; Asset Integrity Engineering at Memorial University
Learning Center
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out
Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

Asset Integrity Engineering at Memorial University


  • pg 1
									Asset Integrity Management at
Memorial University, St. John’s

          Faisal Khan
          Director, Oil & Gas Engineering

          Seshu Adluri
          Asset Integrity Research

   Brief account of AIM at Memorial
   Risk Based Integrity Management
   Asset Integrity Engineering- Advanced
    AIM at Memorial: Capabilities

   Asset Integrity Engineering
       Fitness-for-Service,
       Structural & Mechanical Integrity of
   Risk Based Integrity Management
       Risk Based Integrity Modeling
       Risk based inspection and maintenance
AIM at Memorial: Researchers
Canada Research Chair –Dr. R. Seshadri
   Dr. Seshu Adluri      Dr. Faisal Khan
   Dr. Claude Daley      Dr. M. Haddara
   Dr. A. Swamidas       Dr. Shawn Kenny
   …..                   ….

         • 25 Ph.D. & M.Eng.
         • 20 other students
AIM at Memorial:
Collaborators & Supporters
   Canada Research Chairs            PRAC
    Program                           Lloyd’s Register EMEA
   NSERC                             Hollyrood Power Plant
   Terra Nova (Owners Group)         MadRock Solution Inc
   CFI (Can. Found. Innovation)      Agip
   MUN                               ExxonMobil
   Govt. of Newfoundland & Lab.      Shell
   BMT, NRC, ACOA, TC,               TransCanada
    DRDC, SSC, ISSC, ABS,             WorleyParson
    DNV, HHI, GL, Chalmers,
    TKK, ...)
Major Funding (since 2002)

   CRC – $1.4 Million
   PRAC – $110,000
   DRDC & Transport Canada - $500,000
   NSERC Discovery - $600,000
   CFI & Co - $1.25 million
   Petro-Canada - $250,000
   MUN – $280,000
   AIF (C-CORE) - $4 million
AIM at Memorial: Achievements

   New generation of Fitness-for-Service
    techniques (Level 2 & 3), rule development,
    lab testing, advanced numerical techniques
   New Risk Based Integrity Assessment,
    Inspection and Maintenance planning
    methodology and models
   Industry implementation of the developed
    techniques and continued interest
   Doctoral and Master’s Graduate students
Detailed Presentations of the
Two Main Thrusts

Risk Based Asset Integrity   Fitness-for-Service
       Management              Structural Integrity

       Faisal Khan              Seshu Adluri
    Why Risk Based Approach?
   Traditional engineering methodology
       Deterministic
       Limited quantitative frameworks to assess condition
        relative to common datum or benchmark
       Difficult decision making
   Incentive
       Focus allocation to optimize risk, which is function of
        hazards and its likelihood
       Efficient and effective decision-making making
       Help to prioritize resources
Risk Based Approach
                                       It Involves:
                                 Engineering and
                                 Management Science
          Risk Based Asset Integrity

                   Risk Based

       Risk Based
    Integrity Modeling
                      Risk Based
                     Planning and
Risk Based Approach
   Attempts to answer:
     What may go wrong? [Hazard]

     How may it go wrong? [Mechanism]

     How likely is it to occur? [Frequency]

     What would be the impact?
     What measures (design, inspection, and
       maintenance) would reduce the likelihood
       of occurrence or impact? [Risk Mitigation]
    Industry Success
   A semi-quantitative model for risk based asset
    integrity management has been developed and
    successfully applied to:
       Thermal power plant
       Ethylene Oxide plant
   A new quantitative RBAIM has been developed
    and applied to :
       Process Pipelines
       Autoclave
       Separator
   A new Methodology developed for Risk Based
    Inspection and Maintenance Decision making
    inline with API 580/581 and ASME guidelines
    Future Direction
   Application of quantitative RBIAM to Offshore Oil and
    Gas operation
   Asset Management through Risk based design
   Integration of safety and integrity in holistic asset
    management framework
   Integrity Models for rotary equipment integrity
    assessment and maintenance planning
   Bring facility risk from unit/system level to component
   Integration of human factor elements to risk based
    integrity management
Fitness-for-Service Research

               Seshu Adluri
Asset Integrity Eng. (AIE)
   Three major phases in AIE:
       Monitoring and testing (NDE)
       Fitness-for-Service Evaluation
       Decision making (risk based)
   In the context of the Oil and Gas Sector,
    Mechanical and Structural Integrity
    Assessment is a multi-disciplinary effort
       process chemistry, process engineering,
        thermo-fluids, mechanics, materials, applied
        physics, and computational technology
Asset Integrity Engineering
   Asset integrity decisions (whether probability based
    or otherwise) need the input regarding fitness for
    service of an existing component after some level of
    damage is suspected or detected.
   This input comes from Design and Analysis groups
    and needs to follow guide lines set out by API or
    other bodies.
   The procedures must be easy to apply with high
    confidence level.
   A Canada Research Chair (Dr. Seshadri) and
    several others are actively working in developing
    special techniques for mechanical & structural
Asset Integrity Eng. (AIE)

   Level 1: Conservative Screening criteria that
    are used with a minimum quantity of
    inspection data or information about the
   Level 2: Intended for use by facilities or
    plant engineers
   Level 3: Sophisticated analyses by experts
    where advanced computerized procedures
    are often carried out
Asset Integrity Eng. (AIE)
             Grouping of Failure modes
                                  Category 2:
   Category 1:                    Failures that occur
    Failures that occur            due to repeated
    without warning                application of loads
                                      Less stringent limits
       Stringent design
                                       are placed since
        limits are placed
                                       damage can be
        since failures occur
                                       detected and
        without warning
                                       inspection/ repairs
                                       are possible
      Res. & Development Program

     A new generation of methods addressing
      modes of failures for components
         Methods involve advanced concepts (level 3) in
          plasticity and computational methods
     Develop simplified Level 2 methods for Limit
      Loads and Fitness for Service parameters.

Res. & Development Program
   A major thrust is the assessment of fitness-
    for-service of components
       Pressure vessels
       Piping,
       Other equipment, …
                                     Exact area
   The defects include         t                  d
       Corrosion (single and multiple sites)
       Thermal hotspots
       Fracture and fatigue, …..
  Bulge             Original circular shape

                      Reference volume

                         Advanced Numerical Tech.

                         Advanced computational mechanics for
                          Level 3 verification
                         Simplified concepts for interaction effects
                          of defects in components (Level 2
                         Shell and plate theory use for deriving
                          simple formulas for decay lengths, etc.
                             damage area (before)
                                                                w s, us
          Civil Eng. Installations

   Storage Tanks –Seismic demand
   Crack propagation
   Vibration techniques
   Steel, wood, and concrete structures
   NDE
    Ship Structures Research
   Rule Development (IMO, IACS, SSC, TC)
   Arctic Shipping (LNG, Icebreakers, ...)
   Lab Experiments (frame, grillage, ..impact)
   Analytical Modeling (Limit states, energy methods)
   Numerical Modeling (ANSYS, LS-Dyna, cluster
   Research Directions (limit states design, hybrid
    construction, sensors, loads, safety, aged structures,
Ship Structures Research
 Prof. Claude Daley,
 Director – BMT Ocean and Arctic Structures Research Program
To sum-up

   Two main thrusts
       Structural & Mechanical Integrity of
        Assets (fitness-for-service)
       Risk based Integrity Management
   Seven faculty & over 25 grad students
   Total funding: $5 million (+)
    AIM at Memorial: Major
    Funding (since 2002)
   CRC – $1.4 Million
   PRAC – $110,000
   DRDC & Transport Canada - $500,000
   NSERC Discovery - $600,000
   CFI & Co - $1.25 million
   Petro-Canada - $250,000
   MUN – $280,000
   AIF (C-CORE) - $4 million
Risk Based Integrity Modeling

It aims to model integrity and decide
inspection and maintenance tasks to
satisfy requirements for safe operation at
minimum cost
Three main approaches:
Semi Quantitative
Risk Based Planning and
Decision Making
   Aggregative Hierarchical Risk Based
    Decision Making (AHR)
       Logical representation, easy to follow and
       Relative importance of different degradation
       Contribution as per their active participation
       Easy to upgrade/revise the risk profile

To top