 273(100%)
TOTAL TESTED 267(97.80%)
1 1 5 4 2 1 1 3 1 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 NDD N 161(58.97%)
10-19.9% 1 84(30.77%)
20-29.9% 2 17(6.23%)
10 1 1 1 1 N N N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 O 10, 18 30-39.9% 3 3(1.10%)
40-49.9% 4 1(0.37%)
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 1 N N 50-59.9% 5 1(0.37%)
60-69.9% 6 0(0%)
N 1 N N N N N N N 1 1 N N N N 1 N N 70%-THRU WALL 7 0(0%)
OBS-NO DATA O 5(1.83%)
1 1 N N N N N N N N 1 1 N N N N N PLUGGED 1(0.37%)
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
15 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 1 15, 16
N N 1 1 1 N N N N N N N N N www.TechCorr.com
Company: Petrojam
N O N 1 1 N N N N N N O Location: Kingston Jamaica
Unit:
18 1 N N N N N N N 18, 8 Equip.Number: E-5
Service: VN Splitter Feed / NH Feed Exchanger
Material: SA-179
Stationary End Size: 3/4"x.083"x240"
Inspection Type: RFT
Analyst: Bradford Dozier
Date: 10/18/2021
Kingston, Jamaica
5. ORIENTATION and OBSERVATION PHOTOGRAPHS
Orientation Photograph (TS1)
Row 1
Tube 1
Kingston, Jamaica
Observation Photographs
Exchanger Overview
Condition of tube end damage and tubesheet.

Kingston, Jamaica
6. REMOTE FIELD TESTING METHOD

Remote Field Testing (RFT) is the second most commonly used tube examination method. This
technique is performed on ferromagnetic materials, such as, Carbon Steel, 400 Series Stainless,
Duplex 2205, Chrome-Moly. The Remote Field technique is an electromagnetic examination
which utilizes the “through wall transmission effect” to produce a resultant field that is affected by
anomalies and is measured two to three tube diameters away from the AC excitation source
without the requirement of any tube magnetization or magnetic saturation. The purpose of this
application is to detect I.D. and O.D. degradation such as corrosion, erosion, pitting, fretting and
gradual wall loss generally found in ferromagnetic tubing.
The Remote Field Technique is an

electromagnetic examination, which utilizes a
through-transmission process. The resultant field
is affected by either ID or OD tube wall
anomalies. RFT signal measurements are made
a few tube diameters away from the AC exciter.
A pair of pick-up coils located in the remote field

zone measures the resultant field to give both a
differential and an absolute signal. The signal
phase and amplitude information is used to
determine defect depth and volume. Because of
this configuration, RFT does not differentiate
between ID and OD flaws. Dual driver probes as
shown here reduce the blind spot created by the
support plate.
Remote Field Test (RFT) Method – Applications

• Examination of Ferromagnetic Tubing.
• Can detect and size corrosion, erosion, pitting, fretting, wearing, or a combination
of these.
• Can detect and size wearing (wall loss) at baffle or support locations of defects
25% or greater.
• Can examine low fin and skip fin tubing.
• Can examine tubes from 5/8” to 3” in diameter.
• Can examine tubing that has been coated with non-conductive coating.
Kingston, Jamaica
8. EQUIPMENT and TUBE DATA
Plant: Petrojam
Unit / Area: Crude
Equipment Number: E-5
Virgin Naphtha Splitter Feed / Naphtha Hydrofiner
Service:
Feed Exchanger
Built: N/A. Re-tubed sometime after 2014
National Board Number: N/A
Serial Number: N/A
Tube Material: SA-179
Type of Equipment: Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger
Tube Bundle: Floating
Bundle Orientation: Horizontal
Tube Type: Straight
Tube Surface: Prime
Joint Type: Rolled
Total Tubes in Exchanger: 273
Type of Test: Remote Field (RFT)
Total Tubes Tested: 267
Inspection End (TS1): Stationary Tubesheet
Row Orientation: Top to bottom
Tube Orientation: Left to right
Tube OD: .75”
Tube Wall Thickness: .083”
Tube Length: 240”
Tubes Mechanically Plugged: 1
The tube material type and dimensions as necessary to perform the test are provided by the client.
Inaccurate tube data will affect the final results and quantifications.
Tube data is recorded while testing and analyzed post testing with results documented in a tubesheet tube
map format and data sheets giving indication types, quantifications, and locations presented in this report.
Kingston, Jamaica
9. CALIBRATION DATA
Personnel
TechCorr utilizes highly trained and qualified personnel. Quality begins with TechCorr
maintaining personnel specialized in tube examinations. TechCorr personnel have been
through formal and specific classroom training, have received supervised On-The-Job training
hours and have been tested and qualified through TechCorr's extensive Quality Control
Program, which surpasses the American Society of Non-Destructive Testing's ASNT-TC-1A.
The equipment operator is required to pass extensive "mock bundle" tests, that are establish in
the industry for qualifying personnel prior to performing work in that plant or facility. Once in the
field, the equipment operator will acquire the data and have it analyzed within 48hrs by a Level
II Data Analyst. A preliminary report will then be issued representing the tubes and defects
depths found in the tubes. Formal reports will then follow within 1 day or less from the
completion of the analysis.
Analyst: Bradford Dozier Level IIA*

Acquisition: Diego Gamarra Level II*
Technician: Cristopher Surjan
*ASNT Recommended Practice No.: SNT –TC-1A
Acquisition Instruments
TechCorr utilizes some of the most state of the art examination equipment on the
market today. Some of the equipment used, is as follows: Eddyfi™ Ectane 2 system.
This is a very diversified system, which has the capabilities to perform Eddy Current
Testing (ECT), Remote Field Testing (RFT), Near Field Testing (NFT), Internal Rotating
Inspection System (IRIS) and Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL) all in one system. Some of
the key features of this system include:
• Examination Data Storage.
This system allows data to be recorded and saved. This data, can then be
recalled for later inquiries.
• 4 simultaneous frequencies per input.
This feature allows inspection speeds up to 2 m/s with 4 frequencies on absolute
and differential channels, without signal distortion.
• Electronic probe balancing.
No separate external reference probe is required for absolute channel operation.
• 4 ECT inputs and up to 64 multiplexed channels.
The Ectane 2™ can support a large number of ECT channels to perform array
probe inspections. Compared to single-channel inspection, the array probe
technology allows faster and easier surface coverage.
Kingston, Jamaica
Manufacture Model Serial Number Calibration Expiration

Tester: Eddyfi Ectane II 1426902 June 15, 2022
Fill Factor Poly Length
Probe (1): Corestar CD-500 DE/LF 0087-0817 73% 50’
Probe (2):
Poly (1): N/A
Poly (2): N/A
Calibration Standard(s)
Type Material Dimension Serial Number
Standard 1: Multipurpose RFT SA-214 C/S 3/4” x .083” RFT 21-211
Standard 2:
Test Instrument Settings
Frequency Drive Amplitude Differential Gain Absolute Gain
Frequency 1: 600 Hz X KHz 4 Volts 65 dB 56 dB
Frequency 2: 500 Hz X KHz 4 Volts 65 dB 56 dB
Frequency 3: Hz KHz
Frequency 4: Hz KHz
Mix Freq. 1: N/A KHz N/A N/A
Mix Freq. 2: N/A KHz N/A N/A
Sample Rate: 400 Hz Acquisition Mode Differential and Absolute
Bandwidth: 22 Hz Probe Type Bobbin/Conventional
Filter Cut Off Diff: 10 Hz Order 4 Scan Direction Pulling out
Filter Cut Off Abs: 10 Hz Order 4 Max Scan Speed 1’ per sec.
Applicable Code
ASTM-RFT-E2096-00. Standard Practice for In Situ Examination of Ferromagnetic Heat
Exchanger Tubes Using Remote Field Testing.
Kingston, Jamaica
APPENDIX
Appendix A
TUBE TEST DATA

TechCorr USA, LLC E-5-RFT Petrojam
Bradford Dozier VN Splitter Feed / NH Feed Exchanger-Stationary End Kingston Jamaica
10/18/2021 SA-179 -3/4"x.083"x240"
% Wall Nominal Actual Wall Remaining

Row Tube Loss Wall Loss Wall Location Relative to TS1 COMMENT
1 1 0% 0.083 0.000 0.083 0.0 No Defects Detected
2 12 14.9% 0.083 0.012 0.071 146.527 General Corrosion and Pitting
Page 1 - Defect Tube Map, E-5

10/18/2021 SA-179 -3/4"x.083"x240"

4 12 0.083 0.0 Obstructed (Not Insp)
5 9 26.6% 0.083 0.022 0.061 20.299 Random Pitting
5 16 13.5% 0.083 0.011 0.072 193.125 Random Pitting
6 1 11.9% 0.083 0.010 0.073 176.01 Random Pitting

10/18/2021 SA-179 -3/4"x.083"x240"

7 14 18% 0.083 0.015 0.068 109.41 General Corrosion and Pitting

10/18/2021 SA-179 -3/4"x.083"x240"


10/18/2021 SA-179 -3/4"x.083"x240"


10/18/2021 SA-179 -3/4"x.083"x240"

13 18 0.0 Mechanical Plug

10/18/2021 SA-179 -3/4"x.083"x240"


Kingston, Jamaica
Appendix B
CALIBRATION GRAPHIC
Appendix C
Kingston, Jamaica
Appendix D
Standard of Care
In performing the services requested, TechCorr USA, LLC used the degree of care and
skill ordinarily practiced under similar conditions by others performing such services in
the same or similar locality. All procedures and reference specifications are the current
revision, at the time of the examination. Additional client procedures may be listed or
referenced, but as a minimum TechCorr USA, LLC procedures mandate the quality
level performed during this examination. No other warranties or guarantees, expressed
or implied is intended by TechCorr USA, LLC.
Disclaimer
While all efforts have been made to exercise due diligence for care and caution,
TechCorr USA, LLC cannot assume any liability for damage, leakage, loss of
containment , environmental damage, loss of production, injury (personnel and plant), or
the like associated with the subject. It is understood by all parties that the measurement
techniques used and discussed are non-invasive. As a result, the data provided may
not be indicative of the actual condition and are deductive in nature. TechCorr USA,
LLC is not liable for any misrepresentation of results or conditions. All
recommendations are based upon similar experience, standard industry standards, and
best engineering practice. This report is not to be construed as a guarantee or warranty
of the materials tested. All orders are subject to TechCorr USA, LLC Standard Terms
and Conditions, which are available upon request.
Appendix E
Contact Us
Please feel free to contact us for any questions, comments, work scheduling, planning
or quotations. Also for any changes that may be needed in the report, Client Field
Ticket(s) or invoices.
Our corporate office is located at:
1485 East Sam Houston Parkway South, Suite 160
Pasadena, Texas 77503.
Lance Schreckenbach Russ Black Vincent Summa

TechCorr USA, LLC TechCorr USA, LLC Summa Group, LLC
Tubular Division Manager Gulf Coast Operation Manager President and CEO
lances@techcorr.com rblack@techcorr.com vsumma@summagroup.com
(832) 641-9767 (713) 524-2768 (713) 524-2768

E-5 RFT Final Report 2021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

E-5 RFT Final Report 2021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Petrojam

Eddy Current Remote Field Near Field IRIS

REMOTE FIELD INSPECTION REPORT

4. RESULTS MAP(s) (Optional Plug and 3-D Maps)

5. ORIENTATION and OBSERVATION PHOTOGRAPHS

6. REMOTE FIELD-TESTING METHOD

8. EQUIPMENT and TUBE DATA

a. Tube Test Data

d. Standard of Care and Disclaimer

REMOTE FIELD INSPECTION REPORT

Results of Tubes Tested

4. RESULTS MAP (Following Page)

DESCRIPTION SYMBOL QTY

5. ORIENTATION and OBSERVATION PHOTOGRAPHS

Orientation Photograph (TS1)

Condition of tube end damage and tubesheet.

6. REMOTE FIELD TESTING METHOD

The Remote Field Technique is an

A pair of pick-up coils located in the remote field

Remote Field Test (RFT) Method – Applications

8. EQUIPMENT and TUBE DATA

Analyst: Bradford Dozier Level IIA*

Manufacture Model Serial Number Calibration Expiration

TUBE TEST DATA

% Wall Nominal Actual Wall Remaining

Page 1 - Defect Tube Map, E-5

% Wall Nominal Actual Wall Remaining

Page 2 - Defect Tube Map, E-5

% Wall Nominal Actual Wall Remaining

Page 3 - Defect Tube Map, E-5

% Wall Nominal Actual Wall Remaining

Page 4 - Defect Tube Map, E-5

% Wall Nominal Actual Wall Remaining

Page 5 - Defect Tube Map, E-5

% Wall Nominal Actual Wall Remaining

Page 6 - Defect Tube Map, E-5

% Wall Nominal Actual Wall Remaining

Page 7 - Defect Tube Map, E-5

Lance Schreckenbach Russ Black Vincent Summa

You might also like