Risk Assessment PDF

Structural Integrity Management and Risk
Based Inspection – Recent Developments

SNAME Texas Section Meeting
G. Abdel Ghoneim, Ph.D., P.E.

08 December 2009
Agenda
Introduction
Gulf of Mexico Activity
SIM and RBI Fundamentals
Recent Standards
Challenges
Summary
SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SNAME Texas Section Meeting, 08 December 2009
© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. 2
GOM Platform Activity
900
800
700
600
No. of Structures
500
1945‐1972
400
1973‐1982
1983‐2009
300
200
100
Source: MMS, B.J. Kruse, III

0
Source: MMS
<50 51‐100 101‐150 151‐200 201‐250 251‐300 301‐350 351‐400 >400
SIM and RBI – Recent Developments Water Depth (ft)
09 December 2009
GOM Platform Decommissioning
GoM Platform Vintage (Years)
15%
30%
25%
30%
<5 5-15 15-30 >30
Total ~ 3,900 Platforms

Average Removal Age ~ 16 years
Source: MMS, B.J. Kruse, III, K. S. Patterson, WISTA Oct 2008

The Issues
Source: O'Connor, BP, M. Lalani, June 2007

API RP’s and Guidelines
API 2A-WSD, “Recommended Practice for Planning Designing and Constructing Fixed
Offshore Platforms – Working Stress Design.”
API 2A-LRFD, “Recommended Practice for Planning Designing and Constructing Fixed
Offshore Platforms – Load and Resistance Factor Design.”
API Bulletin 2TD, “Guidelines for Tie-downs on Offshore Production Structures for Hurricane
Season”.
API 2T, “Recommended Practice for Planning Designing and Constructing Tension Leg
Platforms.”
API 2FPS, “Recommended Practice for Planning Designing and Constructing Floating
Production Systems.”
API 2SK, “Recommended Practice “Design and Analysis of Stationkeeping Systems for
Floating Structures.”
API 2RD, “Recommended Practice “Design of Risers for Floating Production Systems
(FPSs) and Tension-Leg Platforms (TLPs)”.
API 2I, Recommended Practice “In-Service Inspection of Mooring Hardware for Floating
Drilling Units”.

API 2HINS Inspection Initiator Process

Destroyed GoM Platforms
80
69
70
Number of PlatformsDestroyed
60
60
50 47
40
40
30
20 14
8 7 7
10
2 3 3 2 3 3 2
0
1948 1961 1964 1965 1969 1974 1979 1985 1992 2002 2004 2005 2005 2008 2008
Year
1.20E-03
1.00E-03 1.00E-03
R
RSR =
1.00E-03
Annual Failure P robability
S 8.00E-04
6.00E-04 5.00E-04 5.00E-04

R 4.00E-04
RSR = 4.00E-04
2.00E-04
S100 2.00E-04
1.00E-05
0.00E+00
Stiff, 2009 Stiff, 2009 Stahl, et.al., THIC, 1992 Stahl, 1986 ISO 19901-2, ISO 19902,
2000 2004 2008
Source
Platform Structural Analysis
Load exposure

Safety format (LRFD vs. WSD)
Requirement Rd<Sd
Design Design
Load (Ld) Resistance (Rd)
Characteristic Characteristic
Load Resistance
Resistance Mean
Resistance
Probability Density
Factor
Mean
Load Load
Factor
Load and Resistance

SIM Process
Management of Change
SIM Process
Hazard Evaluation and
Company Risk Assessment Contingency
Policy Plans
Develop Integrity
Management Plan (IMP) for
Structure / System
Reporting and Audits and

Communication Implement IMP for the Reviews
Structure / System
Learning and Improvement

Information Organization and
Management Personnel

Principles of Asset Integrity Management
Integrity management life cycle activities
Update risk Integrity

Monitor Integrity
status Update overall
Assess risk inspection plan
(incl. SRS)
Evaluate Risk
Filter Inspection
findings plan
Findings
Actions
Plan survey
Inspect
Do follow-up
actions Inspect
Evaluate Record
findings findings
Maintain
Plan follow up
actions

12 Slide 12
© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved.
Why SIM - Ageing Problem?
The contribution of structural failure to the total number of historic
accidents is less than 10% based on worldwide data (Kvitrud, et. al.,
2001).
The reliability of a structure against environmental loads may become
unacceptable in extended lifetime. Subsidence, degradation and
changes to the original design may occur at a higher rate in extended
platform life.
Lack of data on the structure (e.g. drawings, steel type, welding
procedures, inspection results and details about earlier repairs etc.)
may result in higher uncertainty.
Using a systematic approach for evaluating whether a structure is
safe for use beyond its initial design life, taking the above mentioned
issues into account, is the objective of SIMS.
The SIM system has proven invaluable even for relatively newer
structures both fixed and floating.
Ersdal, G. Ph.D. Thesis, U of Stavanger, October 2005

WCT
© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. 13 Seminar
April 26,
Ageing & Need for SIM & RBI

What is Risk-Based Inspection (RBI)?
Strategic process for lowering risk and lowering cost

An integrated, data-based methodology that factors risk into inspection
decision making
Risk analysis includes not only probability of failure (PoF) but also
consequence of failure (CoF)
A qualitative and quantitative process for managing
structurres/equipment based on risk analysis
A systematic process that establishes and prioritises risk levels for each
component in the structure
RBI is an important element in the SIM system.

ORBIT : Main principles
Analyses / (re-)design Inspections Monitoring Observations
Input data Operating Inspection Monitoring Events /

req. & limits results results History
Condition
Evaluation
Condition evaluations
(sections and components)
Action plans
Activities plan Inspection plan

Terminology
Robustness Fatigue/Fracture
RSR Failure
Push-over/Time-domain Safety Category
Assessment/Re-assesment Consequence of Failure Category
Risk/Reliability Strength
RBI Hazards
Design Life Acceptability Criteria
Standards/Regulations Air Gap – Wave-in-Deck
Limit States Probabilistic Methods
WSD/ASD and LRFD Bayesian Approach
Design Criteria Degradation
Joint Flexibility Fitness-for-purpose
SRS SIMS
Load Factor Bias

The Two Main Steps of RBI
Expected RISK Cost

6
Normalised Expected Cost Expected Inspection Cost
5 Expected Failure Cost
Expected Repair Cost
4
Total Expected Risk Cost
0
1.0E-04 1.0E-03 1.0E-02 1.0E-01
SIM and RBI – Recent Developments Target Failure Probability Level
Key Concepts
The Key Concepts of RBI
Consequence of
RISK = Probability of Failure X Failure
GFF X Item DF
Age Damage area

Item repair
Damage Other repairs
type/rate Injury
Business int.
Insp.
Env. clean up
effective.

Consequence models estimate:
- Heat radiation levels from fires

- Gas dispersion distances
- Durations of fires
- Explosion pressures
- Number of fatalities per accident
- Environmental effect

Reducing Risk
Inspection frequencies
Inspection scope / thoroughness
Inspection tools / techniques
Inspection practices (internal vs. external)
Building more Redundancies
Maintenance
Proper use/understanding the limitations
Emergency response
Trained crew
Effective communication lines
Local knowledge

Marine Safety Regulations
International Classification
Maritime Societies
Organization
Rules
Rules
Classification of Mobile
MODU Code Offshore Units
Formal Safety Assessment
Step 1 Hazard Step 2 Step 5

Identification Risk Decision Making
Assessment Recommendations
Step 3
Risk Control Options
Step 4
Cost Benefit Assessment

Risk Assessment
Hazard review
Risk matrices
Hazard checklist
Risk ranking
HAZOP (hazard and operability study)
Structured judgement
FMECA (failure modes, effects and criticality
analysis)
SWIFT (structured what-if analysis)

Risk Assessment
Fault trees THREATS CONSEQUENCES
Event trees Accident Major

accident
Scenario
Bow tie diagrams
Controls
Management
System
Increasing individual risks and societal concerns

Rules and standards Unacceptable
region
Engineering judgement
Tolerable
region
Risk criteria
Broadly acceptable
Cost-benefit analysis region
Company values
Quantitative Methods
Weather Outcome
Historical data analysis
Severe 50% fatalities
Fault tree analysis 0.01
Event tree analysis Rough 30% fatalities

0.09
Consequence modelling Evacuation
1.0E-04 Moderate 10% fatalities
Evacuation modelling per year 0.4
Calm 5% fatalities
Risks and uncertainties 0.5
Severe
Calm 5%
26%
Rough
28%
Moderate
41%
Influences on Technique Selection
Decision context
Lifecycle stage
Major hazard potential
Novelty/non-standard Techniques
Uncertainty Practicality
Views/perceptions Strengths and
weaknesses
Good practice
Efficiency

Traditional Inspection Planning vs. RBI Planning
Traditional RBI
Inspection based on experience and
Inspection based on experience
systematic (risk) review
(usually by previous
failures/breakdowns) Inspection effort driven by “risk”, i.e.
likelihood of failure and consequences
Inspection effort driven by of failure
“likelihood of failure” Pro-active planning and execution of
inspections
Reactive “fire fighting”, running
behind the ball Systematic identification of appropriate
NDT techniques
Use of appropriate / Inappropriate
NDT techniques

Suitable and Sufficient Inspection Planning
Suitable – techniques appropriate for the assessment being
made
Sufficient – adequate to show the risks are ALARP, without
requiring further elaboration
S i n g l e c o m p o n e n t c o n si d d e r e d ; D e si g n l i v e = 2 0 y r
1 . 0 E -0 2
Failure probability
1 . 0 E -0 3
1 . 0 E -0 4
1 . 0 E -0 5
1 . 0 E -0 6
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
S e rv ic e tim e in y e a rs
RBI Investment and Savings
$800,000
$675,000
$700,000
$600,000 $550,000
$600,000
$500,000
$500,000
$400,000
$400,000
$250,000
$300,000
$200,000
$50,000 $85,000 $65,000
$100,000
$0
RBI Inspect Prod RBI Inspect Prod RBI Inspect Prod
Study & Maint Cost Study & Maint Cost Study & Maint Cost
Invest Savings Savings Invest Savings Savings Invest Savings Savings
Chemical Plant - 200 Refinery - 35 Refinery - 50
Pressure Vessels Pressure Vessels Pressure Vessels
Total $ Savings = $1.1M Total $ Savings = $650,000 Total $ Savings = $1.25M

ROI = 22:1 ROI = 8:1 ROI = 19:1
rbi invesment & savings
Typical ROI = 8:1

$800,000
$675,000
$700,000
$600,000 $550,000
$600,000
$500,000
$500,000
$1,520,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$50,000 $75,000 $65,000
$100,000
$0 RBI Inspect Prod RBI Inspect Prod RBI Inspect Prod
Study & Maint Cost Study & Maint Cost Study & Maint Cost
Invest Savings Savings Invest Savings Savings Invest Savings Savings
Chemical Plant - 200 Offshore Installation Refinery - 50
Pressure Vessels Piping & Vessels Pressure Vessels
Total $ Savings = $1.1M Total $ Savings = $1.52M Total $ Savings = $1.25M

ROI = 22:1 ROI = 20:1 ROI = 19:1
ORBIT Structure

RBI Detailed Assessment

RBI Detailed Assessment

Inspection Planning
Challenges: No general standard, guideline or common industry practice available
for inspection planning for structures
RBI Analysis Process
New fatigue analysis results
Updated FIP’s
Only done ones
(input and results)
SIMS SIMS FIP’s Upload

Member condition “Master RBI Table” (2004)
Inspection history
- Fatigue point identification
- fatigue damage rates Updated “Master RBI Table”
- “Analysis Method Fatigue” - RBI Input and results
- “Analysis Method Collapse”
- consequence of member failure Inspection plan (FIP’s)
- preferred inspection method
- etc. RBI analysis report
New fatigue analysis
“Fatigue Master Table”
“Orbit Workflow Manager”

“Orbit Workflow Manager”
RBI analysis
ORBIT/Profast
New RBI Analysis results
(Profast jnl files & database
Relevant DNV Publications
RP-F107 Pipeline Risk Assessment
RP-G101 RBI of Topsides Equipment
OS-E304 Offshore Mooring Steel Wire Ropes
OSS-121 Class base on Risk Assessment
OSS-303 Risk Based Verification
OSS-304 Risk Based Verification of Offshore Structures
Available online: webshop.dnv.com

DNV RP-F107 Pipeline Risk Assessment
Cost Benefit Analysis Risk Matrix

DNV RP-G101 RBI of Topsides Equipment
Maintenance Management System


ISO 17776 (2000)

Push-over Analysis

SIM System

Decision Time

Structural Operational Challenges
New Env. Earthquake / Structural modifications/
Wave diffraction Weight Management
Criteria Accidental Loads
Platform
COG
strength
Subsidence of seabed/
Possible WiD Objective – Reassessment of Jacket Platforms:
To
Todocument
documentsafe useuse
safe untiluntil
end of production
end of production
Deck
Date for change in platform operation
(from
Datemanned
for change in platform operation
to unmanned)
Strength
(from manned to unmanned)
Establish evacuation criteria
Cost and scheduling of structural mitigation
Cost and scheduling of structural mitigation
Fatigue strength & Foundation
Inspection planning
Inspection planning
capacity
Large amount
of
information
Some Challenges
Wave-in-deck-load (WiD) and load on jacket (WoJ) and variation with time
90 90
Fx - Total (inc. "jet" effect)
80 Fx - WoJ (incl. "jet" effect) 80
70 Fx - WoJ (without "jet" effect) 70

Fx - WiD (Comflow)
60 60
Fz - WoJ
50 Fz - WiD (Comflow) 50
40 40
Fx (MN)
Fz (MN)
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
2.2 2.7 3.2 3.7 4.2 4.7 5.2 5.7 6.2 6.7 7.2 7.7 8.2 8.7 9.2 9.7
-10 -10
-20 -20
-30 -30
Time (sec)

Challenges (cont’d)
Determination of failure criteria

P Excessive deformation
Dynamic behavior
delta
P - Rise time for wave-in-deck load coincide with one quarter of platform
lowest eigenperiod
Elastic
flexibility
Axial joint deformation, delta

New vs. Old

NORSOK STANDARD N-006, March 2009

NORSOK Assessment Principles
Requirements to in-service inspection planning and structural integrity management
of jacket structures in general may be found in ISO 19902, Clause 23.
Requirements to inspection and condition monitoring are given in ISO 19903,
Chapter 14.
Requirements to in-service inspection, monitoring and maintenance are given in ISO
19904-1, Chapter 18.
Shut-down and unmanning procedure shall be implemented in order to ensure that
there is less than 5x10-4 annual probability of the facility being exposed to
environmental actions exceeding the structural capacity determined according to the
ALS, with personnel onboard.
In cases of pollution risk or main safety function impairment it should be shown that
the combined probability of a structural failure and leakage that could lead to
significant pollution is less than 1x10-4 per year.

API RP 2SIM (Draft) ToC

API RP 2SIM (Draft)
Data Evaluation Strategy Program
Detailed work
Evaluation of
Managed system Overall inspection scopes for
structural integrity
for archive and philosophy & inspection
and fitness for
retrieval of SIM strategy and activities and
purpose;
data and other criteria for in- offshore execution
development of
pertinent records service inspection to obtain quality
remedial actions
data
Initiator No
Data Evaluation Strategy Program
Triggered
Yes
Assessment
SIM Process and Document Organization
Source: Draft API RP 2SIM

API RP 2SIM (Draft) RBI Intervals
Assessment Initiator
(See 4.3.5)
Risk Assessment
Inspection Interval Ranges Category
Category Assessment Category Consequence of Platform Failure and
(See 4.3.4.4) (see 4.3.4) Assessment
Information
High 3-years to 5-years Assessment Information
(See 7.3)
Medium 6-years to 10-years
Low 11-years or greater YES Inadequate

Deck Height?
(see 4.3.5.1)
Assessment Methods Assessment Criteria
Section 7 Sections 8, 9
Notes: - Assessment Type
- Assessment
a) The timing for the first underwater periodic inspection should be determined Simple Method Category Assessment Criteria
from the date of platform installation or when the baseline inspection was (see 7.5)
- Design Level
- Assessment - Ultimate Strength Assessment
completed. Design Level Criteria - Environmental Load
Method
- Load Approach
b) Risk-based intervals should be adjusted to verify uninterrupted cathodic Method
(see 7.6)
protection of the platform. This should be based on data evaluation from prior - Assessment
Ultimate Strength Category
inspections. Method
RSR Criteria
(see 7.7) - Minimum RSR
Alternative
Methods
(see 7.8)
Mitigation and Risk

Pass Assessment?
Reduction Section 9
Mitigation
And Risk
Assessment
Document
(see 4.2)
Source: Draft API RP 2SIM

API 2A 20th and 21st Ed. RSR’s
20th Ed. GOM 21st Ed. GOM

Assessment Assessment Category Reserve Strength Ratio (RSR)
Category Reserve Strength Ratio (RSR)
GoM L-1 (High) 1.6 for Central Region1
A-1 High 1.21 1.2 for Other Regions
A-2 Medium 0.8 GoM L-2 (Medium) 1.2

A-3 Low 0.62 GoM L-3 (Low) 1.0
1. ThisRSR is applicable only for continued use of the platform for its Other U.S. 2.0
present purpose. Not applicable for Change-of Use conditions.
2. Not to be used for water depth greater than 400 ft.
Offshore Areas
1. Includes
platforms located in the associated Transition Regions. The 100-year
return period metocean conditions as defined in API RP2 MET should be
used to compute the RSR.
20th Ed. Other U.S. Offshore Areas
Assessment Category Reserve Strength Ratio (RSR)
API RP2A 19th API RP2A 20th

Edition and Edition and Later
Earlier
A-1 High 1.6 2.0

Summary
Structural Integrity Management (SIM) and Risk based inspection planning (RBI)
are tools employed to develop bases for asset management and in-service
inspection in order to extend the useful life of the structure and increase its
reliability level.
SIM is geared towards managing the asset data and communicating status to
corporate management in a systematic manner.
RBI entails:
- A risk screening process in order to identify critical areas and summarize the failure
modes.
- The consequences of possible failures and repair strategy are established in close
co-operation with the operator.
- The costs of inspection and repair for failures are established.
- Probabilistic progressive collapse analyses are performed for a number of
representative mechanisms in the structures.
- A cost optimal inspection strategy is established.
Finally, a user friendly tailor made software is developed to to perform the life cycle
management of the Assets.

Safeguarding life, property
and the environment
www.dnv.com


Risk Assessment PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Risk Assessment PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structural Integrity Management and Risk

Based Inspection – Recent Developments

G. Abdel Ghoneim, Ph.D., P.E.

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

Source: MMS, B.J. Kruse, III

GoM Platform Vintage (Years)

<5 5-15 15-30 >30

Total ~ 3,900 Platforms

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

Source: O'Connor, BP, M. Lalani, June 2007

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

6.00E-04 5.00E-04 5.00E-04

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

Load and Resistance

Reporting and Audits and

Learning and Improvement

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

Update risk Integrity

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

 Strategic process for lowering risk and lowering cost

 RBI is an important element in the SIM system.

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

Input data Operating Inspection Monitoring Events /

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

Expected RISK Cost

The Key Concepts of RBI

Age Damage area

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

- Heat radiation levels from fires

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

Formal Safety Assessment

Step 1 Hazard Step 2 Step 5

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

 Event trees Accident Major

Increasing individual risks and societal concerns

 Event tree analysis Rough 30% fatalities

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

Total $ Savings = $1.1M Total $ Savings = $650,000 Total $ Savings = $1.25M

Typical ROI = 8:1

Total $ Savings = $1.1M Total $ Savings = $1.52M Total $ Savings = $1.25M

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIMS SIMS FIP’s Upload

“Orbit Workflow Manager”

Available online: webshop.dnv.com

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

Maintenance Management System

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

ISO 17776 (2000)

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

SIM and RBI – Recent Developments

Strategic process for lowering risk and lowering cost

RBI is an important element in the SIM system.

Event trees Accident Major

Event tree analysis Rough 30% fatalities

Determination of failure criteria