Innovations™ Magazine VII NO.3 2015

1
INNOVATIONS•VOL.VII,NO.3•2015
2 | EXECUTIVE OUTLOOK
Preparing for Greater
Profitability
4 | GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE
Industry Commentary from
Around the World
6 | TECHNOLOGY FOCUS
Changing How We Think
About Low Flow/Low Pressure
8 | SAFETY MATTERS
Safety Imagination, Chronic
Unease, and Storytelling
10 | FUTURE THINKING
Increasing Regulation and
Cost-Effective Compliance
12 | MARKET REPORT
Shale Success in a Low Price
Environment
20 | TOUCHPOINTS
Pipeline Events, Papers
and Conferences
28 | BY THE NUMBERS
Four Steps to Battling Pipeline
Integrity Threats
14 | Corrosion: The Pervasive Menace
As the rest of the world comes to grips with the unrelenting
threat and growing cost of corrosion, the pipeline industry is
already at the frontlines meeting the threat head-on.
22 | Containing Catastrophe
Whether during pipe laying or for platform protection,
advances in non-intrusive isolation technology are helping
offshore operators reduce risk and mitigate incidents.
D E P A R T M E N T S
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Jim Myers Morgan
MANAGING EDITOR Waylon Summers
ART DIRECTOR Joe Antonacci
DESIGN PRODUCTION Kat Eaton, Mullerhaus.net
DIGITAL PRODUCTION Jim Greenway, Ward Mankin
PHOTOGRAPHY Adam Murphy, CorrView
ILLUSTRATION Invisible Element
T.D. Williamson
North and South America +1 918 447 5000
Europe/Africa/Middle East +32 67 28 3611
Asia Pacific +65 6364 8520
Offshore Services +47 5144 3240
www.tdwilliamson.com
Want to share your perspective on anything in our magazine?
Send us an e-mail: Innovations@tdwilliamson.com
V O L . V I I , N O . 3 • 2 0 1 5
Innovations™ Magazine is a quarterly publication produced by T.D. Williamson.
®Registered trademark of T.D. Williamson, Inc. in the United States and other countries. ™ Trademark of T.D. Williamson, Inc. in the United States and other countries.
© Copyright 2015. All rights reserved by T.D. Williamson, Inc. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. Printed in the United States of America.
14
10 22
28
BY THE
NUMBERS 4Battling Pipeline Integrity Threats
steps to
PIPELINE INTEGRITY: A COMPREHENSIVE VIEW
Pipeline operators face the continual challenge of delivering energy to the
world in the safest and most economical ways. They battle aging infrastructure,
weather economic pressures, adjust to increasing regulation, and engage
communities to achieve social license. Fortunately, continual advances in
pipeline threat detection, such as multiple dataset platforms, are supporting
them every inch of the way. Follow steps 1-4 to see how.
DETECT While running an MDS platform,
mechanical (i.e., third-party) damage is detected
by a number of onboard technologies.
CHARACTERIZE Each technology on the MDS platform
provides a unique layer of damage information, providing full
characterization of the threat.
PRIORITIZE/MITIGATE With the final integrity report
delivered in close proximity to the inspection, the pipeline
operator is able to:
REPORT When critically assessed by specialized software and data analysts, the
overlapping MDS data helps determine the exact characteristics and severity of the entire
series of interacting threats – a re-rounded dent with gouging and crack-like features.
Metal loss, re-rounding, cycling, dent length and depth, strain and severity ranking.
• Assess the pipeline’s most
critical needs
• Prioritize maintenance/repair
based on severity
• Minimize cost by avoiding
unnecessary digs
• Ensure safe operation for its
employees and the community
MULTIPLE DATASET
(MDS) PLATFORMS can
supply pipeline operators with a
comprehensive view of their line
integrity by providing a vehicle
for an evolving combination of
overlapping inspection technol-
ogies to be run on a single
tool, at the same time.
THE RESULT: robust threat
detection and advanced
characterization.
Locates the anomaly relative
to the centerline of the pipe.
XYZ MAPPING
DEFORMATION
LOW FIELD MAGNETIC
FLUX LEAKAGE
Defines the anomaly as a dent.
Identifies re-rounding
(or rebounding) of the dent.
Recognizes volumetric
metal loss within the dent.
HIGH RESOLUTION
MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE
SpirALL® MAGNETIC
FLUX LEAKAGE
Identifies axially oriented metal
loss or gouging within the dent.
SMFL
LFM
MFL
DEF
XYZ
28
2
3
4
28
1
N O R T H A M E R I C A N
PIPELINEC O N G R E S S
C H I C A G O
Forging the road ahead
September 22 & 23 | The Westin Chicago River North | Chicago, Illinois
BUILD STRATEGIC CONNECTIONS | DO BUSINESS | ACCESS UNGUARDED INSIGHTS | FIRST CLASS ACCESS | NOTABLE NETWORKING
The key to unlocking North America’s potential as a major energy exporter while securing a
stable domestic supply lies within pipelines.
North American Pipeline Congress provides an elite forum for influential players to engage
in an open dialogue on the regulatory, political, infrastructural and technological demands
impacting the road ahead.
Join us at the crossroads of a new era. Register at pipelinecongress.com.
pipelinecongress.com

3
2
When the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries
(OPEC) moved to preserve market share by maintaining their own
production targets amid a worldwide supply glut, the strategy led to
collapsing global oil prices, the idling of shale oil rigs in the United
States, and cutbacks in capital budgets.
But OPEC’s decision isn’t the only reason for the current slump.
Structural factors, weak demand, and the strength of the United States
dollar also played a role. Today, those issues continue to exert downward
pressure on prices, as do geopolitical risks and events.
With the world concerned about China’s economy, Middle East
instability, and Russia-Ukraine relationships, it’s no wonder that the
Energy Information Administration (EIA) predicts that price volatility
is likely to persist throughout 2015.
At the same time, however, energy production in the United States
remains on the rise. In fact, the EIA notes that the quantity of shale or
natural gas produced per rig has increased by more than 300 percent
in less than five years. And that’s just one factor helping insulate the
pipeline sector from instability.
Because pipeline infrastructure isn’t fully developed in the areas
where much of the new energy production is occurring, projects that
were planned, approved, and funded before the price decline must
continue to progress just to catch up with E&P activity. A considerable
amount of this work involves reconfiguring existing pipelines rather
than new construction.
Pipeline operators are making some business adjustments. But those
activities would probably occur regardless of energy prices.
For example, over the past several years, I’ve seen more fine-tuning
of activities that lead to operational and capital efficiency. In addition,
there’s been more effort to prepare for and respond to increased
regulatory scrutiny, such as Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration’s (PHMSA) Integrity Verification Process (IVP).
By working with service providers who have field-seasoned
expertise and a broad base of technologies, operators can further boost
efficiency, better understand the condition of their pipeline systems,
and promote even greater safety and supply reliability.
All of which create a framework for greater profitability when
energy prices rise again.
CHAD FLETCHER
SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT,
GLOBAL SALES & SERVICE
T.D. WILLIAMSON
E X E C U T I V E O U T L O O K
Preparing for
Greater Profitability
By working with service
providers … operators can
further boost efficiency,
better understand the
condition of their
pipeline systems, and
promote even greater
safety and supply
reliability.

5
4
TRENDS IN OFFSHORE TECHNOLOGY
JAMES DRUMMOND
VP GLOBAL OPERATIONS - LLOYD’S REGISTER ENERGY,
ASSET INTEGRITY SERVICES
OVERCOMING TOMORROW’S INDUSTRY CHALLENGES TODAY
In the face of falling oil prices, it is no surprise that confidence in the outlook
for the global oil and gas industry has taken a hit. More surprising though was how
quickly sentiment changed in a short space of time; the confidence of over 360
senior industry professionals and executives dropped from 65 percent in October
2014 to just 28 percent in January 2015. The findings come from DNV GL’s report, A
Balancing Act: The Outlook For The Oil And Gas Industry In 2015.
The pessimistic outlook was also reflected in capital expenditure (CAPEX)
intentions, with those planning to increase CAPEX in the same time period dropping
from 40 percent to 12 percent.
While investment in technology and innovation will remain a priority for many oil
and gas firms in 2015, a significant proportion will struggle to maintain last year’s spending levels. Almost half (45
percent) expect investment in R&D to stay the same during 2015, while the number of those planning to cut R&D
investment has more than tripled since last year (up from 11 percent to 37 percent).
To adjust to this lower-margin environment, industry players need to develop a long-term sustainable cost
base. This can be done by taking a broader view, reducing complexity and standardising processes, materials and
documentation. We need to work together, and industry standards and guidelines must adapt to industry needs and
the advance of new technologies.
As an independent technical partner and adviser, DNV GL - Oil & Gas works with the industry to address these
issues. The company has 5,500 oil and gas specialists and 22 laboratories and R&D centres around the world and
this year we have initiated over 60 new joint industry projects (JIPs). Several of these address challenges the pipeline
industry faces around the world.
One such example is a JIP run from DNV GL’s laboratories in Singapore and Columbus, Ohio. Eight participants
have so far joined forces with us to develop a method to evaluate fractures and cracks using a Single Edge Notched
Tensile (SENT) test designed for sour service environments. Sour gas puts significant demand on pipeline material,
particularly in deeper water. It is evident in various oil and gas producing regions of the world, in particular, the
Middle East and the Commonwealth of Independent States. The JIP will enable the development of a guideline which
is likely to develop into a Recommended Practice to
help provide significant technical, logistical and financial
savings to the industry.
Arve Johan Kalleklev
REGIONAL MANAGER, SOUTH EAST ASIA, DNV GL – OIL & GAS
GlobalPerspective Industry Commentary from Around the World
Download a complimentary copy of A Balancing Act: The Outlook For
The Oil And Gas Industry In 2015: www.dnvgl.com/balancingact
Reserves are being explored in ever-deeper waters and remote locations where
development requires the oil and gas industry to push the boundaries of existing
technologies.
Last year, Lloyd’s Register Energy published a comprehensive industry report – Oil
And Gas Technology Radar 2014 – which examined the state of technology innovation
within the industry, including the motivators and barriers to implementation. Cost, not
technological capabilities, was identified as the greatest barrier.
“The [international oil companies] have great difficulty replacing their hydrocarbon
reserves, which drives them to go into the most challenging and expensive
environments,” says Duco De Haan, CEO of Lloyd’s Register Drilling Integrity Services. “As a result, costs have
exploded in the last four to five years.”
Nonetheless, technical innovation continues to be a central focus for subsea pipeline owners as they explore
operations at unprecedented new ocean depths.
To support asset integrity management programs, the industry is exploring the use of autonomous underwater
vehicles (AUVs) – which are docked and recharged subsurface – to perform routine visual inspections, free span pipe
monitoring, and cathodic protection surveys that detect corrosion.
In some cases, AUVs could replace current remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) and their support vessels,
potentially reducing cost and improving integrity management practices and maintenance activities.
Advancements in data analytics are also playing an increasingly important role in the integrity management
of pipelines. They are giving operators better visibility of the operating health of subsea pumps and the fluids
produced in subsea processing facilities, as well as helping to monitor the condition of the pipeline – including the
use of leak detection systems.
Pipelines, too, are undergoing a technological evolution with the emergence and application of thermoplastic
composite pipes. Both the polymers and fibre materials are composed of typical industry materials. The fibre,
which provides the strength within the composite, is comprised of materials such as glass or graphite fibres
and KEVLAR®.
Another exciting emerging technology is “additive manufacturing” for fabrication of subsea equipment. Since
deepwater processing facilities require thick-walled vessels to contain pressure, equipment such as gravity-based
separators have become large and difficult to transport when fabricated using solid steel plate.
But just as additive manufacturing offers an opportunity to customize materials, these variations from solid
materials can compromise the structural integrity of an asset in ways that would be new to the industry. Clearly, a
deeper understanding of the benefits and barriers to adoption is required.
Innovative new technologies continue to be developed as the easily accessible fields are depleted. These new
technologies bring improvements, but many also bring new limitations,
which require engineers to revisit accepted risk management
techniques, develop appropriate standards, procedures and
methodologies, and apply their experience in new ways.
Lloyd’s Register Energy’s “Oil and Gas Technology Radar"
report is available at: www.lr.org/technologyradar
KEVLAR®is a registered trademark of E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company and/or its affiliates.
Map & globe art by freevectormaps.com
ROVs at work on a subsea pipeline.

a full picture of the pipeline’s condition and, in
many cases, convincing them that these lines can’t
even be inspected.
An Inspection Breakthrough For
Difficult-To-Pig Lines
T.D. Williamson (TDW) recognized the challenge
of controlling drag to improve wall thickness
inspections in a small diameter, low flow, low
pressure environment. And, in response, the
company developed a 6-inch low drag deformation
and MFL inspection tool that, according to TDW
integrity expert Lloyd Pirtle, not only “removes or
minimizes” speed excursions, but makes it possible to
inspect lines long thought of as too difficult to pig.
“This tool and capability creates confidence,”
Pirtle says. “Operators can now collect geometry
and metal loss data to know what kind of shape
their system is in – even with low flow or low
pressure – while these critical pipelines remain in
service.
“For operators with similar obstacles who’ve
thought their lines weren’t piggable, what we’re
saying is, ‘here’s a tool that can make it piggable,’”
he adds.
The new 6-inch tool not only overcomes the
design compromises that restricted navigability and
wall thickness inspection in conventional small-
diameter MFL tools, it also includes geometry
inspection on the same platform for improved
threat assessment versus stand-alone MFL.
Its advantages include:
• Greater wall thickness capability
• Reduced drag
• Improved navigability
• Improved protection of the magnetizer
Successful Field Testing
Following extensive internal validation using
multiple 6-inch tool configurations, the low drag
tool was field-tested* in partnership with Access
Midstream, a natural gas service provider and
subsidiary of energy company Williams. The tool
was run seven times on pipelines in Texas’s Barnett
Shale, at pressures around 10.34 bar (150 psi).
According to Chuck Harris, Manager, Strategic
Commercialization at TDW, although some speed
excursions occurred with the low drag tool, they
weren’t on the magnitude of those experienced
with traditional inspection tools. The tool gathered
acceptable inline inspection data at pressures as low
as 8.27 bar (120 psi).
“The technology cannot overcome line
conditions completely,” Harris says. “What’s
important is the fact that it can run in pipelines even
at such low pressures.”
In other words, the new low drag tool essentially
opens previously difficult-to-inspect pipelines to
easier, more accurate assessment.
Which can also open operators’ minds to the
possibility of pigging.
7
6
T E C H N O L O G Y F O C U S
6
Every day, there’s another example of technology making
the impossible possible.
But making the difficult-to-pig easier-to-inspect?
That’s an entirely new triumph.
For natural gas operators, inspecting geometry and wall-loss in
small diameter gathering lines, especially in low flow, low pressure
environments, has been a challenge. So much so, in fact, that many
operators have their minds made up: it just can’t be done.
Now, however, there’s a new 6-inch inspection tool that overcomes
problems of size, flow, and pressure in these difficult pipelines.
Not only does it gather data for integrity assessments, it might just
change how operators view the possibility of pigging.
Avoiding Turbulence
An inline tool moves when pressure differentials around it are greater
than the friction produced by the tool itself. In the case of inspection
tools used to survey geometry and measure metal loss, progress through
pipelines is generally slow and steady. Accurate data is captured at
regular points along the line, creating a successful integrity assessment.
But during the inspection of small diameter, low flow, low pressure
pipelines, certain magnetic flux leakage (MFL) tool components – such
as urethane cups and brushes – make contact with the pipe’s interior.
This can create significant drag, which is additional frictional pressure
within the line. And drag can make an inline inspection (ILI) tool’s ride
turbulent, impairing its performance in compressible products such as
natural gas.
For one thing, drag can cause speed excursions, where the tool
accelerates abruptly and lurches ahead before returning to its normal
pace. Unless it stops completely. A standstill could last 10 seconds or
10 hours – sometimes even longer – and might eventually require an
intrusive intervention like having to cut out the MFL tool or launch a
foam pig from behind to push it along.
Drag-related speed excursions, which can be greatly exaggerated in
low pressure and low flow natural gas pipelines, prevent the ILI tool
from capturing data at every point – keeping operators from getting
*Download the white paper from Access
Midstream and TDW to learn more:
www.tdw-lflp.com
Turning Impossible
into Piggable
New 6-inch, low drag
inspection tool changes
how operators think about
assessing low flow, low
pressure lines
DEF2+MFL4 Drag Results
Drag comparison was performed
between multiple 6-inch configurations:
MFL: traditional stand-alone metal loss
inspection
DEF+MFL: traditional geometry
combined with metal loss inspection
DEF2+MFL4: newly designed geometry
combined with metal loss inspection
Drive: drive body only
DRAG TESTING
55%
59%
61%
68%
Drag reduction vs MFL in 0.188-inch
Wall Thickness (WT)
Drag reduction vs DEF+MFL in 0.188-inch WT
Drag reduction vs MFL in 0.388-inch WT
Drag reduction vs DEF+MFL in 0.388-inch WT

8
It Can Happen Here
Everyone has heard some variation of the classic “safety hero” narrative:
Someone – a technician or an engineer, or an especially observant
passerby – notices something suspicious. A warning light. An odd
sound or strange smell. Data that doesn’t add up. Acting on instinct, a
feeling that something just doesn’t feel “right,” they report what they’ve
noticed – and in doing so, they prevent a catastrophic accident.
There’s a reason stories like this are so popular. Everyone loves to
cheer when a hero saves the day and prevents a massive and costly
disaster. But according to Dr. Jan Hayes, associate professor at the
School of Property, Construction & Project Management at RMIT
University in Melbourne, Australia, these stories aren’t the only ones
worth telling.
Not every blinking light means a system failure, after all. And
not every strange sound or unusual smell means a disaster is on the
horizon.
But what about the people who report those non-disasters? They
still deserve recognition. They’re still heroes.
Cultivating Safety Imagination
In her recent book, titled “Nightmare Pipeline Failures: Fantasy
Planning, Black Swans and Integrity Management,” co-authored
with Professor Andrew Hopkins, Hayes examines several well-known
pipeline disasters. While the specifics vary from incident to incident,
there’s one common thread running through each case:
Somebody noticed something. And in every case,
that “something” was explained away as minor
and unworthy of immediate attention.
This tendency to look for alternate – and
less dire – explanations isn’t an indication
of laziness or inexperience. And it’s not
unusual, either. Hayes says it’s a psychological
process that happens so far below the surface
that operators aren’t even conscious of it. The
real culprit, she explains, is a lack of “safety
imagination”: Because most operators have never
experienced a disaster, they can’t imagine a disaster
actually happening.
Look at almost any major oil spill or gas leak,
Hayes says, and you’ll see the same pattern: There
was evidence, but nobody really believed it. Hayes
recalls experiencing a similar sense of disbelief
during her early career as a process engineer with a
major oil and gas company: She was
shocked when the North Sea Piper
Alpha oil platform accident claimed
the lives of more than 160 people.
“I just didn’t think things like
that could happen,” she says. “It’s
easy to have the mindset of, ‘It can’t
happen here because I’ve never seen
it happen here’ – but there’s always
the potential. Safety imagination is
about knowing in the back of your
mind that things can go wrong.”
But how do you encourage
employees to develop – and use – their safety
imagination when it comes to pipeline integrity?
How do you convince them to report anything
that seems suspicious, even if they’re fairly certain
it’s nothing major?
It’s a challenge, Hayes says. But with the right
cultural shifts, it’s not impossible.
The Benefits of “Chronic Unease”
Some safety experts and researchers use the term
“chronic unease” to describe the ideal approach
to safety. It’s the opposite of the “it can’t happen
here” mindset; an outlook that remains aware that
something could go wrong at any time. Chronic
unease means having specific, customized plans in
place for each type of accident; it means thinking
proactively about public safety rather than
focusing solely on compliance.
It also means encouraging people at all
levels of a company – from junior engineers
to maintenance people to C-level executives
– to think critically about safety. Some
organizations are accomplishing this by creating
specialized safety workshops aimed directly
at groups like executives and board members.
Others enact bonus systems that tie financial
rewards to process safety. The most important
thing to do, though, is to create a culture where
everyone feels empowered to speak up when they
notice something unusual – even if it turns out to
be nothing.
“We always hear about the guy who noticed
something and reported it, and if it wasn’t for him
there would have been a huge disaster,” Hayes
says. “That’s all well and good, but we also need
to hear about the guy who thought there was a
problem and reported it, and it turned out that
everything was fine. That guy should still be
congratulated – because it’s not about whether he
prevented a catastrophe. It’s about the fact that we
need those reports to be made.”
S A F E T Y M AT T E R S
Dr. Jan Hayes on safety
imagination, chronic
unease, and storytelling
9Some of the research on which this article draws was funded by the Energy Pipelines Cooperative Research Centre, supported through the Australian
Government’s Cooperative Research Centres Program. The cash and in-kind support from the Australian Pipeline Industry Association Research and
Standards Committee is gratefully acknowledged.
“We also need to hear
about the guy who
thought there was a
problem and reported
it, and it turned out that
everything was fine.”
Because most operators have never
experienced a disaster, they can’t
imagine a disaster actually happening.
SAFETY IMAGINATION:
Dr. Jan Hayes

10 11
Safe, cost-effective
compliance is
within reach
Federal regulators in the United States appear to be honing
in more than ever on bolstering natural gas transmission line safety.
And while everyone wants to be safer, achieving and maintaining full
regulatory compliance can be quite a challenge – and a costly one at that.
For more than a year, natural gas transmission operators have
been deciding how to address the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration’s (PHMSA) pending Integrity Verification
Process (IVP) regulation. The new regulation would require operators
to verify the records they use to establish and support the maximum
allowable operating pressure (MAOP) of pipelines in high and moderate
consequence areas.
Now, operators are digesting the 28 transmission line safety
recommendations that the National Transportation Safety Board
(NTSB) made in late January of this year – including one that would
require all natural gas transmission pipelines to be configured to
accommodate inline inspection (ILI) tools. The proposed NTSB
requirement specifically refers to the use of “smart pigs”, which are used
to record information about the mechanical condition of pipe material.
For a number of transmission line operators, the proposed ILI
requirement would be a tall order: While the use
of sophisticated ILI tools is considered a highly
effective method of detecting corrosion, weld
defects, and other risks to pipeline integrity, the
process simply isn’t an option for some transmission
pipelines. Acute angles, varying inside diameter and
incompatible pipeline pressure make these pipelines
unfriendly territory and significantly raise the risk
of lodging or damaging costly ILI tools as they are
propelled by product flow.
The prospect of making these ILI-unfriendly
transmission lines “piggable” has been a frequent
topic of discussion among American Gas
Association (AGA) members this year, says Andrew
Lu, the AGA’s Managing Director for Operations
and Engineering. Many operators worry that if the
NTSB’s pipeline safety recommendations result in
new regulations, they could be looking at significant
costs during a season of low oil prices.
Exacerbating those concerns is the risk of
revenue loss that comes with downtime, as operators
complete the modifications necessary to make their
pipelines compliant.
“There are a lot of conversations going on,” Lu
says. “Operators are asking, ‘What are the smart
practices for doing this? How do we know where
to start?’”
That’s not to say there hasn’t been activity in this
area. Some operators are doing more than talking
about the changes on the horizon. A handful of
companies are already taking steps to get ahead of
the regulatory curve.
In a March press release, Pacific Gas & Electric
Co. (PG&E) welcomed the NTSB’s 28 safety
recommendations for the gas pipeline industry
– including the call for more inline inspections.
Executive Vice President of Gas Operations Nick
Stavropoulos said PG&E would be working to
“explore and leverage innovation in developing
new inline inspection technologies to inspect
pipelines previously considered ‘uninspectable’ with
commercially available tools.”
COST-SAVING OPTIONS
Whether operators wait to see if the NTSB’s
recommendations become regulation or they opt to
take a more proactive approach, they should know
that modifying transmission lines is achievable – and
it’s far less complicated and costly than many believe.
The most desirable modification method is one
that is safe and does not require line shutdown or
interruption to flow. This can be achieved with
proven hot tapping and plugging (HT&P)
processes, which allows operators to isolate and
bypass short lengths of pipe while modifications or
tie-ins are made.
Today, operators can employ HT&P methods
like a double block and bleed isolation with the
STOPPLE® Train isolation system, developed by
T.D. Williamson (TDW). In conjunction with a
bypass, the system allows lines to be modified for
inspection safely and cost-effectively without the loss
of revenue associated with line shutdowns.
A recent case study calculates the difference
between an operator’s line-replacement costs for
a project that includes a pipeline shutdown and
completing the same project with a standard
HT&P process – along with the costs of using the
STOPPLE Train isolation system. The results, which
show significant savings with the HT&P process –
and even greater savings with the STOPPLE Train
system – are shown below:
MORE STRINGENT
SAFETY REGULATIONS
COULD BE ON HORIZON FOR U.S. TRANSMISSION PIPELINES
F U T U R E T H I N K I N G
SHUT DOWN
Lost Opportunity Due To No Flow 15%
Internal Costs 51%
Isolation Service Provider Cost –
Job Site Charges 34%
—
38%
16%
32%
—
38%
16%
23%
STANDARD ISOLATION STOPPLE®TRAIN ISOLATION
OPERATOR'S LINE
REPLACEMENT COSTS
Operator Savings
over shutdown: 18% 23%
CONTINUED ON PAGE 27

12 13
Play-specific services
model supports
profitability in low
price environment
Business as Usual
As any operator in the Eagle Ford knows, pipeline
service and supply needs are often dictated by
play-specific issues. And one of the area’s most
problematic issues is paraffin. Paraffin buildup clogs
lines, reduces throughput, and increases compression
costs. It can also trap water and
encourage buildup of dangerous
hydrogen sulfide.
The battle against paraffin
buildup can be costly and time-
consuming – and it can be a source
of frequent emergency (or “pop-
up”) supply needs. Hurst recalls
one Eagle Ford operator who was
especially concerned about sourcing
an aggressive cleaning tool, the
PitBoss™ Cleaning Pig. With plenty
of notice, it wasn’t hard to get these
8-inch mandrel pigs shipped in from
another location, but for a pop-up
situation, there wasn’t time to wait
several days for a replacement.
The operator reached out to
Hurst. Due to the ongoing dialogue
and service agreements between
the service center and local operators, Hurst
had anticipated the need – and TDW had the
appropriate safety stock level.
“It’s all part of being partners and problem-
solvers,” Hurst says. By listening to operators and
monitoring what products they need – and how
often they need them – local service centers are able
to ease one of the most common pain points for
Eagle Ford operators: Wait time.
“We operate as a storefront in the Eagle Ford,”
Hurst says. “Rather than waiting days or weeks,
operators can stop by the warehouse and pick up
what they need on the way to a jobsite.”
As the service landscape in the play is changing,
stories like this are becoming increasingly common:
Early in 2015, a gas transmission line running from
the Eagle Ford to Mexico became obstructed,
dramatically affecting the flow to thousands of
customers. It was a weekend, and it could have been
a challenge getting a crew of qualified technicians
on a plane fast enough to prevent a serious service
disruption. But under this new local supply model,
a team from the region was out to the site within a
few hours.
At one time, this would have been fairly
unusual. Today, though, operator access to same-day
service and critical supplies is just business as usual.
Whether in the Eagle Ford, Marcellus, or Bakken,
local sourcing helps operators ensure long-term
profit and stability.
Despite the current low price environment, many of the industry’s
major players remain committed to the Eagle Ford long-game,
including Anadarko, BP, Koch, Marathon, and Shell, to name a few.
To ensure stable profitability these operators are learning to increase
efficiencies while lowering their operating costs.
But until recently, this could be a problem, particularly when it came
to completing repairs or maintenance within tight time constraints.
Over the last two years, though, operators have adopted a play-specific
pipeline services supply model that provides near-instant access to
maintenance, supplies, and repairs. This shift is helping keep costs down
and product flowing in the massive – but isolated – play.
Waiting Doesn’t Pay
When Doug Hurst, a veteran oil and gas manager, joined T.D.
Williamson (TDW) in the Eagle Ford in 2013, he spent several
months driving back and forth getting to know local operators. He
put 93,000 kilometers (58,000 miles) on his brand-new Jeep, but
the mileage was worth it. Hurst learned a lot about the issues facing
operators, and about why it was difficult for them to predict their
service and supply needs.
Some of what Hurst learned was surprising: It wasn’t unusual
for a simple pipeline maintenance or repair issue to slow – or even
temporarily shut down – production. Operators would sometimes
wait days or weeks for help or product to arrive from a major service
or supply hub outside of the play, or even outside of the region.
“Operators can’t afford that kind of downtime,” says Hurst. “Your
throughput is your cash register. If oil isn’t flowing because you’re
waiting for a part or a technician, you’re not getting paid.”
Hurst, who has helped develop a newly opened San Antonio
service center for TDW, has spent the last 18 months working closely
with operators to determine which types of equipment and service
schedules best meet their needs, and creating service agreements that
guarantee availability. The result has been a collaborative partnership
that gives operators access to personalized supplies and services –
when they need them.
Shale play operators share this common goal: to guarantee the health and safety of employees
and the communities they work in. To meet this goal, operators rely on the highest quality
products and services to assist them in reducing environmental impact and mitigating the risk of
leaks and ethane emissions. The local pipeline services supply model helps fulfill this goal.
Local Sourcing
in the Eagle Ford
“Your throughput is your cash register. If oil
isn’t flowing because you’re waiting for a part
or a technician, you’re not getting paid.”
M A R K E T R E P O R T

INNOVATIONS•VOL.VII,NO.3•2015COVERSTORY
15
14
The United States Department of Defense is locked in
battle against a ‘pervasive menace.’
But this time, the enemy isn’t terrorism, despots, or nuclear
proliferation.
Instead, it’s corrosion.
The U.S. Pentagon spends about US$22.5 billion per
year defending American military assets and infrastructure
against corrosion. Which makes the label “pervasive menace”
understandable, if not even
a little mild.
But as hefty as that
multibillion-dollar figure
is, it represents just a
drop in the old, rusty
bucket compared to the
global price tag: at US$2.2
trillion, the annual cost
of corrosion around the
globe amounts to between 3 and 4 percent of the GDP of the
world’s industrialized countries. That’s according to the World
Corrosion Organization, which keeps tabs on such things.
The financial impact of metal corrosion in Europe alone
exceeds US$1.4 trillion a year. And as Dr. Roger King,
Ph.D., reminds pipeline operators, about 40 percent of
pipeline failures result from corrosion, although not all
of those failures result in incidents.
In other words, there’s a lot of stuff breaking
down right now, a lot of deterioration that needs
to be identified and fixed before a failure or
catastrophe occurs.
In some cases, of course, it’s already
too late. And the media is increasingly
tuned to such events. Which means
the public is, too.
GLOBAL PRICE TAG
FOR CORRODING
INFRASTRUCTURE
US$2.2
TRILLION
As the public becomes increasingly aware of the problems associated
with corrosion, they’re demanding more information about the
condition of the world’s pipelines. Operators are acting now, using
detection and control best practices to help people be – and feel – safe.

The Insidious Enemy Within
In a recent article called “Rust Never Sleeps,”
which appeared in the March 2015 issue of The
Atlantic magazine, writer Tim Heffernan ticks
off a list of devastating and deadly incidents
resulting directly from “seemingly mundane”
corrosion: the rupture of a high-pressure
natural gas pipeline near the American city of
Charleston, West Virginia, in 2012 that melted
800 feet of interstate highway; the deaths of five
people in Malta when their lifeboat fell from the
side of a cruise ship during a safety drill; a series
of sewer explosions in Guadalajara, Mexico,
in 1992 that killed 252; and the 1971 crash of
British European Airways Flight 706, which
took 63 lives.
For the uninitiated reader, those are pretty
frightening tales. For those who deal daily with the
risks of corrosion, they’re the stuff of nightmares.
Although Heffernan’s larger point – that the
fight against “the insidious enemy within,” is being
lost – is directed specifically at the United States,
it’s the same story all over the world.
Even in the digital age,
he claims, we still rely on “massive, interwoven,
mechanical” infrastructure. That “big stuff,” he
says, is rusting.
The fact that a piece about corrosion would
make a publication like The Atlantic, aimed at a
general, albeit well-educated, audience, suggests
that concerns about it are no longer exclusively
the province of scientists, engineers, and infra-
structure operators. And it’s no accident that the
ravages of corrosion are rippling into mainstream
consciousness.
Out From Underground,
And Into The Mainstream
One of the groups working to increase awareness
is the New York-based World Corrosion
Organization (WCO), whose mission is to
“facilitate global implementation of best practices
in corrosion protection for public welfare.” Since
2010, WCO has sponsored Corrosion Awareness
Day. This year’s event was April 24.
According to WCO Director General, George
Hay, Corrosion Awareness Day is a “means to
educate the public, industries and government
agencies of the deleterious effects of corrosion on
our infrastructures worldwide.”
As Hay noted in a statement, “The worldwide
cost of corrosion is currently in the same order of
magnitude as the cost to produce and distribute
food worldwide. The difference is that the public
is somewhat aware of issues related to hunger and
the cost of food, but totally unaware of the cost of
corrosion today and its effect on sustainability of
our infrastructures in the future.”
‘A Blender Pureeing The
Remains Of A Mardi Gras Float’
In the United States, however, more people grasped
those concerns after the TV news show “60 Minutes”
aired a story, in November 2014, called “Falling
Apart: America’s Neglected Infrastructure.” It
highlighted the nation’s outdated roads, airports and
rails, its 70,000 structurally-deficient bridges – 15
percent of them “at risk of catastrophic, corrosion-
related failure,” according to NACE International,
the technical society for corrosion professionals –
and the lack of funding to take care of any of it.
But one part of the story was missing, NACE
International said in a public response issued
shortly after the broadcast. And that was a key
solution to infrastructure woes: corrosion control.
The organization argued that “what’s forgotten
is that corrosion-control technology and effective
management practices can extend the life of
bridges and other infrastructure well beyond
original design life.”
NACE International is working with local,
state, and federal governments on policies to
“eliminate the devastating effects of corrosion and
strengthen public safety.”
It’s possible that some of that work took place
at the organization’s Corrosion 2015 conference in
Dallas, Texas, in March. The five-day gathering,
which drew some 7,000 attendees, was covered
with wide-eyed wonder by The Dallas Morning
News. Reporter Marc Ramirez seemed especially
enthralled by an electrode rotator that mimics fluid
flow to test the efficacy of offshore coatings. The
device had been filled with what Ramirez referred
to as ‘sparkly items’ to demonstrate its whirlpool
effect. It looked, the reporter said, like “a blender
pureeing the remains of a Mardi Gras float.”
Corrosion, Chapter-By-Chapter,
Mile-By-Mile
Exposés and news articles aside, if anything
is likely to boost public attention to corrosion,
it will be Jonathan Waldman’s new book,
Rust: The Longest War.
Journalist Waldman’s
journey into what the dust
jacket describes as “a thrilling
drama of man versus nature”
takes him from corporate
hallways to hardware stores,
from a tropical Florida film set
to the subzero Arctic. That’s
where he starts to follow, nearly mile-by-mile, the
trek of a smart pig (inline inspection tool) through
the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS). The 54-
page chapter called Pigging the Pipe recounts initial
failures, subsequent successes, and the retrieval of
data that uncovers nearly 1,000 anomalies, some
three-quarters of them corrosion-related.
Waldman’s prose is matched by his humor – he
refers to a conventional pig as a “red urethane
pig of lesser intelligence” and explains how wax
can render “smart pigs senseless, leaving them
blind, dumb, and amnesiac.” He’s also got a keen
way of bringing the concept of pigging down to
human scale and layman terms. While it’s unlikely
that terms like coupons, magnetic flux leakage,
slacklines, and MAOP will roll off the tongues
of casual readers, at least they’ll have a basic
understanding of what all that means.
According to Waldman, TAPS was at first
called rustproof. Unfortunately, its principal
protection was a painted coating that proved
vulnerable within a number of years. The anti-
corrosion system was eventually fortified with
buried magnesium anodes (“mag bags”), cathodic
protection, and 800 monitoring coupons. But
Waldman notes that it’s due largely to the work of
inline inspection (ILI) tools finding faults before
they could become failures that TAPS hasn’t
suffered a corrosion-induced leak since it began
operating in 1977.
As A Best Practice,
Monitoring Beats Inspection
It’s likely that all of this increased attention around
corrosion issues will lead to greater public scrutiny
of the oil and gas pipeline industry.
1716
COVERSTORY

Rust author Waldman is all in favor of it.
As he writes, “Opposing the construction of
new pipelines is silly … Pipelines are the safest
way to deliver oil. Demanding that we know the
condition that pipelines are in, on the other hand,
is not silly.”
Keeping pipelines in top condition is an
industrywide activity, of course. But delineating
best practices from a global perspective means
talking to people like Dr. Liane Smith, FREng,
and Richard Norsworthy. They were among a
group of experts asked by global pipeline services
provider T.D. Williamson to share their opinions
about what works best when it comes to detecting
and protecting against corrosion.
Materials and corrosion expert Liane Smith is
a Fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineers. That
means she’s achieved the
United Kingdom’s top honor
recognizing engineering
researchers, innovators, and
leaders.
The managing director
of asset integrity company
WG INTETECH, Chester,
England, Smith earned a
Ph.D. in laser
welding from
Sheffield University
and is the author of
94 technical papers and
one book.
Although she wasn’t
referring specifically to TAPS’s
800 monitored coupons, Smith says
that in a contest between corrosion
monitoring and inline inspection, she’d
put her money on the latter. Literally.
“Monitoring gets you almost nowhere,” she
says. “It’s not even worth installing. I’d put all of
my investment into inspection.”
The problem, Smith explains, is that
monitoring is tied to specific locations. Weight loss
coupons, for example, are effective at providing
real time readings, but just for certain points on
the pipeline. And because the flow regime around
a coupon might differ from the rest of the pipeline,
the information can’t be generalized beyond the
coupon itself.
Even worse is the fact that corrosion coupons
are notorious for producing ‘false positives.’
“There’ve been countless times when we’ve
seen negligible corrosion on a coupon, when
actually there’s a lot of corrosion in the pipe,”
she says.
Inline inspection can overcome those
deficiencies, Smith says, providing a highly
accurate picture of the condition of the line along
its whole length. She advocates starting an inline
inspection regimen soon after the pipeline is put in
service to capture baseline data that will be useful
in later comparisons. Through multiple inspections,
operators can identify trends, improve inspection
scheduling, and know with greater precision the
time to failure.
And what about lines that aren’t considered
piggable – or aren’t “fully inspectable,” as Smith
prefers to call them?
Smith says that bi-directional inline inspection
tools can at least provide information about certain
sections of the pipe. By coupling that data with
corrosion modeling of the whole line, she explains,
the operator will have “some calibration around
areas that can’t be inspected, gaining clarity for
business critical decisions.”
It would be best, Smith feels, if pipelines were
designed with inline inspection in mind.
“The costs of doing things right at the start
are far less than the hassles that could come later,”
she says.
No Such Thing As Unpiggable
When it comes to unpiggable lines, Norsworthy’s
view might be even more extreme than Smith’s.
“Most lines are piggable, with very few
exceptions,” the NACE International corrosion
and cathodic protection (CP) specialist and
instructor says flatly. “It just takes time, money,
and effort. But it always pays off.”
And right now is the best time for operators
to take the time and effort to inspect their lines,
Norsworthy says.
“In a low-price environment, when there
aren’t as many new projects, operators have the
opportunity to find new issues before they become
more serious,” he explains. “They can correct
corrosion issues, do rehabilitation work, apply new
external coatings.”
In Norsworthy’s view, it’s those external coatings
that are “the first line of defense” against corrosion.
But that first line isn’t always impenetrable,
says the 30-year industry veteran, who is widely
acknowledged as a leader in his field.
“Several pipeline companies now list disbonded
CP shielding coatings as their number one root
cause of external corrosion,” Norsworthy says.
Disbonding is the loss of adhesion between
metal and cathodic coatings that allows water,
bacteria, and other corrosion instigators to creep
in between the disbonded coating and the pipe. In
addition, some disbonded coatings prevent cathodic
protection currents from protecting the pipe.
As Norsworthy explains, electromagnetic
acoustic transducer (EMAT) technology can locate
areas where coatings have separated from metal.
Once identified, they can often be remediated with
mesh-backed tapes or other coatings that will allow
cathodic protection to work, should disbondment
occur again.
But although repair is possible, selecting the
proper coating for the environment, followed
by rigorous inspection to ensure the coating has
properly adhered in the first place – especially on
girth welds, “where most corrosion takes place
today” – is a far smarter strategy, Norsworthy says.
Bringing Corrosion Out Of Hiding
Is a population that thinks of rust as something
occurring mainly on old cars and paint can
lids ready to learn that their military considers
corrosion a significant threat? Can they cope with
the notion of rotting bridges? What about the idea
that the vast network of pipelines under their feet
could be vulnerable, too?
The fact is, whether people are ready or not,
corrosion is becoming less of a secret. Which gives
the oil and gas industry an opportunity to get in
on the conversation, letting the public know all
that’s being done to help keep them safe from this
“pervasive menace.”
Dr. Liane Smith
1918
INNOVATIONS•VOL.VII,NO.3•2015COVERSTORY

2120
TDW experts deliver — providing technical presentations
and hands-on demonstrations throughout the world.
To learn more: tdwontour@tdwilliamson.com.
TDW Events, Papers & Conferences
TouchPoints
Oil Sands
15-16 SEPTEMBER | Fort McMurray, AB | Canada
SEPTEMBER 2015 OCTOBER 2015
31 AUG - 2 SEPT
NACE Central Area Conference
St. Louis, MO, USA
15-16 Oil Sands
Fort McMurray, AB, Canada
20-22 Arkansas Gas Association
Hot Springs, AR, USA
22-23 North American Pipeline Congress
Chicago, IL, USA
22-24 Rio Pipeline
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
5-9 Aging Pipelines Conference
Ostend, Belgium
12-15 Road Expo
Moscow, Russia
17-20 Australian Pipelines and Gas
Association Convention
Gold Coast, QLD, Australia
21-22 Offshore Technology Days
Stavanger, Norway
21-22 OPT Asia
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
25-27 DUG Eagle Ford
San Antonio, TX, USA
26-29 ASNT Annual Conference
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Rio Pipeline
22-24 SEPTEMBER | Rio de Janeiro | Brazil
Aging Pipelines Conference
5-9 OCTOBER | Ostend | Belgium
OPT Asia
21-22 OCTOBER | Kuala Lumpur | Malaysia
SGA Operating
Conference & Exhibits
20-22 JULY | Nashville, TN | USA
LGA Pipeline Safety Conference
20-24 JULY | New Orleans, LA | USA
MEA Gas Operations Technical
& Leadership Summit
11-13 AUGUST | Rochester, MN | USA
FEPA Summer Symposium
12-13 AUGUST | Palm Coast, FL | USA
The Pipeline & Energy Expo
25-26 AUGUST | Tulsa, OK | USA
NACE Central Area Conference
31 AUGUST - 2 SEPTEMBER | St. Louis, MO | USA
Arkansas Gas Association
20-22 SEPTEMBER | Hot Springs, AR | USA
North American Pipelines Congress
22-23 SEPTEMBER | Chicago, IL | USA
DUG Eagle Ford
25-27 OCTOBER | San Antonio, TX | USA
ASNT Annual Conference
26-29 OCTOBER | Salt Lake City | USA
North American Pipleline Congress (NAPC)
CHICAGO, IL | Sept 22-23, 2015
The Road Ahead: North America’s Pipeline Future
Abdel Zellou, Ph.D. – T.D.Williamson
This opening executive panel explores industry advancements and challenges in
2015. Panelists will provide a market overview and examine what is impacting
the infrastructure deficit, while providing insights into key questions.
New Infrastructure: Planned Project Developments
Mike Kirkwood, Ph.D. – T.D.Williamson
Panelists will explore what is required from the industry to reach the forecasted
project developments. The session will examine upcoming project developments
in the midstream sector, including regional challenges impacting proposed builds.
JULY 2015
20-22 SGA Operating Conference & Exhibits
Nashville, TN, USA
20-24 LGA Pipeline Safety Conference
New Orleans, LA, USA
AUGUST 2015
11-13 MEA Gas Operations Technical &
Leadership Summit
Rochester, MN, USA
12-13 FEPA Summer Symposium
Palm Coast, FL, USA
25-26 The Pipeline & Energy Expo
Tulsa, OK, USA
IndicatesTDW will present
a white paper at this event.
IndicatesTDW will speak
or facilitate at this event.
Road Expo
12-15 OCTOBER | Moscow | Russia
Offshore Technology Days
21-22 OCTOBER | Stavanger | Norway
Australian Pipelines and
Gas Association Convention
17-20 OCTOBER | Gold Coast, QLD | Australia

22 23
INNOVATIONS•VOL.VII,NO.3•2015FEATURESTORY
• Isolating High Risk Construction
• Preventive Measures
• Evolving Use for Non-Intrusive
Inline Isolations
• Pipe-Laying Protection
• End of the Wet Buckle
• Reducing the Inevitable
On a Sunday night in the North Sea, workers aboard the
Brent Alpha platform started a new workweek off on the wrong foot.
Their Monday morning would begin a few hours early – with an
evacuation. A crane had malfunctioned, and the large container it carried
had been dropped into the North Sea, instead of being safely winched
onto a support vessel.
The container sliced through the water heading toward a vulnerable
subsea pipeline. If impacted by the container, the pipeline could
rupture. And a rupture would be a complete disaster: Not only would
product spill into the sea, but a flashback of flammable oil or gas into
the platform could cause danger to personnel and equipment, and gas
clouds could form causing vessel-sinking bubbles.
Fortunately, the workweek didn’t begin with a dangerous pipeline
rupture. But 54 workers were evacuated from the Alpha platform,
and both the Alpha and Bravo facilities were depressurized while the
MITIGATE OFFSHORE INCIDENTS
Containing
CatastropheNON-INTRUSIVE ISOLATION TECHNOLOGIES

FEATURESTORY
24 25
container was recovered by a support vessel. The
incident was labeled a “near miss,” so the only real
consequences were financial.
Although cost and reputation are certainly
important to offshore operators, a dropped object
incident could have been much worse, even fatal.
While subsea pipelines face a host of threats –
corrosion, natural disasters, and anchor drag – some
of the biggest risks come from planned operations.
These might include laying new pipelines, raising
platforms, or construction efforts like tying in new
wells. For this reason, many operators – including
the one mentioned – now go beyond standard
safety training and regulatory compliance to invest
in advanced risk mitigation technologies, such as
non-intrusive inline isolation systems, to protect
their assets.
Isolating High Risk Construction
Dropped objects in offshore operations rarely make
the news, but low probability impact accidents like
the above-described are actually one of the biggest
risks to offshore pipelines, accounting for the most
severe potential consequences.
During construction and platform
maintenance, construction vessels will often come
alongside the platform, potentially dropping
or dragging anchor onto or near pipelines, and
hoisting equipment that could potentially fall into
the ocean. Although offshore operators already
implement many safety and risk mitigation
procedures to identify and avoid the pipelines in
their operational area, due to the extreme severity
of a dropped object impact, they take extra
precautions during these events.
As with any construction near a pipeline, the
absolute safest approach would be to bleed down
or decommission all pipelines in the dropped
object zone until the work is complete. But as
it can take several months before some offshore
platform interventions are complete, and bleeding
down a pipeline is an extremely costly proposition
for the operator – not to mention a major
disruption for downstream customers – work must
often take place while the lines are active.
For example, in 2009, a gas processing
platform offshore Myanmar required a new
pipeline connection to retrieve gas from a
neighboring field. The platform would not be
in production during the tie-in operation, but
the operator needed to keep its large gas export
line live, in temporary “shut-in” condition, to
avoid full decommission. This was critical to
the operator as the export line, which runs 370
kilometers (230 miles) to shore and then onshore
to the border of Thailand, delivers up to 20
percent of Thailand’s energy. Following the new
tie-in, swiftly resuming flow was essential.
Beginning from the existing platform, the
pipe lay vessel proceeded to lay the new line. To
protect and isolate the existing export line during
the pipelaying activity, the operator used a double
block and monitor solution, the DNV-approved
SmartPlug® isolation tool. This isolation would
ensure that if the export pipeline was damaged
during tie-in, it would be safely isolated to prevent
product loss or gas flashback.
The SmartPlug tool, developed by T.D.
Williamson (TDW), was pigged from the platform
into positon, set, and remotely monitored to safely
isolate the area surrounding the platform during
the entire operation. Once complete, the tool was
unset and pigged back to the receiver.
Preventive Measures
While double block and monitor inline isolation
has become the industry’s standard method for
non-intrusive isolation, utilized in all regions of the
globe to protect against the consequences of dropped
objects, it is also relied on for risk reduction during
general offshore maintenance work.
In 2009, Australia experienced one of its
worst oil spill disasters when an incident on an
offshore drilling rig in the Timor Sea resulted in
150 kilometers (93 miles) of polluted ocean and
evacuation of all personnel. The incident was
caused by the cracking of a sub-surface concrete
plug during work on a wellhead. During attempts
to stop the leak, the West Atlas offshore platform
caught fire. Australia declared the incident to be a
national disaster.
Although the Australian disaster was not related
to a dropped object and ruptured subsea pipeline,
this incident provided the impetus for Australia’s
offshore oil and gas regulatory body, NOPSEMA,
to prescribe the use of isolation plugs, like the
SmartPlug isolation system, as a preventive measure
for offshore pipeline interventions. By implementing
such regulation the severity of similar future
incidents would be greatly reduced.
Evolving Use for Non-Intrusive
Inline Isolations
Due, in part, to the industry adoption of the double
block and monitor isolation method – and the
proven technology that makes it work – offshore
operators sought to apply a similar approach to
mitigating the risk of wet buckle during subsea pipe
laying (one of the most costly undertakings in the
offshore industry).
Although isolating pipeline while laying it
may seem like a somewhat different endeavor than
isolating a pipeline to safeguard against dropped
objects or during maintenance, the theory behind
the two systems is actually quite similar.
In each instance, the isolation system is set
in place to safely maintain the integrity of the
pipeline. In the case of isolations during pipe
laying, however, the isolation happens much more
quickly and only as needed.
Pipe-Laying Protection
Laying subsea pipelines requires a long string of
pipeline to be carefully placed on a seabed up to
3,000 meters (1.8 miles) below the water’s surface.
The vessel moves along laying pipe, with each 12
meter pipe joint being welded to the next to form a
suspended string (or chain) that is then lowered to
the seafloor as the vessel moves along by its
own propulsion.
During the pipe laying process – due to the
occasional propulsion system malfunction, or the
inadvertent effects of waves and currents – the vessel
can pitch or sway outside normal operating limits.
This can create a buckle at the point that the string
of pipe has the largest curvature (i.e., where it leaves
the vessel or where it joins the seabed).
Two things can happen when the pipe buckles:
in one instance, the buckle will flatten the pipe
together, but it will not break. This is called a “dry
buckle,” and can be fixed by going back and cutting
the joint, moving back and cutting more, until the
buckle is encountered and pulled out. Then the lay
vessel will start that section over.
Although a dry buckle wastes pipeline materials
and time, it’s nowhere near the cost of the second
instance – a wet buckle.
When a wet buckle occurs, the pipeline
is severed and water enters the line, filling the
suspended section that is being laid. This causes
several problems: for one, the lay vessel is calculated
to hold the pipeline at a certain weight and let it out
as it moves forward, but when it is filled with water,
the pipe becomes much heavier.
“There are only two or three lay vessels in the
world that can hold a deepwater pipeline filled with
water,” cautions George Lim, an offshore expert
with TDW. “The vessel has a maximum tension
capacity and if the pipeline becomes too heavy it
will pull the chain out of the lay vessel.”
And if the pipeline comes loose, it can flail
Wet Buckle

26 27
around uncontrollably, risking massive damage to
the lay vessel and people on board before falling
down to the seabed.
Another consequence of a wet buckle is that the
seawater and soil contaminate the newly laid line,
meaning that the operator must dewater it before
the vessel can start laying pipeline again. Dewatering
is a lengthy process. First, the damaged area of the
line is cut, then pigs with special inhibitors are
pushed to dry the line so that it can
be picked up again and the laying
process can continue.
Dewatering is also expensive,
requiring a fleet of pumps and
compressors to be on standby. The
rental fee for this spread, which can
occupy an area the size of a football
field, is significant. In addition, the
lay vessels cost around US$500,000
per day or more and will be delayed
on standby while the line is dewatered.
End of the Wet Buckle
Until recently, there were no viable methods for
preventing flooding as a consequence of a wet buckle.
However, TDW has developed the SmartLay™ pipe-
laying isolation system – based on some of the key
design aspects of the proven SmartPlug isolation tool.
When laying pipe, one method of deploying the
SmartLay isolation tool is to pull it forward inside
the line via cable running through the suspended
section of pipe. Another method is pulling it forward
by means of a self-contained vehicle (tractor or
crawler) set in front of the SmartLay tool. When
a new joint is welded onto the pipeline, the tool is
advanced in the line. In a normal situation, it glides
through the pipe as it’s laid, but if the line buckles
and there is water ingress, the tool immediately
senses the seawater and sets itself in the pipe within
one second – preventing water from flooding the
pipe.
Typically, a minimum of one such device is
present to close off the newly laid pipeline on the
seabed. Additional devices can be placed in the
buckling “zone” (i.e., where the line leaves the
vessel and where it joins the seabed). Then, the
flooded section between the buckle and SmartLay
tool can be simply cut out before continuing the
laying process.
According to Lim, the SmartLay isolation tool –
already delivered to a few major offshore operators
who have further developed deployment methods
to suit their particular pipelay operations – prevents
flooding of the pipeline, reduces risk to personnel,
and eliminates the need and extreme cost to dewater.
Reducing the Inevitable
Every year the offshore industry adopts more
regulations and safety processes, and we are indeed
safer for it. However, regardless of how many
preventive procedures are put in place, accidents
– even low-probability ones – will still occur. So,
although these advancing isolation technologies
can’t reduce the probability of an incident, they can
reduce the consequences.
“The SmartLay and SmartPlug systems are
risk reduction tools,” explains Lim. “Risk is
equal to the probability of failure multiplied
by the consequence. Tools like these reduce the
consequences of an unfortunate incident.”
Internal costs generally
comprise an operator’s project
management, from engineering
designs to environmental
remediation. Direct job site costs
encompass third-party vendors
and their work, from welders to
the excavation process.
The study’s conservative calculations are based
on a completed project where the operator owned
the pipeline system, but not the product it carries.
“If there’s a shutdown for an operator that owns all
of the assets, the shutdown cuts off their supply
of incoming cash flow and becomes even more
expensive,” says project author Veronyca Kwan, a
Senior Business Market Analyst with TDW.
Income loss is one of the primary concerns
facing transmission line operators as they try to
decide how and when to respond to the NTSB’s ILI
recommendations. And the ability to prevent such
losses – by continuing pipeline operations – is one of
the key reasons that HT&P procedures could prove
hugely beneficial to operators that move forward
with a multiyear modification project to get their
pipeline system in compliance.
In the case of STOPPLE Train
isolation technology, shutdown
prevention is one of several features
that could make compliance with
the NTSB recommendations more
cost-effective, says Grant Cooper,
Manager of Commercialization,
HT&P Technology, for TDW.
“What we’ve done is expand
standard block and bleed
technology, so you can weld two
fittings on the pipeline, instead of
four,” Cooper says. “In one fitting
you have a double block and bleed
isolation, which means it’s not only
less costly, it’s even safer.”
The two independent seals used
to establish the system’s double
block and bleed capability also increase the
likelihood of a successful workable seal on
the first try, another cost-saving feature. In addition,
the system reduces the size of the excavation
needed to access the pipe – lowering equipment
costs – and minimizes the risk of costly third-party
damage.
And in certain circumstances, the system allows
operators to run a bypass directly through the
housing of the plugging system, further reducing
the need for additional fittings and associated costs.
Whether they choose the standard HT&P
process or more advanced isolation technology, the
strategic investments in line modifications will not
only help operators achieve compliance with the
NTSB’s recommendations, the work will enhance
their pipeline integrity management programs,
provide operators with more actionable inline
inspection data, and help them safely maximize
throughput.
Future Thinking
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 11
= PROBABILITY OF FAILURE X CONSEQUENCERISK * NTSB Study: www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Documents/
2015_Gas_Transmission_SS_BMG_Abstract.pdf
TDW e-book on pending IVP regulations:
www.TDW-IVP.com
Operators worry that if the NTSB’s pipeline
safety recommendations result in new
regulations, they could be looking at significant
costs during a season of low oil prices.
If the line buckles and there is water
ingress, the tool immediately senses
the seawater and sets itself in the
pipe within one second – preventing
water from flooding the pipe.
Double Double Stopple Train Isolation with Bypass

28
BY THE
NUMBERS 4Battling Pipeline Integrity Threats
steps to
PIPELINE INTEGRITY: A COMPREHENSIVE VIEW
Pipeline operators face the continual challenge of delivering energy to the
world in the safest and most economical ways. They battle aging infrastructure,
weather economic pressures, adjust to increasing regulation, and engage
communities to achieve social license. Fortunately, continual advances in
pipeline threat detection, such as multiple dataset platforms, are supporting
them every inch of the way. Follow steps 1-4 to see how.
DETECT While running an MDS platform,
mechanical (i.e., third-party) damage is detected
by a number of onboard technologies.
CHARACTERIZE Each technology on the MDS platform
provides a unique layer of damage information, providing full
characterization of the threat.
PRIORITIZE/MITIGATE With the final integrity report
delivered in close proximity to the inspection, the pipeline
operator is able to:
REPORT When critically assessed by specialized software and data analysts, the
overlapping MDS data helps determine the exact characteristics and severity of the entire
series of interacting threats – a re-rounded dent with gouging and crack-like features.
Metal loss, re-rounding, cycling, dent length and depth, strain and severity ranking.
• Assess the pipeline’s most
critical needs
• Prioritize maintenance/repair
based on severity
• Minimize cost by avoiding
unnecessary digs
• Ensure safe operation for its
employees and the community
MULTIPLE DATASET
(MDS) PLATFORMS can
supply pipeline operators with a
comprehensive view of their line
integrity by providing a vehicle
for an evolving combination of
overlapping inspection technol-
ogies to be run on a single
tool, at the same time.
THE RESULT: robust threat
detection and advanced
characterization.
Locates the anomaly relative
to the centerline of the pipe.
XYZ MAPPING
DEFORMATION
LOW FIELD MAGNETIC
FLUX LEAKAGE
Defines the anomaly as a dent.
Identifies re-rounding
(or rebounding) of the dent.
Recognizes volumetric
metal loss within the dent.
HIGH RESOLUTION
MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE
SpirALL® MAGNETIC
FLUX LEAKAGE
Identifies axially oriented metal
loss or gouging within the dent.
SMFL
LFM
MFL
DEF
XYZ
28
2
3
4
28
1
29

OPERATIONOFFSHORE.COM
#operationoffshore
T.D.WILLIAMSON/MCGPRODUCTIONSPRESENT“OPERATIONOFFSHORE”
mMARKSIM,TODDBEADLE,GORDONBLAIR,ALEXEYTUGANOV,ANTONKOVALENKO,LAURENTFABRY,TAMMYWISENBAKER,
KEVINMCNAUGHTON,PAOLACORRALES,STEVEAPPLETON,ALEXANDREPETRAGLIA,/ROLFGUNNARLIE
LARRYRYAN,GEORGELIM JEFFWILSON,GARYANDERSON xMIKEBENJAMIN,CHADFLETCHER RISKONTHEPLATFORMDEVELOPMENT
DIRECTORS
BASEDON
THESTORY
TECHNICAL
DIRECTORS
© Copyright 2015 T.D. Williamson, Inc

Innovations™ Magazine VII NO.3 2015

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

En vedette

En vedette (16)

Similaire à Innovations™ Magazine VII NO.3 2015

Similaire à Innovations™ Magazine VII NO.3 2015 (20)

Plus de T.D. Williamson

Plus de T.D. Williamson (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Innovations™ Magazine VII NO.3 2015