Pipe wall thickness issue
Pipe wall thickness issue
(OP)
Hi All
In general buried gas pipe line going pass high consequence areas required to be heavy wall to avoid the risk involvement. Given the pipe line dia 559 mm, wall thickness of 7.92 mm and MAOP of 7322Mpa to safely operating under the above conditions, instead of having the heavy wall can the operator only reduce the MAOP to a certain % from the MAOP to satisfy the conditions? Or else what are the factors effecting to take up a decision under these circumstances. Appreciate if someone gives me proper direction to tackle this issue.
In general buried gas pipe line going pass high consequence areas required to be heavy wall to avoid the risk involvement. Given the pipe line dia 559 mm, wall thickness of 7.92 mm and MAOP of 7322Mpa to safely operating under the above conditions, instead of having the heavy wall can the operator only reduce the MAOP to a certain % from the MAOP to satisfy the conditions? Or else what are the factors effecting to take up a decision under these circumstances. Appreciate if someone gives me proper direction to tackle this issue.





RE: Pipe wall thickness issue
You said this was a high risk area? How much risk do you want (your customer want) to take based on years of future liability just to save a few dollars on thick-walled pipe?
RE: Pipe wall thickness issue
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
Motto: KISS
Motivation: Don't ask
RE: Pipe wall thickness issue
Are you sure about the unit?
RE: Pipe wall thickness issue
Reduction of operating pressure is the same as increasing the hoop stress safety factor, each of which is a valid approach to decreasing the risk factor of operating in high consequence and sensitive areas. Other considerations might be extra burial depth, or adding mechanical protection in the form of concrete plates above the pipeline, concrete slabs, etc. Additional measures might also be to increase the patrol observation frequency, from yearly, to monthly, to weekly. Early warning leak detection systems might be another measure, as well as adding remote operated valves, or valves that will close on a particular level, or rate of pressure loss. Fencing and marking of the right-of-way could be another approach. You could propose only one, or all. Which ones and what you finally do may depend on how your regulating authority views the effectiveness of each one. All the above have been used in one location or another to increase the general safety and decrease the risk of operating within high consequence areas.
"We have a leadership style that is too directive and doesn't listen sufficiently well. The top of the organisation doesn't listen sufficiently to what the bottom is saying." Tony Hayward CEO BP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpiIWMWWVco
"Being GREEN isn't easy." Kermit
http://virtualpipeline.spaces.liv
RE: Pipe wall thickness issue
You could reduce MOP.
Regards,
SNORGY.
RE: Pipe wall thickness issue
"We have a leadership style that is too directive and doesn't listen sufficiently well. The top of the organisation doesn't listen sufficiently to what the bottom is saying." Tony Hayward CEO BP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpiIWMWWVco
"Being GREEN isn't easy." Kermit
http://virtualpipeline.spaces.liv
RE: Pipe wall thickness issue
RE: Pipe wall thickness issue
Appreciate all for your contributions.
RE: Pipe wall thickness issue
7.322 Mpa
Sorry guys
RE: Pipe wall thickness issue