Page 1 of 4

REPORT OF RUPTURED PIPE AT DMM

YARD
Pipe Number 1PNB-00192 (44x9.5mm W.T Gr X65)

Project Name Ras Al khair-Hafar Al batin WTS

Inspected by Kashif Ejaz

Inspection Location Dammam Yard

Pipe Manufacturer PSL sharjha

Procedure followed (Y A 4 0 - F - 0 0 8) REV OB

1-Purpose of Inspection at Dammam Yard:

To visually identify and rectify of damages of pipes occurred during transportation,
handling or stacking at receiving end.

2-Acceptable and Rejected Limits as procedure:

I-Bevels damaged, dents, cuts and other deformation > 1 mm was consider as
damage, shall be cut off and re-beveled.
ii- For Dents, the length is in any direction 0.5D and not exceed in depth 3.2 mm
for cold formed dents with sharp bottom gouges & 6.4 mm for other dents
iii-If pipe lengths was damaged more than 60%, pipe was considered as Rejected.

3-Pipe History:

1- Pipe manufacturing date : 04-01-2013 (PSL Sharjha)

2- Pipe Received on jubail port : 20-03-2013
3- Pipe received in dmmam yard : Not available
4- Pipe Released from dmm yard : 29-06-2013
5- Aico Release No : PSL/REWORK/DMM/REL-25
6- Pipe 3LPE coating date : 26-03-2014
7- Received by Mapa : 26-03-2014

4- Inspection Summary
Checked each pipe to identify the visual defects. every defect was verified
with instruments before cutting.
In case if any defect was observed exceeded limits on pipe body or on
ends ,pipe would send for cutting process,
And in case if pipe ends and pipe body found free of defects,the pipe stack
in yard and
 Page 2 of 4

Released with out any cutting/Rebevel process.

4.1 Verification Of pipes in dammam yard,

Regarding pipe details like pipe no, grade,thickness,etc ,was mentioned in

pipe stenciling, I was tally all details with packing list issued by aico inspector
at PSL sharjha,

5-Regarding Pipe No: 1PNB-00192 & inspection process

5.1 Primary Inspection:

Pipe number 1PNB-00192 was Re-inspected at dammam yard, primary

inspection was conducted on inspection skid with PSL inspector , during
inspection pipe was found ok,as its shown no change in length, during
inspection ends found under limits.and cutting was not required.As per repair
procedure if any defect was less then 1mm its acceptable,
Checked flatness, peaking,straightness,Roundness at primary stage.
5.2 Final Inspection:

After submission the packing list for release by PSL, conducted final
inspection in Yard. During Inspection in yard, each pipe was verified
according to packing list,also verified the peaking,pipe length,Roundness.etc
of each pipe.
Before release verified X-ray,UT,MPI results of cut off pipes.

6-Joint Inspection with MAPA:

After final inspection by Aico,PSL called to MAPA Representative for joint
inspection, joint inspection was conducted with Mr. Semi (MAPA),Mr.Raam
Jee(PSL).
MAPA was verified each pipe according to Aico signed packing list,MAPA was
checked and verified length,Roundness,peaking,flatness of all offered pipes
and Visually inspected each pipe ,in case if Mapa found any defect during
inspection, they did not accept the pipe.
And the pipe No= 1PNB-00192 also inspected by MAPA at dammam yard
and Received in good condition, as they marked OK in packing list.

Note: Joint Inspection was conducted according to SWCC instructions. SWCC

was instructed that MAPA should be checked each pipe before dispatch.
 Page 3 of 4

After mapas satisfaction pipes will dispatch, if Mapa not accept any pipe that
pipe will consider as Rejected pipe.

7-Issued AICO release:

After Joint Inspection ,I issued the Release to PSL for Pipe transfer to coating.

8-Pipe Hold/Rejected By Mr.Ali Fadul at jubail yard:

As Mr.Ali fadul statement,he was reject the pipe# 1PNB-00192 at

jubail port due to flatness.

Mr.Ali fadul was responsible for incoming pipes inspection at jubail port.he
was conducted only visual inspection at port,when he was observed any
defect or any discontinuity in pipe he hold that pipe,then these pipes send to
dammam yard for rectification.
At dammam yard mostly pipes was found OK that was hold by mr.Ali
fadul.
So its not possible all pipes was rejected or defected that he had to hold.
Mr.Ali fadul never mark or identify on pipe and never raised any report and
even not informed to aico/swcc.he just says to PSL and send it for
rectification.
Regarding Pipe No 1PNB-00192, there was no any Mark/Sign/Report
on pipe by Mr.Ali, shows that pipe was rejected.

8.1 Repair Status in Dammam yard:

Pipes Received at dmmam yard : Aprox 950 pipes
Repaired (Cutoff/Rebevel) : Aprox 350 pipes
Rejected at dmm yard : Aprox 10 pipes
Other pipes was accepted without any Repair/cut off, because pipes was
found ok in visual inspection.
(Related documents already sent to aico during repair work)

9-Duration after release to coating:

I was released pipe no 1PNB-00192 on dated 29th June,2013 from dammam
yard.but this pipe was coated on 30-03-2014 in welspun coating.total period
of release to coating aprox 9 months. In these 09 months aico was not
 Page 4 of 4

responsible for any handling,storage,I dont know what happened in this

duration.

10-Pipe Ruptured Conclusions:

pipe was not ruptured on ends. ruptured area min 4mtr away from end.
During incident
ends was saved.its just prove that pipe ends was good,and pipe ends was
jointed properly,
At the time of site visit with Mr.Aziz khan, SWCC & PSL.Mr,Raju dasai from
PSL accepted may be PSL have been jointed Two different thicknesses in
pipe.one side was 9.5mm and other side was 8.7mm,Grade X65.
As Laboratory report of ruptured pipe, its proved that ruptured pipe material
is not compete X65 requirments.
Tensile test is failed,

10.1 Fugo-Suhaimi report reference no:

1- FSL/T/808-2015
2- FSL/T/752-2015

My Responsibility :

I was full fill my duty as Approved procedure (Y A 4 0 - F - 0 0 8),and I was

handed over all released pipe in acceptable condition to MAPA.

Kashif Ejaz
Inspection Engineer
Dammam-Aico