Risk Assessment of an Urban Natural Gas Polyethylene Piping System
Publication: Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice
Volume 11, Issue 2
Abstract
The integrity management activities should aim to ensure that all safety requirements are maintained within acceptable levels. A fully comprehensive inspection of all equipment in a unit/facility is not a cost-effective method. Therefore, in recent approaches, the budget and resources are assigned in a way to only fully cover the equipment with a medium-high or high-risk level, while preserving a sufficient effort on lower risk components. In this regard the risk assessment procedure of the underground polyethylene (PE) natural gas piping networks has not been developed yet. Hence, the current study was conducted to (1) identify the credible failure mechanisms in urban natural gas PE piping systems and (2) evaluate the probability of failures and consequences of failures for various failure scenarios. The ultimate goal was to find the critical piping segments. It proposed a methodology to prioritize technical inspection activities for different segments in the urban natural gas piping systems based on their risk levels. The procedure was applied in the piping network of a small city (Ardabil, Iran) to identify the critical segments. Relevant recommendations were made after successfully detecting these segments.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
All data, models, and code generated or used during this study appear in the published article.
References
API (American Petroleum Institute). 2013. Managing system integrity for hazardous liquid pipelines. API RP 580/581. Washington, DC: API.
API (American Petroleum Institute). 2016. Risk-based inspection technology. API 581. Washington, DC: API.
ASME. 2016. Managing system integrity of gas pipelines. ASME B31.8S. New York: ASME.
Bai, Y., and Q. Bai. 2014. Subsea pipeline integrity and risk management. Houston: Gulf Professional Publishing.
Chant, E., and J. R. Sims. 2010. “Risk-based inspection for polymers.” In Proc., Corrosion 2010. Houston: NACE International.
Chien, C.-H., C.-H. Chen, and Y. J. Chao. 2009. “A strategy for the risk-based inspection of pressure safety valves.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 94 (4): 810–818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2008.09.002.
Eskandarzade, M., A. Kalaki, and R. Shahrivar. 2018. “The application and limitations of corrosion management process.” Struct. Integrity Life 18 (3): 4.
Golubović, T., A. Sedmak, V. Spasojević Brkić, S. Kirin, and I. Rakonjac. 2018. “Novel risk based assessment of pressure vessels integrity.” Tehnički vjesnik 25 (3): 803–807.
Guédé, F. 2018. “Risk-based structural integrity management for offshore jacket platforms.” Mar. Struct. 63 (2019): 444–461.
Han, Z., and W. Weng. 2011. “Comparison study on qualitative and quantitative risk assessment methods for urban natural gas pipeline network.” J. Hazard. Mater. 189 (1–2): 509–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.02.067.
Hasan, S., L. Sweet, J. Hults, G. Valbuena, and B. Singh. 2018. “Corrosion risk-based subsea pipeline design.” Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip. 159 (Jan): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2017.10.003.
Mancuso, A., M. Compare, A. Salo, E. Zio, and T. Laakso. 2016. “Risk-based optimization of pipe inspections in large underground networks with imprecise information.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 152 (Aug): 228–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2016.03.011.
NORSOK (Norsk Sokkels Konkuranseposisjon). 2005. Fabrication and installation of GRP piping systems. M-622. NORSOK.
NORSOK (Norsk Sokkels Konkuranseposisjon). 2013. Norwegian oil and gas association recommended guidelines for NDT of GRP pipe systems and tanks. NORSOK.
Papatzimos, A. K., T. Dawood, and P. Thies. 2018. “Cost-effective risk-based inspection planning for offshore wind farms.” Insight Non-Dest. Test. Condition Monit. 60 (6): 299–305. https://doi.org/10.1784/insi.2018.60.6.299.
Phan, H. C., A. S. Dhar, and R. Sadiq. 2018. “Prioritizing water mains for inspection and maintenance considering system reliability and risk.” J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract. 9 (3): 04018009. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)PS.1949-1204.0000324.
Rachman, A., and R. M. Chandima Ratnayake. 2019. “Machine learning approach for risk-based inspection screening assessment.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 185: 518–532.
Ramuna, M., C. R. C. Hassan, and M. D. Hamid. 2019. “Critical success factors of risk-based inspection.” Process Saf. Prog. 38 (1): 4–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/prs.11973.
Scales, D., R. Hubbard, and C. Merrick. 2018. “Risk based, statistical approach to assessment of corrosion anomalies in pipelines.” In Proc., Offshore Technology Conf. Perth, WA: Atteris.
Schroeder, B., and J. A. Jackson. 2007. “Why traditional risk management fails in the oil and gas sector: Empirical front-line evidence and effective solutions.” In Proc., AACE Int. Transactions, RI11.
Shin, S., G. Lee, U. Ahmed, Y. Lee, J. Na, and C. Han. 2018. “Risk-based underground pipeline safety management considering corrosion effect.” J. Hazard. Mater. 342 (Jan): 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2017.08.029.
Trotta, T., C. Kashou, and N. Faulk. 2018. “Pressure relief valve inspection interval.” Process Saf. Prog. 37 (1): 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/prs.11892.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice
Volume 11 • Issue 2 • May 2020
Copyright
©2019 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jan 14, 2019
Accepted: Aug 6, 2019
Published online: Dec 26, 2019
Published in print: May 1, 2020
Discussion open until: May 26, 2020
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.