Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 205 views

    Coked Failure

    Uploaded by

    Mahendra Rathore
    Failure modes of coke drums include skirt failures from cracking or buckling and shell failures from bulging or cracking. Common causes include thermal and mechanical stresses from the batch process. Effective inspection and monitoring programs utilize techniques like laser scanning, acoustic emission testing, and temperature monitoring to assess the severity of issues like bulging indicated by the plastic strain index. Maintaining an integrated mechanical integrity program of inspection, assessment, operations, repair and replacement can avoid premature drum replacement and effectively manage common failure modes.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Coked Failure

    Uploaded by

    Mahendra Rathore
    205 views43 pages
    Failure modes of coke drums include skirt failures from cracking or buckling and shell failures from bulging or cracking. Common causes include thermal and mechanical stresses from the batch process. Effective inspection and monitoring programs utilize techniques like laser scanning, acoustic emission testing, and temperature monitoring to assess the severity of issues like bulging indicated by the plastic strain index. Maintaining an integrated mechanical integrity program of inspection, assessment, operations, repair and replacement can avoid premature drum replacement and effectively manage common failure modes.

    Original Description:

    coke failure

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Failure modes of coke drums include skirt failures from cracking or buckling and shell failures from bulging or cracking. Common causes include thermal and mechanical stresses from the batch process. Effective inspection and monitoring programs utilize techniques like laser scanning, acoustic emission testing, and temperature monitoring to assess the severity of issues like bulging indicated by the plastic strain index. Maintaining an integrated mechanical integrity program of inspection, assessment, operations, repair and replacement can avoid premature drum replacement and effectively manage common failure modes.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    205 views43 pages

    Coked Failure

    Uploaded by

    Mahendra Rathore
    Failure modes of coke drums include skirt failures from cracking or buckling and shell failures from bulging or cracking. Common causes include thermal and mechanical stresses from the batch process. Effective inspection and monitoring programs utilize techniques like laser scanning, acoustic emission testing, and temperature monitoring to assess the severity of issues like bulging indicated by the plastic strain index. Maintaining an integrated mechanical integrity program of inspection, assessment, operations, repair and replacement can avoid premature drum replacement and effectively manage common failure modes.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 43

    Failure Modes and Inspection Needs of Coke Drums

    Mahmod Samman, Ph.D., P.E. President Houston Engineering Solutions, LLC (832)512-0109 [email protected]

    Overview
    Introduction Overview of common failures Skirt failures Shell failures Inspection and monitoring needs The big picture Summary
    2

    Introduction
    Profitable unit Failure-prone
    Batch process Excessive loads
    Thermal Mechanical
    Temperature

    Randomness
    Flow channels Feed type
    Time

    Human factors
    3

    Common Failure Modes


    Skirt failures
    Cracks Buckling Bolt failures

    Piping Failures
    Blow-down line Nozzles Pipe supports

    Shell failures
    Bulges Cracks Tilting (banana)

    Vibration-induced failures Structural concrete failures


    4

    Skirt failures

    Skirt Failures
    Cracking in attachment weld
    Common in conventional welded skirts Potential consequences Drum replacement

    Buckling
    Uncommon Potential consequences

    Anchor bolt failures


    Drum movement and jumping Typically recurring Becoming more common Overload, fatigue, corrosion Thermal gradients, vibrations, falling boulders, corrosion
    6

    Conventional Skirts
    Variations:
    Slots Weld details Scallop Forged ring Damage: Joint cracks Keyhole cracks Bulges Bolt failures
    In-line Lap-joint
    7

    History of Failures
    API 1996 Survey

    Skirt Stresses
    Temperature

    Skirt Stress

    Example Temperature Animation

    10

    Temperature Animation Close-Up

    11

    Axial Stress Animation

    12

    Skirt Attachment Experience


    API 1996 Survey:
    23% replaced skirt => 45% cracked again. 54% ground-and-rewelded => 50% cracked again.

    Typical design life of conventional welded skirts under todays transients:


    500 1500 cycles 2 - 6 years

    Observed cracks in recent conventional welded skirts is 3 to 5 years.


    13

    Recap on Skirt Failures


    Skirt failures are common in conventional welded skirts especially attachment weld cracks. Drum design, fabrication, and operation influence skirt life. Neither skirt repairs nor replacement are typically effective in ending attachment weld cracking.

    14

    Shell failures and inspection needs

    15

    Shell Failures
    Bulging and cracking
    Common Consequences Drum replacement

    Tilting
    Becoming more common Uneven drum heating or cooling Single-sided inlets Consequences (Functional vs. structural)
    16

    Shell Bulging & Cracking


    Classic Constrained balloon

    Weil and Rapasky (1958)

    Courtesy CB&I

    17

    Cycles to First Bulge / Crack


    API 1996 Survey

    18

    Bulge Dimensions
    API 1996 Survey

    19

    Locations of Bulges and Cracks


    API 1996 Survey

    20

    Possible Causes of Bulging


    Radial growth:
    Stress vs. strength Type of feed

    Non-uniform:
    Stiffness mismatch Imperfections Random channeling Local heat treatment

    Progressive Patterns
    Circumferential welds Mid-plate Mid-drum
    21

    Relatively Similar Bulging Pattern


    Identical design and operation

    22

    Dissimilar Bulging Pattern


    Identical design and operation

    23

    Consequences of Bulging
    Primary damage Secondary effects Can lead to leaks and fires

    24

    Shell Cracks
    Bulging-induced cracks Weld cracks
    Defects Weld-base boundary Clad boundaries

    Combination

    25

    Bulging-Induced Cracks
    INTERIOR

    EXTERIOR
    26

    Bulging Severity
    Stress analysis Geometric analysis Strain analysis

    27

    Plastic Strain Index (PSI)


    Failure limits from API 579/ASME FFS Outcome:
    Bulging-induced cracks:
    Likelihood Ranking Locations

    Frequency of laser scanning

    Correlates well with history of failures


    PSI magnitude
    80% to 100% 60% to 80% 40% to 60% 0 to 40%

    Severity Grade
    Failure Danger Concern Design

    Likelihood of Bulging-Induced Cracks


    Likely Probable Possible Unlikely

    Recommended Frequency of Laser Scanning


    6 months to 1 year 1 year 1 to 2 years 2 to 3 years
    28

    Example Identical design and operation

    ovality

    Excessive cracking

    Localized Bulge Cracking

    29

    PSI Severity Maps

    High Severity at cracking sites

    30

    PSI Trending

    31

    Recap on Shell Failures


    Shell failures are common. Several factors contribute to creating bulges. Bulging magnitude and severity are different. PSI analysis assesses the severity of bulges and provides directions for prioritizing inspection needs and optimizing resource allocations. Premature drum replacement can be avoided and bulges can be effectively managed with proper engineering, inspections, and repairs.
    32

    Inspection and monitoring needs

    33

    Overview
    Laser scanning Conventional nondestructive testing methods Acoustic emission testing / monitoring Temperature monitoring Strain monitoring

    34

    Laser Scanning
    Available laser scanning techniques Advantages
    Bulge sizing and characterization Some provide video surveying / photos

    Disadvantages
    Significant differences in techniques / accuracy Incomplete without engineering assessment

    35

    Conventional NDT Methods


    Advantages
    Sizing of defects Robust methods with physical record

    Disadvantages
    Scaffolding and removal of insulation Some require shutdown Time-consuming / costly for entire drums Too many indications
    36

    Acoustic Emission Testing


    Advantages
    Detect active cracks only Through-insulation No shutdown

    Disadvantages
    No size information Human factors

    37

    Temperature Monitoring
    Advantages
    Robust Inexpensive Commonly used and specified for new drums Easily incorporated in control process

    Disadvantages
    Incomplete without engineering analysis Data management
    38

    Strain Monitoring
    Advantages
    Measure of damage Research / verification

    Disadvantages
    Cost Scaffolding /removal of insulation/ wiring Data management Data scatter
    39

    Inspection/Monitoring Recap
    Most common inspection tools:
    Visual Laser scans Liquid Penetrant Ultrasonic testing techniques

    Valuable additional inspection/monitoring tools:


    AET Temperature monitoring
    40

    The Big Picture


    An effective mechanical integrity program:
    Inspection Assessment operations Repair Replacement

    Integrally related

    41

    Summary
    Skirt and shell failure modes that are common in coke drums can lead to leaks and fires. Drum design, fabrication, and operation influence coke drum life. Premature drum replacement can be avoided and common failures can be effectively managed with proper analysis, assessment (PSI), inspections, and repairs. Most common inspection tools are visual testing, laser scanning, Liquid Penetrant, and Ultrasonic Testing techniques. Additional recommended tools include acoustic emission and temperature monitoring. Inspection needs are effectively fulfilled when inspections are performed as part of an inter-dependent mechanical integrity program.
    42

    QUESTIONS?
    Mahmod Samman, Ph.D., P.E. President Houston Engineering Solutions, LLC (832)512-0109 [email protected]

    You might also like