DIAGNOSTIC CORROSION CONDITION OF OIL AND GAS PIPELINES USING CONTROLLED UNMANNED SYSTEMS.

APPLICATION EXPERIENCE

Dr. Michael Getmansky1, Prof. Efim Lyublinski2

, Eng. Boris Verbitsky3, Dr. Ilya Silvokon1, Dr. Sergey Nozhnin3

1“Intercor, Inc.” USA, intercor@comcast.net; 2 “COR/SCI”, USA, elyublinski@gmail.com; 3”AMT-Asmos LLC”, Russia, asmos08@mail.ru

ABSTRACT Worldwide experience shows that existing corrosion protection systems (coatings, cathode

protection systems (CPS) and their combination) can guarantee an expected efficiency and service life only in the expected environmental and application conditions. However, these results are impossible to achieve and in unpredictable spaces across all pipelines dangerous failures-damages of coatings and low efficiency of CPS - are found. Application experience shows that these failures result in unexpectedly high corrosion rates and forms, formation of holes and stress - cracking corrosion. Due to the described situations there are many well-known failures of the following types: leakage and losses of product, contamination of environment, fires and explosions, that have occurred in many countries. It is important to know that these failures occurred or can occur in approximately 1-10% of the pipelines length. But it will require taking the entire length of the pipeline out of operation. This finding allows conclusion that, to solve the above problems it is necessary to find out where failures can happen on time, in order to allow very fast provision of the necessary repairs.

This paper presents application experience of the controlled unmanned systems and technologies that allow predicting corrosion conditions and other possible damages to oil, gas and water pipelines. The technology developed was based on modern innovative methods of non-destructive testing to ensure the operational safety of the pipelines. Statistical data presented allows interpretation of the information with a high degree of certainty. The developed technologies significantly reduce the risks of accidents and we provide recommendations on carrying out maintenance work on the most weakened sections of pipeline, which ultimately leads to significant financial savings. Results of the developed technology application in many countries for diagnostic aboveground, underground, underwater pipelines during all seasons are presented.

Keywords: pipeline, natural environment, atmosphere, soil, water, oil gas, diagnostic, corrosion, fire, explosion, contamination.

INTRODUCTION The developed new unmanned systems and technologies that allow predicting corrosion

conditions and other possible damages of aboveground, underground and underwater oil, gas and water pipelines, excluding loss of products, contamination of environment, fire and explosion of pipelines were described in a paper presented at EUROCORR 2016[1]. But during last year most oil and gas countries did not start application of the developed new technologies based on modern innovative methods of nondestructive diagnostic to check the corrosion of pipelines (pipes, flanges, valves and welded joints) to ensure the operational safety of the pipelines.

Due to this situation, major world-wide problems still exist. In many countries during the last year many leakages, loss of products, dangerous fire and explosions, contamination of environment have occurred.

As is well known, in the United States alone, in 2016 there were 26 pipeline accidents (Tabl.1) whis also destroyed homes, caused injuries to people and took pipelines out of operation.

TABLE 1. LIST OF SELECTED PIPELINE ACCIDENTS IN THE 2016 (UNITED STATE)

Data of accidents Locations Type of

pipeline Main results

Janu

ary

2 Oklahoma Texas Gas

3 people were injured, one home destroyed, and 50 homes were damaged

9 Robertson County

Gas transmission pipeline exploded and burned. 4 families nearby were evacuated]

Febr

uar

y 14 Rozet,

Wyoming Crude oil Spilling about 1,500 gallons of crude oil into a creek bed

24 Near Sulphur, Louisiana Gas A 10-inch pipeline exploded and burned.

About 208,000 gallons of propane were burned.

Mar

ch 11 Sioux City,

Iowa Gasoline

About 30,000 gallons of spilled from a leaking plug on a pipeline, at a tank farm.

22 Harwood, North Dakota

About 4,000 gallons of gasoline spilled from petroleum products pipeline.

Apr

il 12 Woodsboro,

Texas Gas A pipeline at a gas plant in exploded.

17 Wabash County

About 48,000 gallons of diesel fuel was spilled in the Wabash River

May

Ju

ne 20

Tracy,

California Crude Oil

Pipeline leaked spilling about 21,000 gallons of crude oil

23 Ventura County,

Pipeline crude oil line leaked and the estimate spill size was 45,000 gallons

Sept

embe

r

9 Shelby County Gasoline At least 252,000 gallons of gasoline leaked from

line

10 Sweetwater, Texas. Crude oil About 33,000 gallons of crude oil were spilled. The

pipeline was just over a year old

21 Lycoming County,

Pennsylvania Gasoline

On, an 8-inch pipeline ruptured in, spilling about 55,000 gallons of gasoline into the Susquehanna

River.

Dec

embe

r 2 Bowman County,

North Dakota Water

Source water pipeline led to a leak of approximately 84,000 gallons of source water into

Skull Creek.

5 Billings County,

North Dakota Crude oil A 6-inch pipeline spilled 529,800 gallons of crude

oil into Ash Coulee Creek.

Some examples of worldwide dangerous pipeline spills and explosions зкуыутеув in the

Table. 2, Fig.1 and 2 show that pipeline accidents created and will continue create global environmental, safety and economic problems practically in most of countries [2]. This brief information explains how important it is to start application of the new technology in order [1,5] to exclude or significantly decrease the described problems in different countries.

TABLE 2. LIST OF PIPELINE OIL SPILLS SELECTED FROM 57 REGISTERED IN 2010-2016 NUMBERS OF SPILLS

Location Oil Spill / Vessel Year Spills, Tones

Min Max United State, Gulf of

Mexico Deepwater

Horizon 2010 492,000 627,000

France, Brittany TK Bremen 2011 220 Brazil, Frade Field Campos Basin 89 400 Canada, Alberta Little Buffalo 2011 3,800

Venezuela, Guarapiche River 2012 680 41,000

Thailand, Rayong 2013 43 163

Israel, Eilat Trans- pipeline 2014 1,948 4,300

Figure 1. Examples of the top disastrous pipeline spills in 2016 (USA):

a) An estimated 700 barrels of crude oil spills from broken pipeline in Venture , California; b) North Dakota oil pipeline spill an estimated 4,200 barrels of oil. Of that amount, 3,100

barrels of oil flowed into Ash Coulee Creek and polluted 5.4 miles of Creek; c) 336,000 gallons of gas seeped into the ground after Alabama gas pipeline explosion, d) 176,000 gallons of oil spilled at North Dakota pipeline.

a b

c d

Figure 2. Some of the largest pipeline spills and explosions: a) West Virginia natural gas pipeline explosion following high profile natural gas accidents (2012); b) Pipeline Explosion at Alabama Spills 250k gallons of gasoline into a mine water retention pond (2016); c) An oil field exploded in Basra Iraq (2011); d) Pipeline Explosion Kills 10 Campers in New Mexico (2016); e) 185,000 Miles of U.S. Oil Pipelines Leak every single day.

a b

c d

ee

It is well known in most cases the collapses described above happened: > unpredictable application and environment conditions that create unpredictable external and

internal corrosion of pipelines; > absence of the possibility to check the corrosion condition and find out where and when must be

replaced the corrosion protection systems and/or provide maintenance of damaged parts of pipelines. Our diagnostic technology/systems [1] in most cases allow to solve the described problems and

find out where and when it is necessary to provide maintenance and replace the corrosion protection systems.

Below are presented the results of pipeline diagnostics during last year that can be taken into consideration and used by any worldwide companies operating oil and gas pipelines. It will solve the described problems and save million and millions dollars.

APPLICATION RESULTS To find out the condition of aboveground and underground pipelines used the Airborne

Contactless Pipeline Monitoring System with Drone Global Observer (DRONGO) described in the paper [1,5].

The methodology approached the problem from a different angle. The stress attention was on spatial position of the pipeline and analyzes the dynamic stress-state of a linear part of the pipeline while corrosion is more likely a consequence, not a cause.

The integrated system’s tools consist of the following components: 1. Digital topographical map of 0.2 km wide area along the length of the tested pipeline. 2. Precise digital orthophotographical map with uniform (Digital Terrain Map). 3. 3D digital model of the pipeline, both above and below the earth's surface using special

equipment measuring inductive phenomena to locate metal pipes and other objects. 4. Command and Control Center that includes proprietary software for characterization and

analysis of pipeline network integrity in real time. 5. Used special sensors on a low altitude above the pipeline axial which collect data for the

pipeline dynamic stress-state calculation. Monitoring is performed periodically across the pipeline network as well as examining

specific parts of the pipeline in all types of terrain. This data characterizes sections of the pipeline that do not have any changes compared with the original deployment, as well as those segments which are under mechanical stress, and thus likely to suffer from initial corrosion or other damage, and also parts that require immediate direct inspection & maintenance because of high probability of leaks and ruptures. The main goal was to identify out the critical parts of the pipeline for preventing leaks and ruptures. The technology generates a database of the critical parameters of pipelines and contains tools that facilitate an effective decision making process of monitoring, maintenance and corrosion protection of pipelines. This monitoring system is used to check the following worldwide problems:

Ø Contamination of environment and explosion of oil and gas underground, underwater, above-ground pipelines due to unexpected pipeline external and/or internal corrosion, leakage and loss of products.

Ø The necessity to take pipelines out of operation to replace or conduct long-term and very expensive maintenance work.

Below are presented the application results conducted in December 2016 using the developed system.

The length of the pit was 62m. The length of the plot surveyed accounted for 61.5 m. General view of some objects are shown in Fig. 3.

The top forming a pipeline made geodetic measurements in increments of no more than 2m (on the top generating line of the pipeline). Accuracy of determining the marks does not exceed 4mm.

Water in soil and wet soilСlutch

Сlutch

Сlutch0.06m.

Сlutch

Unloading of the pipeline

about 0.15m.

a

cb

Figure 3. Condition of some part of underground pipelines with different unpredictable condition.

The application experience that was conducted from the air by using the developed

system during only about 20min, allowed finding out the unpredictable condition of pipelines: Ø Offset (unloading) of the pipeline (Fig. 3a) - Localized border values offset direction

and shedding ground in overnight and border flooding pipeline of ground waters. Ø Find out a fully destroyed and unpredictable higher diameter of some parts (Fig. 3b). Ø Unloading of some parts (Fig. 3c) that can create stress cracking corrosion and

destroy the pipe.

Diagnostic of the soil performance (Fig. 4) also allowed ascertaining out how the waterlogged soil structure and condition can influence on the pipeline performance. This data received after checking condition of 80km of underground pipeline.

Figure 4. Condition of soil around pipeline in flat waterlogged plain In winter time the iced waterlogged soil became a source to change the pipeline profile,

destroy the coating and became a source for the increased general and stress creaking corrosion. The monitoring test results allowed finding the maximum permissible radius of curvature of the underground pipelines (Tabl.3).

Table 3.The permissible radius of pipelines curvature.

Diameter of the

pipeline, мм Maximum permissible radius of curvature, м

Maximum permissible curvature, м-1

7.6 209 0,00478

9.1 312 0,00320 10.0 296 0,00328 11б8 282 0,00355

The corrosion condition of pipelines and possible damages in many cases depends, on

how deep the pipelines are installed, because the soil has different chemical composition, humidity, concentration of chemicals, pH and temperature. To find out the difference of pipelines condition depending on how deep they are installed in all cases the work started (the system used) to check underground location of pipeline. One of the examples conducted during this application shown on Fig.5. It shows that on the 112.09m. length of the pipeline the difference of the location is about -22,4 m.

Taken into consideration the maximum permissible radius of pipeline curvature the monitoring results allowed to find out the location of pipeline that are critical for application(Fig.6).

0255075100L,km

30

20

10

H,m

Figure 5. Monitoring results that shown how deep is location of underground pipeline

0255075100

20

15

10

5

0

Length of pipeline, km

Criti

cal p

arts

of P

L

FIGURE 6. NUMBER AND LOCATION OF THE UNDERGROUND PIPELINE (PL)

CRITICAL PART CONFIRMED DURING UNMANNED DIAGNOSTIC The information described allowed drawing the conclusion that the tested pipeline has many

critical for application parts. It allowed selecting the exact locations of the parts (Tabl.4) that must be fixed to exclude the possible accidents, for example leakage, fire and contamination of environment. Some additional examples of the critical pipeline conditions detected during application of developed technology presented on Fig 7.

TABLE4.SELECTEDINFORMATIONABOUTTHECONDITIONOFCRITICALPARTSOFPIPELINE,DETECTEDDURINGDIAGNOSTIC,ANDMAINRECOMMENDATIONS

Distance to the location,

m

The curvature radius, m

Destination,m Radius of curvature, m

Remarks Recomen-dations

according to the diagnostic

40889 116 40881- 40889 165 Destroyed

clutch Instant

repair and frequency diagnostic 56764 82 56760-

56772 212 Corrugation

87664 35 87664 - Corrugation with dent

Instant tenderloin or repair

FIGURE 7. CRITICAL CONDITION OF SOME UNDERGROUND PIPELINES DETECTED

DURING THE DIAGNOSTIC

The presented information in many cases will allow decreasing duration, cost of the maintenance and increase application period of the pipeline.

CONCLUSION

Leakage and explosion of oil and gas underground, underwater, aboveground pipelines due to unexpected external and/or internal corrosion, loss of products, contamination of environment is well-known problems in most of countries

1. Application of the new developed controlled technology is an unmanned system that allowed providing detailed inspection and diagnostic of the underground pipelines conditions.

2. Prepared and presented digital orthophotographical maps and photos along 1 km. of pipeline using the developed equipment and measuring systems.

3. Find out the locations that must be frequency controlled and also identified the locations where the parts of pipeline must be immediately maintained or replaced.

4. It is become clear that application of the developed technology will allow predicting location of possible leaks and ruptures in the first place.

5. The application results allow making decision that the developed and approved diagnostic technology:

Ø easily applicable and allow to provide recommendation how to exclude the leakage, environment contamination, and explosion of pipelines;

Ø will significantly (in many cases) decrease the duration and time to find out the application condition of pipelines;

Ø allow to increase service life of pipelines, exclude the necessity to take pipelines out of operation, significantly decrease the cost of application.

REFERENCES 1. M. Getmansky, E. Lyublinski, B. Verbitsky, I. Silvokon. Remote diagnostics of underground, underwater, aboveground pipelines using controlled unmanned systems, Montpellier, France, EUROCORR 2016, Paper 62512. 2. List of pipeline accidents in the United States in the 21st century, 2017. 3. Corrosion control in petroleum production, NACE International, Houston, 1999. 4. A. Muradov, M. Getmansky, M. Agranat, V. Vinokurov, L. Perelman. Hyperspectral Optical Technique for Quantitative Visualization of Micro cracks in Oil and Gas Equipment using Metal Nanoparticle Markers, Estoril, Portugal, EUROCORR 2013, Paper KN-8527. 5. M. Getmansky, E. Lyublinski,, B. Verbitsky, I. Silvokon. Evaluation of underground pipelines corrosion condition by using controlled unmanned systems, Conference “Corrosion and flow assurance in oil and gas”, Moscow 2016.