×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

TML & API 570

TML & API 570

TML & API 570

(OP)
According to API 570 TMLs can be eliminated for piping systems if "Noncorrosive systems, as demnostrated by history or similar service, and systems not subject to changes that could cause corrosion".

How many isnpections do I need (without finding thinning) to do in order to drop a particular TML?

Any suggestions or guidelines?

Thanks,

RE: TML & API 570

The key phrase in the quote from API 570 is "systems not subject to changes".  It isn't only about the thickness readings it's also about process stability, operating history and, possibly, prior treatment of inspection data.  Process monitoring data must be one of the key input parameters for the decision process.  If the process corrosivity assessment hasn't changed over the inspection life then it could be possible to statistically infer that there is no future effect on remnant life.  The first real question is: is the process data collection a) sufficient enough and b) reliable enough for judgement to be made about fluid corrosivity changes at the TML.  The second question is: what confidence is there in the inspection data to say that corosion is at a sufficiently low level at that location not to monitor for it.

Personally, I would say that if the TML in question is not consuming a wholly disproportionate amount of resources, and is not in such a situation as to give worthless reliability of measurement, then it would probably be considered an ALARP (as low as reasonably practicable) measure to continue to take readings and possibly just reduce the frequency.

Guidance on determining the number of measurements may be found at:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr016.pdf

Steve Jones
Materials & Corrosion Engineer
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/8/83b/b04
 

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources