Part 4: Assessment of General Metal Loss

Background to the Methodology

This assessment procedure is aimed at examining pressure equipment (eg pressure vessels, piping and tanks), subject to general metal loss resulting from corrosion and/or erosion. The methodology for conducting such an assessment is based on a thickness averaging approach. The assessment procedure can be used for both internal and external, uniform metal loss (UML) and local metal loss (LML), although the results for LML may be conservative. If further refinement is required for LML assessments, the procedures in Part 5 of the standard should be used. Nevertheless, API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 recommends that a Part 4 assessment should first be performed on any area of metal loss. Part 4 introduces component definitions to determine the permissible assessment level for a component. These component definitions are referred to in other parts of the document. Type A components have a design equation relating pressure and/or other loads to a required wall thickness, including: Pressure vessel cylindrical and conical shell sections. Spherical pressure vessels and storage tanks. Spherical, elliptical and torispherical formed heads. Straight sections of piping systems. Elbows or bends that do not have structural attachments. Cylindrical atmospheric storage tank shell courses.

Type B components have a code design procedure to determine acceptable configurations and the local stresses; Type B components have thickness interdependency and typically exist at a major structural discontinuity. Type B components include: Pressure vessel, tank nozzles and piping branch connections. The reinforcement zone of conical transitions. Cylinder to flat head junctions. Integral tubesheet connections. Flanges. Piping systems.

Type C components are not covered by the definitions for either Types A or B, including: Pressure vessel head to shell junctions. Stiffening rings attached to a shell. Skirt and lug-type supports on pressure vessels. Tank shell bottom course to tank bottom junction.

The assessment procedure to be used is dependant on the component type, the available thickness readings (eg point or thickness profile), the characteristic of the metal loss (eg UML or LML), minimum required wall thickness, and degree of conservatism desired. The Level 1 and Level 2 assessment procedures are designed such that the data and user knowledge requirements are minimal. Consequently, operating, inspection or engineering personnel can conduct the assessment with limited data such as original design data, inspection data and operation data. The assessment procedure assumes that the pressure equipment was constructed to recognised codes and standards, and that the metal loss is relatively smooth (ie no local stress concentrations).

API 579-1/ASME FFS-1

Copyright TWI Ltd, 2007

Applicability and Limitations Any pressure equipment that is assessed using these procedures should meet the following requirements: The component is not operating in the creep range. If the design temperature is above the value given in Table 4.1, a creep assessment should be performed using Part 10. Component is not in cyclic service. Screen using Annex B1, paragraph B1.5.4. Equipment does not contain crack-like flaws. If it does, a Part 9 assessment is required.

Description of Assessment
The assessment can be carried out at a number of different levels. The initial step for any assessment is the collection of equipment information eg original design information, past, present and future operational loading and production information. The following is a description of the three assessment levels for pressure vessels. The assessment procedure for storage tanks and piping is marginally different from that for vessels. Thickness measurements are required for the component to be assessed for general metal loss. The procedures are slightly different depending on whether point thickness readings, or thickness profile data are available. Level 1 assessment using point readings The following method is used for Type A Components when point thickness readings are available. The assessment of general metal loss using point readings is handled by the use of statistical methods and the calculated coefficient of variation (COV), as follows: 1 2 3 4 Determine the minimum required thickness to the construction code (tmin). Determine the minimum measured remaining wall thickness from inspection (tmm) and the average wall thickness (tam), and calculate the COV. For COV 10%, then the metal loss is UML and assessed using tam using Level 1 criteria in Table 4.4 eg for a cylinder tam - FCA tmin. For COV > 10%, metal loss is not uniform and the use of thickness profiles is required.

Level 1 assessment using critical thickness profiles If thickness profiles are used, a critical thickness profile (CTP), in both the circumferential and longitudinal directions is generated from the data, see Figure 1.

M line is the longitudinal path of minimum readings C line circumferential path of minimum readings Figure 1 Inspection planes for determining the plane of maximum metal loss (critical thickness profile) on a cylindrical shell.

API 579-1/ASME FFS-1

Copyright TWI Ltd, 2007

The spacings of thickness readings should be chosen to ensure the metal loss profile is accurately represented and recorded. It should be noted that the standard has a procedure for highlighting required inspection locations for thickness profile inspection. The CTP is determined by projecting the minimum measured (remaining) thickness along all parallel inspection planes onto a common plane. An example is shown in Figure 2 for an example CTP. The CTP is similar to the river bottom technique used by the RSTRENG assessment method.
s or c

Metal loss

FCA

CTP

tnom

trd tc = trd - FCA tmm

FCA: Future Corrosion Allowance tnom = Nominal wall thickness trd = Measured thickness away from metal loss tmm = Minimum measured thickness tc = Corroded wall thickness s = Dimension in longitudinal direction c = Dimension in circumferential direction

Thickness readings inspection grid

from

Figure 2 Critical thickness profile (CTP) for the metal loss contours and parameter labels. Level 1 assessment using thickness profiles The following method is used for Type A Components when CTP data is available. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Determine tmin. From inspection readings determine tmm. Determine tc (corroded wall thickness), using Part 4 Equations 4.2 or 4.3 in the standard. Calculate remaining thickness ratio, Rt where Rt = (tmm - FCA)/ tc. Calculate the length for thickness averaging, L using Equation 4.5. This variable is used to determine readings used to determine tam. Determine tam using the CTP based on L, for both the circumferential and longitudinal directions. L is positioned to ensure the resulting tam is a minimum. Determine acceptability using the Level 1 criteria in Table 4.4, eg for a cylinder tam - FCA tmin.

If the Level 1 assessment is found to be unacceptable, perform the following (nb. conservatism decreases down the list): 1 2 3 Rerate, repair, replace, or retire component. Adjust the FCA by applying remediation techniques. Adjust the weld joint efficiency factor, E, by performing more inspection (eg for a double V seam weld, no inspection constitutes E = 0.7, spot radiography has E = 0.85 and 100% radiography has

API 579-1/ASME FFS-1

Copyright TWI Ltd, 2007

4 5

E = 1.0, therefore by increasing the amount of inspection one can potentially decrease the minimum required thickness). Use the Part 5 locally thinned area (LTA) assessment procedure. Conduct a Level 2 or Level 3 assessment.

Level 2 assessment Follow the assessment procedure for Level 1 but determine acceptability the Level 2 criteria in Table 4.4. The Level 2 criteria reduce the conservatism from Level 1 by including provision for the allowable remaining strength factor (RSFa). Absolute minimum (limiting) thickness values: Levels 1 and 2 As well as the requirements for the average thickness there is also a limitation on the minimum measured thickness. For pressure vessels and piping the minimum measured thickness minus the FCA should not be smaller than the maximum of 0.5tmin or tlim, where tlim is the maximum of 0.2tnom or 2.5mm. Level 3 assessment A Level 3 assessment is normally more complex than Level 1 and Level 2 assessments and should be conducted by FFS specialists or qualified engineers. The assessment generally consists of finite element analysis or structural stability analysis. Remaining Life and Remediation Remaining life can be assessed using two approaches: Thickness-based approach, based on minimum required thickness, thickness measurement and an estimate of possible future corrosion rate. This is suitable for Type A components. The thickness-based approach may produce non-conservative results for Type B and C components. For Type B and C components, the maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) approach should be used. This uses previous inspection data to determine the MAWP for a series of increasing time increments using an effective corrosion allowance.

If the equipment has not met the acceptance criteria then various methods could be used as remediation, including, but not limited to: Perform changes to the process stream, eg reduce MAWP, temperature, velocity. Application of solid barrier linings or coatings to isolate from the environment, eg organic coatings, metal spray, refractory. Application of agents to modify the environment eg inhibitors, filming chemicals. Weld overlay for repair of base metal or for application of corrosion resistant lining.

API 579-1/ASME FFS-1

Copyright TWI Ltd, 2007