Repairment Methods of Pipelines

Southern Gas Association
Transmission Operating Conference

New Orleans, July 2001
Eric Quick Clock Spring Company L.P.
Patrick Porter Clock Spring Company L.P.
Economics of Pipeline Repair
There are several repair options available to pipeline operators 1. Each option has its
place and selecting the most appropriate option requires careful thought. The first
consideration is the effectiveness of the repair. Will the repair return the pipeline to a
condition that will allow complete serviceability? The second consideration is safety.
How safe is the repair from both an installation and long-term serviceability standpoint?
The third consideration is the immediacy of the need. If a defect has been day-lighted,
and is seen to require immediate action then the repair alternative must allow this fast
response. This factor will take on higher importance as new rules and regulations take
effect. The last consideration is cost. Is there a significant cost advantage to one repair
over another?
Repair Options
Typically, pipeline defects have been repaired in the following fashion:
Removal of the pipe as a cylinder.

Grinding the anomaly to reduce the effect of stress concentration.
Depositing weld filler metal to replace the missing wall thickness.
Reinforcing with a full-encirclement, non-pressure-containing sleeve (Type A).
Sealing the defect with a pressure containment sleeve or clamp (Type B).
Removal of defect via hot tapping.
Reinforcing with epoxy filled shell sleeve.
Reinforcing with fiberglass reinforced composite materials.
Removal of the pipe as a cylinder

Clearly, this is a very good repair alternative but has obvious disadvantages. The pipeline
must be removed from service with all of the economic factors associated with loss of
throughput. Pipe replacement also carries the safety and environmental risks associated
with any pipeline construction. It is time consuming, requires heavy equipment and
skilled labor. It is by far the most costly alternative and in most cases, the least preferred
option. When several joints of pipe are involved in the repair or when there is a systemic
problem with material, pipe replacement may be the only option.
1
Clock Spring is a registered trademark of NCF Industries Inc. All rights reserved. Manufactured under license from
NCF Industries. The Clock Spring symbol is a trademark of Clock Spring Company L.P.
Grinding
Minor scratches or surface imperfections can represent stress concentrators. It has long
been known that these minor imperfections can be ground, or buffed, out of the pipe
without any loss of serviceability. This is a good repair alternative for minor
imperfections. The repair area should, of course, be inspected by appropriate NDE
techniques to ensure that the defect has been completely removed and that there are no
lingering imperfections. If the buffed area leaves less wall thickness than is required by
code or company standards then the area can be assessed as a metal loss defect and a
repair alternative for that type of defect selected.
Weld deposition
Weld repairs have long been accepted. Most operators feel comfortable working with
welded fittings or mechanical sleeves for repair of pipeline defects. Welding onto in
service pipelines has risks to the pipeline operator. These risks are:
Pipe-wall burn through/blowout
Hydrogen cracking
Metal decomposition
Previous welder-induced defects
These risk factors need to be evaluated prior to choosing any weld-repair method.
Techniques for depositing weld metal have been proven for cases in which a defect is
located on a sharp bend inappropriate for a sleeve. Weld deposition repairs are feasible to
900 psi for minimum 0.125-inch wall thickness pipe. Small diameter low hydrogen
electrodes should be used with limited heat input. The restoration of static strength is
accomplished with full-thickness weld deposition.
Sleeves-Type A and Type B

Pre-stressed welded reinforcement sleeves reduce bulging and hoop stress at the defect.
Two general categories exist for reinforcement sleeves. Type A for non-welded sleeve
ends and Type B for welded sleeve ends. The major differences between the two types
are that Type B sleeves can be used to repair leaking defects, reinforce internal corrosion
defects, and are utilized more frequently on larger defect areas. Training in proper
welding techniques is extensive for proper installation of these sleeves and the risks of
welding on the pipe mentioned earlier apply.
Mechanical sleeves require less operator expertise when installing, however are generally
more expensive.
Hot Tapping
Hot tapping is a method of re-routing the pipeline product to allow a section of pipe to be
removed without loosing full throughput. It is very expensive and is only used in extreme
cases where no other alternative exists and the pipeline cannot be shut down.
2
Hot tapping can also be used to remove isolated defects from the pipeline. The equipment
allows a small section, coupon, of pipe to be removed while the line is under pressure.
The section of pipe removed is then re-established with a suitable weld on fitting. All of
the risks associated with welding on the pipe, as well as the risk of penetrating a
pressurized pipeline are present in this repair alternative.
Epoxy filled sleeves

This reinforcement sleeve is slightly larger than the pipe to be repaired. It is placed on the
pipe to be repaired with a uniform annulus around the circumference. The ends of the
sleeve are sealed and the annulus filled with a load transferring epoxy. This type of sleeve
can be an effective repair for longer defects.
Clock Spring Composite sleeve

Clock Spring is a composite sleeve that can be used to reinforce damaged pipe. Clock
Spring offers the following advantages;
Composite reinforcements avoid introducing welding associated risk.
Eliminates cost and service outages associated with conventional repairs, which
require pipeline shutdown prior to welding.
Clock Spring restores the original pressure capabilities of the pipe and provides
resistance to further structural deterioration.
Repairs can be made without line-pressure reduction.
Clock Spring can be installed easily without highly skilled labor or special
equipment.
Typical installation time less than 25 minutes.
Training is required to ensure proper installation and performance. The figure below
illustrates the simple design of the Clock Spring reinforcement sleeve.
Figure 1. Clock Spring Reinforcement Sleeve 2

Clock Spring is a three-part system.
A patented unidirectional composite structure of glass fibers and a polymer base
A patented two part adhesive system
A proprietary high compressive strength load transferring compound
Once installed, the three elements bond together to form an extraordinarily strong,
durable repair.
3
Selecting a Repair Alternative

The effectiveness of the repair is independent of pipeline location and access. Table 1
summarizes repair options based on the defect to be repaired and the location of the
defect in the pipeline. In most cases, this table will allow multiple repair alternatives.
Defect
Weld
Grinding Deposition
Repair Method
Sleeve
Sleeve
Clock
Type A Type B Spring
Clamp
Bolt-on
Hot
Tapping
Yes
Yes
Yes
Conditional
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Pipe Location
Onshore
Offshore
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Conditional
Defect Location
Straight Pipe
Gradual Bend
Sharp Bend
Internal Defect
External Defect
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Special Special
Yes
Special Special Special
Conditional Yes Conditional
Yes
Yes
Yes
Defect Type
Corrosion
Leak
Dent
Gouge
Crack<0.4t
Crack>0.4t
SCC
Wrinkle Bend
Hard Spot
Arc Burns
Girth Weld
Blisters
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes Conditional
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Special
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Special
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Conditional
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Defect Size
Area-Large
Area-Small
Pits<0.8t
Pits>0.8t
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Conditional
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Table 1. Repair Application Summary 3
4
Safety considerations
Some repair alternatives are inherently safer than others. Individual companies will assess
the value of this safety factor differently. Pipe replacement carries all the risks of
mainline construction. Full encirclement welded steel sleeves and weld deposition carry
with them the dangers associated with welding on an operating pipeline. The risks
include burn-through, cracking and the normal risk of hot work in the ditch. Type A steel
sleeves have less risk associated with the welding but there is still the danger associated
with hot work. Hot tapping carries the risks associated with cutting into a high-pressure
pipeline. While hot tapping procedures have been tested and proven effective the risk still
exists. Bolt on sleeves and composite sleeves are the safest repair alternative.
Immediacy of the repair

The immediacy of the repair need can be a significant factor in selecting the repair
alternative. Hot tapping requires a careful planned program and is not effective for
immediate response. Welded steel sleeves can be time consuming to fabricate and install.
Bolt on clamps and composite sleeve offer an advantage to the welded sleeve for the
immediate repair requirements that might be encountered. Weld deposition can also be
fast and effective for some repairs.
Cost of the repair

Estimating the cost of the repair is difficult and controversial. The actual repair-cost
equation is very straightforward; material cost + labor = repair cost 4. Material costs are
easy to estimate. Labor, however, depends on individual company accounting practices
and seems to invoke heated debate. The debate not only covers the value of the labor
supplied but also the quantity of labor required for a given repair operation. There is no
single set of correct assumptions so each operator will have to estimate repair costs based
on individual considerations. Following is a typical assessment showing where cost will
likely be incurred.
Assume that the repair options selected for a particular defect are welded steel sleeve or
composite sleeve. How does the cost compare? The most important factor is the physical
length of the defect. This analysis will show that for short defects, composites repairs are
more cost effective than steel sleeves but as the defect length grows to several feet, the
welded steel sleeve may become an economical alternative. If safety is a concern,
composites repairs will be the preferred option.
Table 2., summarizes the labor and equipment rates used in the cost analysis. These rates
will vary from company to company and will affect the outcome of the analysis.
5
Position
Welder
Operator
Pipeliner
Apprentice
Rate/hour
$35
$34
$31
$21
Welding rig
Backhoe
Boom truck
$20
$36
$20
Equipment
Table 2. Cost Rates (Fully burdened)

Assume that a single isolated patch of corrosion measuring 6 inches in diameter with a
depth of 50% wall in 24-inch pipe has been uncovered. It must be repaired. The cost of
repairing with both a welded steel sleeve and a composite repair are detailed in Table 2.
In this case, the composite sleeve saves $900 over the steel sleeve at each installation.
Now assume that the defect is 8 feet long. The welded steel sleeve is less expensive by
almost $900 as shown in Table 3. At some point between 1 foot and 8 feet is a crossover
point where the composite sleeve loses its cost advantage over the steel sleeve. Figure 2
shows this crossover point based on this analysis. This crossover depends on the cost and
quantity of labor used in the calculation. Material costs are easy to predict and do not
influence the cost equation to same extent as labor.
Type B Steel Sleeve
Hours
Cost
Item
Composite Repair
Hours
Cost
Preparation
Welder
Pipeliner
4
4
Materials
Installation
Welder
Operator
Pipeliner
Apprentice
Equipment
Backhoe
Welding rig
Miscellaneous
Nondestructive Testing
Total Cost
9
9
9
9
9
9
$140
$124
$80
$315
$306
$279
$189
0
5
5
5
$534
$324
5
$180
0
$95
2
$100
$2132
Table 2. Cost Comparison Isolated Single Repair
0
$170
$155
$105
$180
$85
$1229
6
Type B Steel Sleeve

Hours
Cost
Item
Composite Repair
Hours
Cost
Preparation
Welder
Pipeliner
7
7
Materials
Installation
Welder
Operator
Pipeliner
Apprentice
Equipment
Backhoe
Welding rig
Boom truck
Miscellaneous
Mobilization
Nondestructive Testing
Total Cost
16
16
32
16
$245
$217
$300
$560
$544
$992
$336
0
9
9
9
0
$306
$279
$189
9
0
0
$324
$4272
16
16
16
$576
$320
$320
$150
$400
4
$200
$5160
Table 3. Cost Comparison 8-Foot Defect
$140
$250
0
$5760
What is clear from any analysis is that for a typical isolated defect composite repairs are
more cost effective than steel sleeves. This along with the safety factor is making the
Clock Spring repair the preferred repair alternative.
Cost Comparison
Sleeve vs Clock Spring
$6,000
Cost ($)
$5,000
$4,000
Clock Spring
$3,000
Sleeve Type B
$2,000
$1,000
$1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Defect Length (Feet)
Figure 2. Cost of Repair vs. Defect Length
7
The composite repair is cost effective for isolated defects and for extended defects up to
approximately 7 feet in length. At this length, the welded steel sleeve may become
competitive. It is not possible to provide actual cost detail for each repair because of
widely varying cost structures and cost recovery of operating companies. Based on your
own labor costs it should be a straightforward exercise to determine the most appropriate
and cost effective repair alterative. If safety is a critical factor, Clock Spring composite
will win every time.
Conclusions
The operations and maintenance personnel of pipeline companies need to have the
knowledge to properly determine if a defect discovered in a steel pipeline should be
repaired or a section of the pipe replaced. In the case of a repair, the available
technologies, application techniques and materials need to be known.
Selecting the appropriate repair technique is an important decision that requires an
understanding of the risks and rewards associated with each alternative. Safety,
permanency and effectiveness are the primary drivers of this decision but cost can
become an important issue. Composites, like Clock Spring, compete with older, more
widely accepted weld repair techniques. These new repair options offer advantages over
the more traditional repairs and are both more cost effective and safe.
Each repair must be evaluated to determine the technically correct repair option and the
most cost effective method of carrying out the selected repair. Composite repairs may not
be the right repair option every time but they are an important alternative that can be very
effective in most repair cases.
References
1. D. Boreman, B. Wimmer, K. Leewis, "GRI Topical Report Repair Technologies
for Gas Transmission Pipelines".
2. Clock Spring literature.
3. Kiefner, W. Bruce, D. Stephens, "Development of a Pipeline Repair Manual",
PRCI Ninth Symposium on Pipeline Research, American Gas Association 1996.
4. Oil and Gas Journal October 9, 1995.
8

Repairment Methods of Pipelines

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Repairment Methods of Pipelines

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Southern Gas Association

Transmission Operating Conference

Economics of Pipeline Repair

Removal of the pipe as a cylinder.

Removal of the pipe as a cylinder

Sleeves-Type A and Type B

Epoxy filled sleeves

Clock Spring Composite sleeve

Figure 1. Clock Spring Reinforcement Sleeve 2

Selecting a Repair Alternative

Table 1. Repair Application Summary 3

Immediacy of the repair

Cost of the repair

Table 2. Cost Rates (Fully burdened)

Type B Steel Sleeve

Figure 2. Cost of Repair vs. Defect Length

Anda mungkin juga menyukai