GIP32 Piping Thickness Requirements
GIP32 Piping Thickness Requirements
GIP32 Piping Thickness Requirements
CONFIDENTIAL
THICKNESS MONITORING
REQUIREMENTS
PIPING THICKNESS MONITORING
GLOBAL REQUIREMENTS Section Page
INSPECTION 3.2 1 of 17
PRACTICES JULY, 2004
MANUAL REVISION 0.0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 SCOPE
3.0 INTRODUCTION
4.0 DEFINITIONS
5.0 PROCEDURE
5.1 Standard Format for Thickness Monitoring Plans
5.2 Thickness Monitoring Inspection Intervals
5.3 Determination of TMLs for Piping
Table 5.3.1 Thickness Monitoring for Uniform Corrosion
Table 5.3.2 Thickness Monitoring for Localized Corrosion
6.0 DOCUMENTATION
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 3.2.1: Typical Piping Standard For Tml Test Point Locations
Attachment 3.2.2: Uniform Corrosive Service – Standard Inspection Level
Attachment 3.2.3: Uniform Corrosive Service - Medium And High Inspection Levels Localized
Corrosive Service - Standard Inspection Level
Attachment 3.2.4 A: Localized Corrosive Service – Medium And High Inspection Levels TML/Test
Points -- ELL
Attachment 3.2.4 B: Localized Corrosive Service – Medium And High Inspection Levels Tml/Test
Points -- Tee 1
Attachment 3.2.4 C: Localized Corrosive Service – Medium And High Inspection Levels Tml/Test
Points -- Tee 2
Attachment 3.2.4 D: Localized Corrosive Service – Medium And High Inspection Levels Tml/Test
Points -- Tee 3
Attachment 3.2.4 E: Localized Corrosive Service
1.0 SCOPE
This procedure provides the requirements for a piping thickness monitoring program. It establishes the
minimum number and location of initial thickness measurement locations (TMLs) for piping which has not
been exempted from corrosion rate monitoring, thickness verification, or remaining life determination based
on metal loss. This procedure does not include requirements for stagnant zones, dead legs, injection/mix
points, corrosion under insulation or corrosion at small pipe connections (vents and drains).
3.0 INTRODUCTION
Thickness measurements must be obtained on piping systems in order To establish corrosion rates for
inspection interval and determine retirement. Determining the appropriate quantity and locations for the
thickness measurements can be problematic.
This document has been developed to help identify the optimal selection of thickness measurement
locations (TMLs) on piping. TMLs are used for monitoring degradation modes associated with metal loss.
Proper selection and location of TMLs is crucial to mitigating the risk caused by degradation modes
associated with metal loss.
4.0 DEFINITIONS
Piping Inspection Drawing Line sketches of a piping circuit that shows all fittings, reducers,
flanges, valves, small piping connections and supports. Additional
information may include process streams, temperatures, and materials
of construction.
Soil-To-Air Interface An area in which external corrosion may occur on partially buried pipe.
(See API 570)
Straight Run of Pipe Straight section of pipe between two fittings (elbows, tees, valves, etc.)
that is at least 10 feet long or 20 times the diameter, whichever is less.
Test Points Area(s) at a TML typically defined by a circle having a diameter not
greater than 2 inches for a line diameter not exceeding 10 inches, or
not greater than 3 inches for larger lines.
Turbulent Point Any section of piping where turbulence is enhanced. This may occur at
or downstream of an orifice, reducer, tee, control valve, or pump
discharge.
5.0 PROCEDURE
5.3.1 Each piping circuit shall be categorized into one of two general classifications based on the
extent of corrosion.
5.3.1.2 Localized corrosive services as described in EDDs 7, 12, 15, 16, 21, 35, 45, 46, 47,
48, 49 & 50. Some examples include:
§ Acid gas lines where local heat sinks such as piping supports or
vents/drains may cause some condensation,
§ Rich Amine systems where pressure drop at control valve stations may
cause acid gas break out,
§ Fuel Gas lines ahead of knock out pots where water may drop out and
cause problems at low points.
Table 5.3.1
Thickness Monitoring for Uniform Corrosion
Inspection
Description
Level
§ TML's located on 50% of components including a representative number of
fittings and straight runs.
§ A minimum of 4 test points in a band around the pipe (or UT scanning non-
High insulated pipe) or radiography at each TML in two planes. (Att. 3.2.3)
§ Corrosion rate should be estimated using a statistical approach.
Table 5.3.2
Thickness Monitoring for Localized Corrosion
Inspection Description
Level
• TMLs located on 50% of components including a representative number of fittings and
straight runs
• PLUS - TMLs located at 100% of any additional areas suspected of experiencing
accelerated corrosion. For example, locations where flow is disrupted, or where
condensation could occur.
• For the TMLs, test points should be taken per Attachments 3.2.4A-E or, in lieu of test
points, one radiograph in each of two planes should be taken at each TML. The
readings or radiographs should be directed at the expected areas of corrosion (i.e. the
High extrados of and elbow for erosion-related corrosion, or the bottom of a pipe for under-
deposit corrosion.
• Until the presence or absence of localized corrosion has been confirmed and located,
automated scanning UT or close-grid UT measurements also should be considered as
an inspection method.
• Corrosion rate and remaining life should be calculated using an advanced statistical
(1)
approach after the areas of accelerated corrosion have been located
5.3.2.3 Every effort should be made to understand the nature and the critical areas of
corrosion for localized corrosive services. TMLs should be planned accordingly -
both to find the critical areas, if possible, and to monitor their status. This might
include additional test points around the circumference of the pipe, more frequent
TMLs along the length, a TML grid in various or suspect locations, additional TMLs
in potential areas (e.g. only along the bottom or at the liquid/vapor interface), or
other areas, and might include alternate NDE methods.
5.3.2.4 When a large amount of data is needed to evaluate piping subjected to localized
corrosive services and to manage the costs and time associated with this extent of
inspection, it may be appropriate to consider the following:
§ Use of UT scanning to evaluate the entire area followed by grid mapping of
only the thin locations.
§ Use of radiography to complement or at times replace UT
§ Use of external MFL/EMAT.
5.3.2.5 Once a corrosion pattern has been established, and the minimum thickness area
identified for future monitoring, the requirement for TML grids or area inspection by
RT or UT scanning may be adjusted to focus on that specific area.
5.3.2.6 It is expected that this approach will apply to most localized corrosive services.
However, it should be emphasized that there may be some unique circumstances
in which the corrosion is so highly localized (e.g. pitting corrosion) that the
corrosion rate can not be predicted with confidence. In such cases, use of this
procedure may not be appropriate. Some examples may include:
§ Acid services where velocities exceed recommended limits for the material
§ Lines containing naphthenic acid exceeding recommended TAN/TRS and
velocity limits
§ Lines with two-phase flow where turbulence effects can produce extremely
high local corrosion rates.
It should be noted that localized corrosion does not mean pitting. Pitting should be
considered unpredictable unless special evaluation/analysis proves differently.
5.3.3 Locating TMLs
5.3.3.1 The location of TMLs shall consider the potential for localized corrosion and service
specific corrosion as well as actual corrosion history. To minimize costs, ease of
access should be considered in the location of TMLs but only if it does not
compromise the quality of the thickness data and the ability to properly monitor the
progress of the identified degradation. Other considerations include:
§ Locations representative of the typical line sizes and conditions found in
the circuit.
§ Locations where the direction of fluid flow is changed, e.g., at or
immediately downstream (two times the pipe diameter) of an elbow
§ Locations before and after a change in line size
§ Dead legs and stagnant zones
§ The heat-affected zones of welds, especially dissimilar materials
§ Mix points and injection points
§ Areas where condensation can form or solids can settle out (i.e., dead legs
or process stagnant zones)
§ Turbulent locations such as thermocouples, small connections, nozzle
intersections, orifice flanges, control valves, tees, pump or compressor
discharges, and outlets of pressure vessels
§ Accessibility to inspection
§ Locations on the downstream side of the direction of flow.
§ Older components in the circuit.
5.3.3.2 Attachment 3.2.1shows a typical standard for TML test point orientation on piping
components. Each site will have a standard orientation defined in the Site Quality
Assurance Manual or equivalent, and TMLs and test points shall be assigned
accordingly.
5.3.3.3 Attachments 3.2.2, 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 A to E provide guidance on location of TMLs
for fittings and tees for the two corrosion categories.
5.3.4 Data Quality and Evaluation
Thickness data must be reviewed for questionable readings and to confirm that the
thickness readings are appropriate. GIP 3.1, General Requirements for Thickness
Monitoring, should be followed to insure the quality of the data and consequent evaluation.
6.0 DOCUMENTATION
TMLs and test points shall be permanently documented on an appropriate drawing or sketch by TML/TP
point number. It is preferred for actual thickness data to be maintained electronically in a central inspection
database such as IDMS, MERIT or WTM. If electronic storage is not available, the hardcopies of the
thickness report shall be retained for the life of the equipment. In cases where UT scanning of the area or
RT is substituted for UT point readings the results should be documented and retained for corrosion rate
and remaining life calculations. See GIP 3.1 for specific guidelines on data/documentation requirements.
REVISION MEMO
Attachment 3.2.1:
Typical Piping Standard For Tml Test Point Locations
Attachment 3.2.2:
Uniform Corrosive Service –
Standard Inspection Level
Attachment 3.2.3:
Uniform Corrosive Service - Medium And High Inspection Levels
Localized Corrosive Service - Standard Inspection Level
Attachment 3.2.4 A:
Localized Corrosive Service –
Medium And High Inspection Levels TML/Test Points – ELL
Attachment 3.2.4 B:
Localized Corrosive Service –
Medium And High Inspection Levels Tml/Test Points -- Tee 1
Applicable for all pipe to pipe Tee configurations
NOTE: FOR BRANCH CONNECTIONS MADE WITHOUT TEES, LOCATE BAND "C" ONE PIPE DIAMETER
FROM CENTERLINE OF BRANCH. LOCATE BAND "D" ONE HALF PIPE DIAMETER FROM "C". LOCATE
BAND "A" ONE PIPE DIAMETER FROM CENTERLINE OF PIPE. LOCATE BAND "B" ONE BRANCH
DIAMETER FROM "A".
Attachment 3.2.4 C:
Localized Corrosive Service –
Medium And High Inspection Levels Tml/Test Points -- Tee 2
Applicable for all pipe to pipe Tee configurations
NOTE: FOR BRANCH CONNECTIONS MADE WITHOUT TEES, LOCATE BANDS EQUIDISTANT, ONE HALF
PIPE DIAMETER APART.
Attachment 3.2.4 D:
Localized Corrosive Service –
Medium And High Inspection Levels Tml/Test Points -- Tee 3
Applicable for all pipe to pipe Tee configurations
NOTE: FOR BRANCH CONNECTIONS MADE WITHOUT TEES, LOCATE BANDS EQUIDISTANT, ONE HALF
PIPE DIAMETER APART.
Attachment 3.2.4E:
Localized Corrosive Service
Medium And High Inspection Levels Tml/Test Points -- Tee 4
Applicable for all pipe to pipe Tee configurations
NOTE: FOR BRANCH CONNECTIONS MADE WITHOUT TEES, LOCATE BAND "B" ONE PIPE DIAMETER
FROM CENTERLINE OF PIPE. LOCATE BAND "C" ONE BRANCH DIAMETER FROM "B".