SIM – STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT

Structural Integrity - Introduction

Orginator: Ole Tom Vårdal ole.tom.vardal@axess.no
Presentation: Espen Kalland espen.kalland@axess.no
The key question!

• How can we be sure that the facilities are sufficiently safe?

• We need to be sure that no accidents occur.

Can we trust;
a) the structural analyses ?
b) the fabrication quality ?
c) the technical documentation?
d) the inspection process ?

Detect -> Compensating measures

 Integrity Management
vs.
Inspection Management

Integrity Eng. Inspection

Condition Perform
Assessment – inspection –
The process of The process
What to be done
of How to do

Integrity Engineering and Inspection

working together on-site, on-shore and off-shore.

Page 7
Operational part of SIM
• Supervice inspection
• Adjust program
• Define and secure proper repair and modification
• Deliveries:
a) Inspection reports
b) Insp.eng- reports
c) Integrity reports
d) Design of modification
e) M&R reports (Modification & Repair )

Operational Data  Condition Data  Reduced uncertainties

 Validation Studies – The Benefit of
Refinements
• Studies for Philips Petroleum, bp, TFE, PSA-N and HSE-UK in the period 1995-1999,
• 3 published reports by HSE-UK and more than 10 papers
• Detailed assessment of more than 500 fatigue cracks

Main Conclusion
• Traditional follow-up regime
– 20-40% of the detected cracks are in accordance with the initial fatigue analyses
– Crack growth does mainly occur at details given poor fabrication quality
– All units given comparable amount of inspections
• Refined Follow up and RBI (level 3 and partially level 2)
– The calculations are based on As-Is description
– 70-80% of the fatigue crack growth are according the calculated crack growth
potential
– The scope of inspection varies from 30 to 200% of a traditional follow up scope
 Competance at Site
Unit 1 - As-Is description and improved follow-up regime for
inspection, repair, modifications and weld improvement

• Upon 10 years operation

– 73 fatigue cracks of 1 at weld improved area i.e. hot spot given ultra high
fatigue loads

Unit 2 - Traditional site team for inspection, repair and

modification
• Upon 5-years operation
– 180 fatigue cracks at 143 different locations
– All cracks at hot spot given high fatigue loads
– Main reason: Poor workmanship for weld improvement and local
modification
 Benefits of level 3
• Avoid non required re-inspections
• Details are improved before failure occur, hit rate: 25% versus 80%
• Avoid or reduce On-shore inspection
• Avoid or reduce the need for re-construction
• Prepared for life time extension and utilization of capacity beyond the design
requirements
• Competence at site secure effective closing of findings
– detect – recommend – get approval - implement

The cost of failure vs. the cost required to avoid failure

• AIMS developed in cooperation with the rig owners that have experienced
the cost of failure
Main Challenges - 1:

• The old “How to do culture” i.e.

To Maintain the given design ≠ Integrity Management

• Insufficient ownership for the Condition Data and Condition

Assessment i.e.
– Gross errors related to look ahead of present findings
– Gross errors in the Condition Data and basis for
Condition Assessment
– Follow the procedure without sufficient ownership of
Integrity element

Continuous Improvement of Follow-up Scheme

Page 15
Main Challenges - 2:

• The theoretical approach and neglection of As-Is i.e.

Theoretical predictions ≠ The reality

• The inspection and repair history is the Key Book i.e.

– Identify shortcomings and application area for the
theoretical predictions
– Identify inspection program for validation
– Based on observation obtain reasonable conclusion of
the safety for structural integrity

Page 16
Main Challenges - 3
Activity and Competence
• Inspection
• Report inspection results and apply acceptance criteria
• How to close (design) and secure closing (construction) of
findings?
• The Life Cycle Documentation; a) Structural analyses
results and design data, b) Inspection, operation and
construction data
• Condition assessment and program for inspection and
improvements
• Reporting to PSA, Client and Owners
THANKS
Structural integrity
management

Ageing structures
Workshop April 8th

PTIL/PSA
Ageing and life extension

12/04/2010
PTIL/PSA
2
PTIL/PSA
The main elements in the process of
initiating and conducting an assessment
of a structure (ISO 19902)
a) assemble data on the structure, its history and exposure level;
b) determine if any assessment initiators are triggered;
c) determine acceptance criteria;
d) assess the condition of the structure;
e) assess the actions,
f) screen the structure in comparison with similar structures,;
g) perform a resistance assessment, using:
⎯ design level analysis;
⎯ ultimate strength level analysis;
h) prevention and mitigation

PTIL/PSA
Tasks that needs emphasis in life
extension
• Predict future degradation including wide spread
degradation and the consequences from this
degradation.
• Plan inspections and maintenance taking that
degradation into account
• Evaluate if components can be inspected
• Evaluate criticality of components

PTIL/PSA
Projects in PSA:
Structures and materials
• Probabilistic inspection planning of ageing
structures
- Aalborg University
• Regulation of life extension in Nuclear industry in
USA
• Material risk ageing installations
- DNV, SINTEF, Cranfield University
• SIM CMM
- OceanStructures / Cranfield University
• Ageing of concrete structures
- OceanStructures / Cranfield University
• Joining of materials

12/04/2010
PTIL/PSA
8
Structural integrity management

PTIL/PSA
 Goals & Req. Maintenance Prog. Planning Execution
Input 2.1
Evaluate Outputs
s 1.1 design,
2.2
Organisation Develop and inspection
Define Long 3.1 4.1
term Inspection Inspection
update SIM data and
inspection planning execution
Philosophy analyses
programme Technical
including
8.1 Allocation & ageing Condition
management of
resources & Report
10.1

Resources 11.1
11.2 Tech. Assure integrity
QA/QC Supervision Independent
Documents verification condition 10.2
9.1 Compare with
Develop DFI KPIs
resume
10.3
9.2
Improvements Analyses Reporting Management
In-service reporting
history 6.1
7.1
Evaluate,
Evaluate 5.2 5.1
analyse and
efficacy of Manage SIM Reporting on
assess
inspection data inspections
inspection
programme
data

Assessment Repair & mitigate Life extension Emergency preparedness

S1.3 S3a S3b
S4.2
Assessment Manage life Particular S4.3
S2.1 S2.2 S4.1 Understand
S1.1 S1.2 of extension issues for Prepare for
Determine Plan and Awareness significance
In-place Fatigue robustness approval ageing of potential
repair and undertake of potential of potential
structural assessment (redundancy process – mobile units emergency
mitigation remedial emergency emergency
assessment , tolerance to production – Classed situations
measures actions situations situations
damage) installations installations
PTIL/PSA
only only
 5

4,5

3,5

Lowest
2,5
Highest
Average
2

1,5

0,5

0
7.1 8.1 9.1 9.2 10.1 10.2 10.3 11.1 11.2 S1.1 S1.2 S1.3 S2.1 S2.2 S3 S4.1 S4.2 S4.3

PTIL/PSA
Key areas of concern in SIM

• Understanding ageing
- competency,
- data logging and trending
- life extension
• Technical condition evaluation and reporting
- KPI's,
- management reporting
• Emergency preparedness
• QA / QC and verification

PTIL/PSA