RBI or RCM, Which One to Choose for Facility Management?

Muhammad Abduh (abduh@reksolindo.co.id)

Facility management nowadays utilize these two regimes of asset management as toolbox for company maintenance program. Many still have a mixed understanding between the term of integrity and reliability, such as material reliability, structural integrity, equipment reliability, asset integrity, etc. This writing tries to study the difference and similarities of the two approach.

Integrity Engineering Case

Definition: the ability of materials, equipments, and structures to withstand applied load against the defect from manufacturing, fabrication, and construction or damage caused by its performance or because the interaction with environment.

Failure Definition: a condition when a material yielding or its thermodynamical state is altered that cannot withstand service load e.g. stress static or cyclic, high temperature, low temperature, and environment hostility.

Measurement : remaining life, remaining strength, fatigue strength, maximum allowable operating pressure, and specified minimum yield strength

Applicability : static mechanical equipments (piping system, pipeline, heat exchanger, boiler, pressure vessel, valves, pump casing, compressor casing, storage tank), structural systems

Actvity Involved : Material Selection, Welding, Comissioning, Corrosion Protection System, Operation and Maintenance, Inspection (non destructive or destructive), and Defect Assessment

Codes and Guidelines: API 580, API 581, DNV G-101, SINTAP, BS-7910, DNV F-101, API 579, R6, R5, ASME B31.G, RSTRENG, and Pipeline Defect Assessment Manual.

Reliability Engineering Case

Definition: Probability of equipments, machineries, or systems will perform their required functions satisfactorily under specific condition within a certain time period or the duration of probability of failure-free performance under the stated conditions.

Failure Definition : A condition of inability of any asset to do what its users want it to do or the probability of an item operating for a given of time without failure. Functional failure is defined as the inability of any asset to fullfill a function to a standard performance which is acceptable to the user. Then failure mode is defined as any event which cause functional failure.

Measurement : Mean time to failure, mean time between failure, Weibull Analysis, and failure rate, P-F Interval

Applicability : Traditionally but not exclusively applied to rotating machineries (compressors, turbines, valve and pumps, gears) mechanical cross-functional systems static or rotating equipments,

Activity Involved : Condition Monitoring, Maintenance, Vibration Analysis, Failure Mode Effect Analysis, Dynamic Monitoring, Inspection, Root Cause Analysis, and Consequence Analysis.

Codes and Guidelenes: SAE JA-1011 Evaluation Criteria for Reliability Centered Maintenance

RBI or RCM ?

Risk based inspection (RBI) as a product of integrity engineering approach applied for static or stationary mechanical equipment, and reliability centered maintenance (RCM) as a product of reliability engineering applied for rotating machineries or mechanical functional systems. Both have same methodologies for risk assessment as risk defined as the function of failure likelihood and failure consequence. Since both method defined failure as contributing event, there should be similar approach to develop the defined level of performance, e.g material selection, material assessment, corrosion, fatigue, creep, etc. And as facility management must be an integrated approach, these two method of facility asssesment must be combined and the complete information of facility condition can be achieved.

Reference:

1. http://www.weibull.com

2. Reliability Centered Maintenance by John Moubray

3. Pipeline Risk Mangement Manual by W.K. Muhlbauer

Lesson Learned From Major Engineering Failures – Accident Mitigation For Hydrocarbon Industry

Muhammad Abduh (abduh@reksolindo.co.id)

Print Version Published for PetroEnergy February-March 2008 Edition

Remarkable fires and explosions to several production and processing sites in Cilacap, Tuban, and Belawan and also the remaining public controversy of Sidoarjo Mud Volcano recently should be learned within the industry to better manage engineering accidents. Every accident was triggered by multi-event of failures. Those failure events are contributed by faults of one or more elements that build the system (e.g. design, health and safety policy, operation and maintenance). Oil and gas industry that have of facilities with high pressure system, corrosive medium, and hostile environment have a large engineering failure experiences from the fire in Piper Alpha to the recently explosion of Texas City Refinery. This paper will present an overview of major engineering failures in oil and gas and hydrocarbon industry and to look for an alternative perspective for the mitigation management in Indonesia.

Figure 1. Cilacap Pipeline Fire 2008 and Belawan Pipeline Fire 2008 (liputan6.com)

I. Major Engineering Failures (1977-2007)

Compilation of engineering failures that has significant impact both in economic and personnel safety have been already developed by several integrity engineering companies, government bodies, health and safety authorized body, engineering risk consultants, insurance companies, and loss adjusters Table 1.

II. FAILURE ANALYSIS AND FAILURE MAPS

Every failure is an unexpected event. But if it happened, we can track back to find out the failure path, contributing events, and root causes. This methodology in broader term will refer as failure analysis. In the development failure analysis methodologies, there are several approach to express the structure of failures including root cause analysis (RCA), failure mode effect analysis (FMEA), event tree analysis (ETA), and fault tree analysis (FTA). One recent development in failure analysis is the expanding of the failure elements domain to the overall company organization (e.g. HSE, Human Resources, Quality Policy) and the socio-economic environment (regulatory systems, societal), Figure 2 .

Figure 2. Failure Map

Expanding the Root Cause

Engineering failure is triggered by multi-event of failures. The term of root cause then becomes relative. As we can see from above figure, surrounding societal aspects that include regulatory system can trigger the failure. Technical investigation to find out the nature of the accident should be beneficial in order to make necessary improvement in technical regulation. As we know that the first issue of American Society of Mechanical Engineer (ASME) Code for Boiler and Pressure Vessel was driven by the explosion of shoe factory in Boston in 1914. United States regulation on pipeline safety 49 CFR 192 has been already amended for several times following previously some significant pipeline explosions. The amendment was expected the close the void in the regulation that makes the accident occurred.

III. TECHNICAL MEASURES OF FAILURES

Technical measures which failed or were not adequately implemented in each of the accidents are:

– Inadequate Design that includes: materials selection, pipework design codes, corrosion protection system, plant siting and layout, pipeline and underground conduit layout;

– Defective Manufacture: material quality control, welding quality,

– Inability to predict and to Prevent; inspection (NDT, Assessments), risk assessments; maintenance procedures, emergency response,gas leak detection, spill control,isolation; and warning systems.

Figure 3. Accident Mitigation Scheme

IV.ACCIDENT MITIGATION

Accident mitigation differs in every country. In several countries regulatory system defines and provides the procedure for the formation of an investigation authority. In United Kingdom the formation of this official investigation body is ruled under COMAH (Control of Major Hazard) Regulation 1999. The competent authority under this regulation minimally consists of Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and Environment Agency. Additionally, in United States the investigations are performed by several government agency including Chemical Safety Board (CSB), Pipeline Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA), and National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) supported by third party investigation company (e.g. integrity engineering, explosion engineering, failure analyst, risk analyst, loss adjustor). In other case like P-36 Sinking, Petrobras performed an in-house investigation and the results were validated by third party company.

The investigation authorities performed task as follows:

– Find out the root cause, contributing event, chronology;

– Give necessary recommendation for the company to prevent the occurrence of the failure;

– To propose amendment in regulation;

– To propose revision for technical code and designs;

– To publish neutral public information;

One important action in accident mitigation is technical investigation. Technical investigation is an activity to find out the technical nature of the accident that includes failure analysis. Outputs expected from technical investigation are:

– Independent judgment on the nature of accident is important to avoid the public miss-perception, and political distortion;

– Recommendation for regulatory amendment;

– Independent judgment for contractual disputes;

– Necessary corrective action for the companies

Conclusion

From engineering accident experience, stakeholders in oil and gas industry have an opportunity to develop better managed accident mitigation. Reference shows that more managed accident mitigation action will reduce non-technical excess of the accident (e.g. public miss-perception, distortion of information), improvement in technical code and design regulations, and to solve legal or contractual disputes.

Reference

1. The 50 Major Engineering Failures (1977-2007) in Oil and Gas and Hydrocarbon Industry, Reksolindo Publication, 2008;
2. The 100 Largest Losses 1972-2001 Large Property Damage Losses in the Hydrocarbon-Chemical Industries, Marsh Risk Consulting 20th Edition: February 2003;
3. www.hse.gov.uk
4. http://www.antara.co.id/en/arc/2008/3/10/pertamina-refinery-fires-death-toll-rises-to-three
5. http://www.metrotvnews.com/berita.asp?id=52489
6. http://www.tempointeraktif.com/hg/nasional/2008/03/09/brk,20080309-118872,id.html
7. http://www.liputan6.com/news/?id=156080&c_id=7

Corrosion and the Shutdown of Alaska Prudhoe Bay Oil Field

Muhammad Abduh (abduh@reksolindo.co.id)

Nation biggest oil field of United States was shutdown after an indication of severe pipeline corrosion. The Trans-Alaskan Pipeline is one of the world largest oil pipeline. The line that is known for it zig-zag pattern to allow thermal expansion and earthquake movement. The pipeline was designed to allow 5 feet of vertical movement and up to 20 feet laterally. The pipeline which cost about USD 8 billion to build sits on top of 78,000 aboveground supports spaced 60 feet apart.

Figure 1 – Prudhoe Bay Pipeline Network (Source: USA Today, BP, EIA, CSI)

The sections aboveground are insulated and covered. Build in the 1970s after oil discovery at Prudhoe Bay in 1968. The pipeline is 48-inch diameter, 800 mile of line links Prudhoe Bay on the Arctic Ocean with a terminal at Valdes, the ice-freeport within the area. This pipeline serves Californian and some US West Coast Refineries, which accounts for roughly 20 percent of US oil annual production or 2,6% US national supply or about 400,000 barrels per day.

Figure 2. Trans-Alaskan Pipeline

Oil spill was reported in March 2, 2006. US Department of Transportation ordered smart pig inspections responding the leaking report. The inspection record noted that the steel had corroded in 12 places on the eastern side of Prudhoe Bay up to 70-81% orginal thickness which was less than company standard. According to the company corrosion authority, the pipeline was designed for 25 year and at the time of leaking the pipeline was 29 years lasted. Company spent to fight corrosion USD 72 million at the year of leaking and USD 60 million previous year. The effort, according to the company man including corrosion inhibition, X-Ray runs, and ultrasonic tests.

Reference

1. BP: Pipeline shutdown could last weeks or months (USA Today)

2. BP to Shutdown Prudhoe Bay Oilfield (BP Global Press)

3. BP’s Prudhoe Bay Pipeline Shutdown Could Continue into Next Year (Guardian UK)

4. Oversight Hearing on BP Pipeline Failure (PHMSA DOT US)