AC Corrosion Case Study

Challenges of AC Interference & its Mitigation
AC Interference
Risk Assessment, Mitigation & Monitoring
Experience Sharing on Challenges of AC Interference & its
Mitigation
Keshav Kumar Dewangan

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
Keshav Kumar Dewangan AC Interference on Pipelines & its mitigation (11 Jan 2023) - IOCL, Pipeline Head Office, Noida Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.. || 1
Presentation Flow
1 AC Corrosion Evaluation Process

2 Risk Assessment for Existing Pipelines
3 Case Studies
4 Applicable Standards
5 Conclusions
AC Corrosion Evaluation Process
Risk Assessment
Risk
Assessment New
Existing
New Pipelines Interference
Pipelines
Mitigation
Sources
Strategy
Pipeline History
All the details
Monitoring of sources
Strategy
Proximity Analysis at
Assessment design stage &
Powerline
mitigation
Parameters
Monitoring CP & ILI Data
Risk Assessment for Existing Pipeline
AC Interference
Study 4 6
2
1 3 5
Pipeline Cathodic Coating
Corrosion Protection Survey Data
History Potential
Proximity AC Voltage Soil

Assessment Measuremen Resistivity
ts Survey
Case 1- Metal loss due to Fault Current
Trigger Points–
• DCVG Minor
defect (14% IR
Drop)
• Transformer in 7m
LT
the vicinity of Transformer
pipeline
• Metal loss of
70% of wall
thickness in ILI
Data
Safe Separation Distance (Arcing Radius)
Theoretical Calculation for Safe Separation Distance:

• Fault current data can be taken from Powerline operators. Generally it is assumed
as 40 KA for HT Tower.
• Soil resistivity can be measured at site.
Fault Current Calculation
Calculation for Transformer Short Circuit fault current

Case 2 – Cathodic Depolarization due to AC Interference
AC-DC VOLTAGE DATA LOGGING
45
0
40
-0.5
35
-1
30
-1.5
25
DC PSP
-2
20
-2.5 15
-3 10
-3.5 5
-4 0
16:46:4717:42:4618:38:4619:34:4920:30:4921:50:0722:46:1923:42:19 0:38:19 1:34:28 2:30:28 3:26:28 4:22:28 5:18:28 6:14:28 7:32:07 8:28:07 9:24:07 10:29:2511:37:2812:40:4313:38:4014:34:4015:35:55
PSP DC PSP AC
Observations:
• With the increase of AC Voltage in the pipeline, DC PSP Values decreases.
• This generally observed at locations where multiple LT Line are present in the
vicinity of Pipeline.
Effect of Induced AC on Cathodic Protection levels
Excessive
Induced AC Small Defect
CP
Pre-requisites
Increased AC Depolarization Increased DC (CP)

Current Current
Ohm’s Law Alkalinity
Reduced Spread Resistance
*Reference: NACE SP-21424 – 2018

Criteria for AC Interference
Criteria for AC Corrosion Based on AC & DC Current Density:
(Reference: NACE SP-21424 – 2018)
 AC Current density should not exceed time weighted average of 30 A/m2 if DC

Current density exceeds 1 A/m2.
 AC Current density should not exceed time weighted average of 100 A/m2 if DC
Current density exceeds 1 A/m2
Case-3: Challenges in Validation of Modelling data with field parameters
• The double circuit 110KV transmission
11 way line that connects two (A & B)
Li 0 K a il
ne V R ine substations crosses the BPCL pipeline at
Tr L
a ns particular location at an angle less than
m 45 deg.
iss
io
n • This transmission line run parallel with
the pipeline for about 1.5 Km.
• The separation distance between pipeline
and the transmission line at this 1.5Km
stretch varies from 50 meters to 200
e
in
l
pe
meters.
Pi
• This is the main source and cause for the

interference voltage on pipeline section at
this location.
• Field logging recorded AC Voltage > 40V,
where as in Modelling it was only 6.3
Voltage.
Root Cause Analysis
OBSERVATIONS:
• Circuit 1 of the transmission line, fed from SS-A is carrying a load current of 345
amps during normal operations. Circuit 2 of the transmission line SS-B that is
connecting Three different substation is bi -directional flow with 132amps during
normal operation
• SS-B is a distribution station with more numbers of 11KV/433V transformers
feeding to agricultural and residential loads and Protective Multiple Earthing
system at LV side there is every possibility for an unbalance current flow in the
double circuit line.
• It is also feeding to Railway Traction substation. The traction supply is of single
phase with ground return through rails.
• Software simulation and validation was done considering balanced loads in circuit 1
&2, which means the current flow in all 3 phases are equal at 345 amps in circuit 1
and 132 amps in circuit 2.
Root Cause Analysis
ACTION TAKEN:
• Being the currents are equal, the resulting EMF is less due to field cancellation and
the interference voltage on pipeline was also less in magnitude. This was the main
cause for difference in measured maximum voltage and the one from simulation.
• Re-modelling was done taking into account of unbalance current flow, mainly due to
traction supply.
RESULTS:
• The average value of AC Voltage was matching with simulation results.
Validation of Modelling data with field Parameters
Field Data logging Modelling Result
As the traction loads are highly fluctuating and depends up to train movement, recorded voltage also
showing high fluctuations.
Applicable Standard
OISD 188 – Corrosion Monitoring for Offshore & Onshore Pipeline
• Power lines operating at 66 KV and above shall generally be considered as threat of HVAC
interference.
• AC corrosion threat may be considered insignificant, if the AC Current density is lower than 30
A/m2 on a coupon with 1 cm2 holiday / probe over a representative period of time (e.g. 24 Hrs.)
along with polarized (off) PSP value maintained more negative to - 850mV for aerobic or - 950 mV
in anaerobic soils with Sulphate Reducing Bacteria (SRB).
• AC Pipe to Soil Induced potentials shall be restricted to least possible but not exceeding 15 V (rms)
AC for steady state conditions.
• Mitigation in respect of fault conditions should be taken such that AC- Pipe to Soil Coating Stress
Voltage is restricted below the threshold limit for the type of coating to prevent coating damages and
to prevent pipe from Structural damages
Conclusion – Key Take away
• Proximity assessment is very important in Risk Analysis.

• Low voltage lines should not be ignored in AC Interference Study.
• Field Data and Modelling data should be validated with available

Powerline parameters.
• Increased AC Current Density may lead to Cathodic Depolarization, so

AC-DC Data logging is required for evaluation of Corrosion.
Thank You

AC Corrosion Case Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

AC Corrosion Case Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Challenges of AC Interference & its Mitigation

Keshav Kumar Dewangan

1 AC Corrosion Evaluation Process

2 Risk Assessment for Existing Pipelines

Proximity AC Voltage Soil

Theoretical Calculation for Safe Separation Distance:

Calculation for Transformer Short Circuit fault current

• With the increase of AC Voltage in the pipeline, DC PSP Values decreases.

Increased AC Depolarization Increased DC (CP)

Ohm’s Law Alkalinity

Reduced Spread Resistance

*Reference: NACE SP-21424 – 2018

 AC Current density should not exceed time weighted average of 30 A/m2 if DC

• This is the main source and cause for the

• Proximity assessment is very important in Risk Analysis.

• Low voltage lines should not be ignored in AC Interference Study.

• Field Data and Modelling data should be validated with available

• Increased AC Current Density may lead to Cathodic Depolarization, so

You might also like