6th Pipeline Technology Conference 2011

In-Line Inspection of Multi-Diameter Pipelines:

Standardized Development and Testing for a Highly Efficient
Tool Fleet
Dr. Hubert Lindner, Thomas Beuker and Martin Diekamp
ROSEN Technology & Research Center (RTRC), Germany

Presenter
Dr. Hubert Lindner
ILI Tool Expert
ROSEN Technology & Research Center
Am Seitenkanal 8
49811 Lingen
Germany

Abstract
Governmental regulations on natural gas transmission pipelines mandate that operators
provide a baseline integrity assessments for their pipeline irrespective of the fact,
whether these pipelines can be inspected from the inside by in-line inspection tools or
not. In implementing their Integrity Management Programs and working towards the
prescribed deadlines, operators are often confronted with challenging pipeline segments
that are difficult to inspect with existing technology. A common challenge are
installations or pipeline segments, with substantial changes in the internal bore.

Due to the inability of many currently available ILI tools to meet these challenging
inspection requirements, some pipelines are still deemed unpiggable. Engineering and
implementing the modifications necessary to make a pipeline piggable are often cost-
prohibitive, since time-consuming and cumbersome integrity assessment methods have
to be used to meet the regulatory requirements. In view of these technological difficulties
and the prescribed time constraints, it is imperative that inspection solutions are found
that are both economical and time-sensitive.

The paper discuss the development of a multidiameter inspection system utilizing

magnetic flux leakage technology. The inspection tool can operate in pipelines with a
change in diameter in the range of 32" to 42". Also an overview will be given about the
design requirements for a multidiameter inspection tool fleet ranging from 10" to 48".

Developing such a complex tool requires rigorous testing. Accordingly, comprehensive

tool testing took place at the ROSEN production site where a pipe was set up
specifically to simulate the diameter changes and bends of the pipelines which were
supposed to be inspected.

page 1 of 10
1. Introduction
In-line inspection (ILI) with various inspection methods such as Magnetic Flux Leakage
(MFL) or Ultrasonic Technology (UT) has become standard in pipeline integrity
assessment worldwide. Whereas approximately two thirds of the world’s gas, oil and
product pipelines can be inspected with off-the-shelf inspection tools, the remaining lines
are currently classified as “unpiggable”. However, many of these pipelines can be made
inspectable through specific measures such as pipeline modifications and operational
changes. Where asset modification is not feasible, the development of highly flexible
and specialized inspection tools is the only viable solution to overcome issues related to
in-line inspection.

One important factor in making pipelines difficult to inspect are significant variations in
internal diameter, as, for example, in dual-diameter pipelines of 18/24 or 28/42 inches or
even multi-diameter pipelines featuring multiple internal widths. Many of these multi-
diameter pipelines were constructed before in-line inspection was invented, meaning
that diameter was no consideration at the time. However, even new pipelines
occasionally have varying diameters in order to accommodate, say, the requirements of
risers in offshore transport lines or the limited space available on subsea templates.
Whatever the reason for the inconsistencies in the internal diameter of assets, integrity
assessment based on ILI technology is now mandatory, since it guarantees safe and
efficient pipeline operation. Developing solutions to overcome the challenges posed by
multi-diameter pipelines is therefore an important concern in the oil and gas industry.

2. Development of Multi-Diameter Tools

In line with the development of ILI technology as a whole, the operating range of multi-
diameter inspection tools has vastly increased in recent times. In the early days of
pipeline inspection, tools sometimes even struggled with the relatively minor internal
diameter changes found in single-size pipelines, to say nothing of narrow bends and
other bulky installations. Over the years, ILI tools have improved both in terms of
flexibility and measuring performance, giving rise to the first dual-diameter applications
and an extension of 1.5D capability to include smaller pipeline diameters. As in-line
inspection (particularly metal loss detection) became a universally accepted and legally
required part of pipeline integrity, the demand for more difficult applications rose. The
first multi-diameter tools for specific applications were soon developed for larger sizes
and limited diameter ranges. Today, customized inspection solutions for multi-diameter
pipeline systems are commonplace. This approach was taken, for example, in the
Gassco-operated Asgard Transportation System, an offshore project on the Norwegian
Continental Shelf, and also in BP’s Thunder Horse deepwater offshore project. Such
assignments typically involve extreme development and testing efforts.

A customized inspection solution was developed by ROSEN to enable inspection of a

147 km long multi-diameter offshore pipeline in the North Sea beginning with a short 26"
diameter section followed by a long 30" segment. The medium was gas, and the bends
were not smaller than 3D. A specific challenge was posed by the need to reduce tool
speed in relation to pipeline flow. As the section with the small internal diameter (ID) was

page 2 of 10
only short (a few km) and at the start of the line, it was possible to implement a
conventional solution with a special cup. To achieve full circumferential coverage and
good magnetization in the 30" segment, two magnet units were used as shown in Figure
1. A first successful run was performed in March 2007.

Figure 1: ROSEN’s 26"/30" multi-diameter MFL tool with speed control

Although this inspection tool was designed for a particular application and therefore
features specific properties, it is still an often requested inspection tool for single-
diameter pipelines, because of its speed control capability, its ability to pass through
different diameters, its high magnetization levels, and its easily adaptable cup or disc
setup. The only limitations of the ROSEN 26"/30" multi-diameter MFL tool are potential
wear of its polyurethane (PUR) components and its inability to negotiate 1.5D bends.

Faced with a heavy-wall 14"/18" deepwater application in 2007, ROSEN took the
development of its multi-diameter inspection tools one step further [1]. Once again, the
tool was adapted to accommodate the specific features of the asset to be inspected:
• Pipeline length: 163.9 km
• Diameter: 14" for 11.9 km (wall thickness: 20.6 mm – 22.2 mm)
• Diameter: 18" for 151.9 km (wall thickness: 22.2 mm – 28.6 mm)
• Bends in the 14" section: 5D
• Bends in the 18" section: 5D
• Maximum water depth: 1900 m
• Maximum pressure: 290 bar
• Known minimum ID: 300 mm
• Internal wall: coated
• Medium: gas

Furthermore, the pipeline had several subsea appurtenances (notably check valves,
connectors, ball valves, tees and reducers), two jumpers in the subsea connection
segment, and an adjacent Y-piece. The transition from the 14" to the 18" section
occurred in one leg of the Y-junction. This meant that one part of the cleaning or

page 3 of 10
inspection tool had to expand its driving unit and pass the cavity of the Y-connection
while its rear parts were still in the 14" pipeline.
Figure 2: The ROSEN 14"/18" test loop

Given that the tool was developed from scratch and that tool failure would have had
serious consequences due to the location of the pipeline, a test loop mirroring the critical
features of the line (check valves, Y-joint etc.) was designed and constructed (Figure 2).
This test loop was used in all phases of tool development from the gauging tool to the
complete Extended Geometry tool and the MFL tool (Figure 3).

Figure 3: ROSEN 14"/18" multi-diameter MFL tool

Valuable data was gathered and experience gained during the test phase. The test runs
notably led to a major improvement of the design which was necessary because of the
interaction of bend passage and a connector cavity. In addition, the runs provided
essential information about the run conditions likely to be encountered in the real
pipeline.

page 4 of 10
3. Standardization of Multi-Diameter Tool Development
On the basis of experience gained in real-life applications in 2007 and estimates of likely
future developments, ROSEN has since defined a set of simple criteria to classify multi-
diameter tools in terms of their complexity and even their estimated feasibility for a given
task [2]. This classification takes into account diameter variations, restrictions imposed
by the narrowest bend, and the absolute size of the pipeline.

To render the development of the multi-diameter tools even more efficient, development
researchers increasingly began to separate the two essential aspects of a tool: its
pulling component, which ensures tool movement through the pipeline, and its
measurement (or cleaning) technology component. In terms of the tool’s pull unit, this
standardized development method enables optimization of the general requirements
through a number of basic design options, including:

• 1.5D capability even in the smallest required pipeline size, if it not collides with other
requirements (e.g. overall range or reasonable body length)
• Ability to pass through all general installations (full bore tees, diameter transitions)
• Modular design, to ensure capacity to handle Y-junctions in particular
• Standardized sub components and technologies
• Additional options such as a speed control function

The ability to pass Y-connections is explicitly mentioned not only because this is a
common installation feature of subsea pipeline systems, but more importantly because
such connection types are typically used where a smaller line leads into a larger
transport line, thereby resulting in a diameter change.

The advantage of this standardized approach involving separation of components is that

it creates considerable flexibility for the development process: the diameter range of a
pull unit can be designed without the need to develop a measuring or cleaning segment
at the same time and therefore without having to consider the particular requirements
arising from such a unit.

An example of the separate and standardized development approach is the pull unit for
the 14"/20" MFL and Extended Geometry tool (see Figure 4) with the following basic
design features:

• Multiple single segments

• Special semi-rigid connections to stabilize the segments
• Centralized wheel support system
• Basic mechanical solutions for certain size ranges
• Multi-diameter cups (connected to the support system)

page 5 of 10
Figure 4: Drawing of the 14"/20" pull unit

The combination of short segments and special joints allows safe 1.5D passage even in
14" diameter pipelines. Due to the unit’s modular structure, as many segments as
required can be used, for example to ensure sealing of the cavity while the tool passes
through a Y-junction. This design also enables the tool to negotiate other common
installations such as check valves and full bore tees.

Similar to the pull unit, the separate development of the measuring and electronic units
has also led to innovative solutions. In this tool segment too, all measuring units are
centralized by different mechanisms to ensure optimal measurement quality for all
measurement instruments. Most measurement units run on wheels to prevent wear by
reducing friction. Figure 5 shows the complete 14"/20" MFL tool.

Figure 5: Complete 14"/20" MFL Tool

The 14"/20" MFL tool as a whole can be considered a standardized multi-diameter

solution for medium pipeline sizes. It consists of a modular pull unit and two magnet
segments (for circumferential coverage) and two wheel-supported electronic parts. It has
full 1.5D bend capability in 14" lines and can cope with all common types of installations.

Since relatively more space becomes available with increasing pipeline diameter and
higher flow rates are typically present in larger lines, a different standard was developed

page 6 of 10
for larger pipe sizes. This standard notably takes into account the need for speed control
arising from fast-flowing media. The remaining requirements are similar to those of
medium-sized pipelines: 1.5D bend capability, separate pull unit, basic mechanical
solutions and safe negotiation of standard installations.

Figure 6: The 30"/36" MFL tool with speed control before inspection run

Figure 6 shows the realized basic design concept of larger multi-diameter tools. The
tool’s identical pull unit segments can carry either a speed control valve or the battery /
electronics compartment. Where required, these segments can additionally be equipped
with multi-diameter cups on each support plane. A particular improvement has been
achieved with the design of the magnet unit: using a special support technique, ROSEN
has managed to construct a multi-diameter magnet unit which not only consists of one
single segment but features a unique flexible sensor ring allowing circumferential sensor
coverage for all sizes.

An overview of the current status of the ROSEN multi-diameter tool fleet is given in
Table 1. It includes all currently available and projected tools. It is worth pointing out that
even the very small 6"/8" tool still requires the same solutions as larger multi-diameter
tools.

page 7 of 10
Table 1: ROSEN‘s multi-diameter tool fleet

1.5D bend MFL unit Extended Speed

capability geometry unit control
6"/8" in 8" Yes Yes No
12"/18" ≥ 12" Yes Yes No
14"/20" ≥ 14" Yes Yes No
18"/24" ≥ 18" Yes Yes No
24"/32" ≥ 24" Yes Yes Yes
30"/36" ≥ 30" Yes Yes Yes
32"/42" ≥ 36" Yes 32"/40" Yes
(36"/42")

4. Multi-Diameter Test Procedure

Thorough testing of newly developed multi-diameter tools is important for a number of
reasons. Firstly, each new tool tends to exceed the range of existing experience due to
extended specifications. Secondly, tool designs change significantly from one
development to the next. Thirdly, it must be ensured that despite their extended
specifications and altered design, new tools are still capable of negotiating different
pipeline segments and installations. Finally, run behavior and operational conditions
must be tried and tested before actual field applications to ensure tool safety and
reliability. For all these reasons, ROSEN has developed a special multi-diameter tool
test program which typically includes the following steps:

1. Pull test for all relevant pipeline sizes

While the tool is pulled through pipelines of the relevant size, pulling forces are
measured and deformation behavior is monitored. Pulling is also used for tool
functional and calibration testing.

2. Flip-over / sealing test in the largest diameter

Pressure and flow are monitored to evaluate sealing capability and detect the flip-
over pressure.

3. Pump test in full-scale test loop

The test loop includes at least the extreme elements of the tool specifications
(1.5D bend in the smallest relevant diameter size, heavy wall segment in the
smallest pipeline size for passage, largest relevant pipeline diameter, full bore tee
in the largest pipe size and at least one transition between the extreme
diameters). Monitoring the flow and pressure during the pump test supports
prediction of run behavior. If required, special installations can be simulated as
well. Pump tests are typically carried out with water as the propellant.

page 8 of 10
Due to the current developments, ROSEN currently is operating as many as ten pump
test loops, five of these are multi-diameter. An example of a 32"/42" test loop is given in
Figure 7. Apart from diameter transitions of 32" to 36", 35" to 40" and 40" to 42", this
particular test run features four bends (32", 36", 40" and 42").

Figure 7: Pump test loop for 32"/42" multi-diameter tools

5. Field Experience with Multi-Diameter Tools

The importance of the multi-diameter test procedure has been confirmed on numerous
occasions by the excellent first run success rates achieved. All of the configurations
shown in Table 1 have been successfully operated in several pipeline inspection
surveys. All of them covered the entire diameter range. And for a special application the
12"/18" pull unit has been used as a tractor for a 12" MFL tool in a 12"/18" pipeline.

While the first runs of all multi-diameter tools developed were successful without
exception thanks to the intensive test phase and careful project preparation, the
standardized tools offering the biggest operating range in particular showed very good
performance and were in excellent condition after the run (see Figure 6 above). Over
and above liquid pipelines, the tools have also proved their efficiency and reliability in
four gas lines with varying diameter combinations.

page 9 of 10
6. Conclusions
Although multi-diameter pipelines pose major cleaning and inspection challenges,
increasingly stringent legal requirements for asset integrity call for ever more complex
inspection solutions. To meet these industry demands with the greatest degree of
flexibility and cost-efficiency, ROSEN has conceived a standardized process for the
development of highly maneuverable and reliable tools to ensure accurate in-line
inspection and thorough asset cleaning. This development system is complemented by
a special multi-diameter tool test procedure the effectiveness of which has been
repeatedly shown in field applications. Given the success of both the development
system and the testing procedure established, ROSEN intends to use these as the basis
for future multi-diameter tool designs. The group thus looks set to continue to make an
important contribution to overcoming one of the major challenges facing the oil and gas
industry.

7. References
[1] Lindner, H.: Meeting the Challenge of Deep Water In-Line Inspection.
In: International Oil & Gas Engineer 02 – 2009.

[2] Beuker, T.; Lindner, H.: Classifying Pipeline Complexity.

In: World Pipelines – March 2007.

page 10 of 10