Sie sind auf Seite 1von 60

===

Design of Composite Repairs


for Pipework




January 2005
Private circulation - PRI/88/2.0060/05

===

Design of Composite Repairs
for Pipework








January 2005



AEA Technology ii
=

Title Design of Composite Repairs for Pipework

Customer

Customer reference

Confidentiality,
copyright and
reproduction


Warranty

File reference 57711001

Report number AEAT - 57711

Report status January 2005


AEA Technology plc
E1 Culham
Abingdon
Oxon
OX14 3ED
Telephone 01235 464244
Facsimile 01235 463799

Name Signature Date

Author SR Frost

Reviewed by

Approved by


==


AEA Technology iii
=

Contents
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. NOMENCLATURE 2
3. SCOPE 4
4. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY 6
5. RISK ASSESSMENT 8
6. DEFINITION OF REPAIR CLASS 9
7. DEFINITION OF REPAIR LIFETIME 11
8. REQUIRED DATA 12
8.1 Original equipment design data 12
8.2 Maintenance and operational history 12
8.3 Material data 12
9. DESIGN METHODOLOGY 15
9.1 Design based on pipe allowable stress 15
9.2 Design based on composite allowable strains 16
9.3 Design based on repair allowable stresses determined by performance
testing 18
9.4 Additional requirements for leaking pipes 19
9.5 Axial extent of repair 21
10. ELEVATED TEMPERATURES 23
11. MINIMUM BOND STRENGTH 25
12. OPTIONAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 26

==


AEA Technology iv
=

12.1 Impact 26
12.2 Cyclic loading 26
12.3 Live repairs 26
12.4 Fire Performance 28
12.5 Gas service 29
12.6 Environmental Compatibility 29
12.7 External Loads 30
13. REPAIR OF OTHER COMPONENTS 31
13.1 Clamps and other repair systems 31
13.2 Piping system components 31
13.3 Tank and vessel components 32
14. RE-QUALIFICATION 35
15. INSPECTION AND TESTING 35
16. HEALTH AND SAFETY 35
17. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 35
18. BIBLIOGRAPHY 36
APPENDICES 38


==


AEA Technology 1
=

1. INTRODUCTION
Design codes and standards for pressurised equipment provide rules for the design,
fabrication, inspection and testing of new piping systems. These codes do not address the
fact that equipment degrades in service or may require to be up-rated due to a change in
duty, nor do they consider options for remedial action should such events occur. This
specification provides guidance for the design of one repair option: the external
reinforcement and the repair of damage such as holes in pipe or pipe components using
composite materials. The procedures described in this specification can be used to design
composite reinforcements to allow damaged pressurised equipment to continue to operate
safely.

The development of this document was carried out in collaboration with a number of
organisations representing material suppliers, users and regulatory agencies. Those
involved included Shell, BP, Saudi Aramco, Amerada Hess, Petrobras, Petronas, Statoil,
BG-Hydrocarbon Resources Ltd, DML, WTR, Clock Spring and IMG.

This document is one of a number that covers the design, installation (AEAT- 57756) and
inspection (AEAT- 75394) of composite repairs. An overview of the documents is provided in
a summary report (AEAT- 02529).


==


AEA Technology 2
=

2. NOMENCLATURE
c = crack length (m)
d = diameter (or diameter of the equivalent circle) of the leaking region (m).
D = external pipe diameter (m)
D
a
= external attachment equivalent diameter (m)
D
b
= external branch, tee, nozzle diameter (m)
D
d
= external diameter dome end (m)
D
f
= degradation factor the long term performance of leaking repairs
D
r
= external reducer diameter (smaller diameter) (m)
E = bending modulus for the composite laminate, see Table 3 (N/m
2
)
E
c
= tensile modulus for the composite laminate in the circumferential direction,
see Table 3 (N/m
2
)
E
a
= tensile modulus in axial direction for the composite laminate, see Table 3
(N/m
2
)
E
s
= tensile modulus for steel obtained from ASME B31.3 (N/m
2
)
f
c
= service factor for cyclic fatigue
f
leak
= service factor for leaking repairs
f
perf
= service factor for performance data, see Table 5
f
th,overlay
= repair thickness increase factor for reduced available overlap length
f
th,stress
= repair thickness increase factor for piping system or vessel component
f
T1
= temperature de-rating factor for composite allowable strains
f
T2
= temperature de-rating factor for leaking pipe design
F = sum axial tensile loads due to pressure, bending and axial thrust (N). (Note
that the axial tensile load generated by an applied bending moment is (4M/D))
G = shear modulus for the composite laminate, see Table 3 (N/m
2
)
h = burial depth (m)
I = second moment of area (m
4
)
L = total axial extent of repair (m)
L
available
= available axial extent of undamaged pipe section (m)
L
over
= axial extent of design thickness of repair (m)
L
defect
= axial length of defect (m)
L
taper
= axial length of taper (m)
N = number of cycles
P = internal design pressure (N/m
2
)
P
e
= external design pressure (N/m
2
)
P
ext,soil
= external soil pressure (N/m
2
)
P
live
= internal pressure within the pipe during application of the repair (N/m
2
)
P
min
= minimum (internal pressure) load (or stress) of the load cycle
P
max

= maximum (internal pressure) load (or stress) of the load cycle
P
s
= MAWP (maximum allowable working pressure) for the steel pipe determined
from API 579 (N/m
2
)
P
0
= initial test pressure (bar)
P
&
= fixed linear increase in test pressure (bar/hour)
q = tensile stress (N/m
2
)
R
c
= cyclic loading severity, defined as:
max
min
P
P
R
c
=
s = allowable tensile stress for the steel obtained from ASME B31.3 (N/m
2
)
s
lt
= lower confidence limit of the long term stress determined by performance
testing in accordance with Appendix 5 (N/m
2
)

==


AEA Technology 3
=

s
SMYS
= minimum specified yield stress of substrate (N/m
2
)
t = wall thickness of pipe or component (undamaged) (m)
t
b
= wall thickness of branch (m)
t
f
= wall thickness of flange (m)
t
design
= design thickness of repair laminate (m)
t
min
= minimum thickness of repair laminate (m)
t
s
= minimum remaining substrate wall thickness of pipe or component (m)
T
d
= design temperature (
0
C)
T
m
= maximum operating temperature of repair system (
0
C)
T
amb
= ambient temperature (
0
C)
T
test
= qualification test temperature (
0
C)
W = (axial) width of circumferential slot defect (m)


s
= thermal expansion coefficient of steel

(
0
C
-1
)

c
= thermal expansion coefficient of the repair laminate

for either the axial or
circumferential directions (
0
C
-1
)

c
= circumferential design strain

c0
= allowable circumferential strain obtained from Table 4

a
= axial design strain

a0
= allowable axial strain obtained from Table 4

t
= thermal strain
= angle subtended by axial slot (radian)
T

= temperature difference between operation and installation (
0
C)
= toughness parameter (energy release rate) for the composite steel interface
measured according to Appendix 4 (J/m
2
).

soil
g = specific weight of soil (kg/ms)
= lap shear strength Appendix 2 (N/m
2
)
= Poisson's ratio for the composite laminate in the circumferential direction, see
Table 3 (N/m
2
).


==


AEA Technology 4
=

3. SCOPE
The design procedures given in this document cover situations involving damage commonly
encountered in utility oil and gas pipework systems. The procedures are also applicable to
the repair of pipelines. They are not intended to provide a definitive guideline for every
possible situation that may be encountered. However, they are intended to be used flexibly
and can, in principle, be used as a basis for repairs to uncommon situations that are not
explicitly covered.

Procedures in this document cover the repair of carbon steel pipework and pipework
components, and pipelines originally designed in accordance with a variety of pipe standards
including ISO 15649/13623, ASME B31.1/B31.3/B31.4/B31.8 and BS 8010. The following
circumstances are addressed:

external corrosion, which may or may not cause leaking, and structural integrity needs to
be restored. In this case it is probable that with suitable surface preparation the
application of a composite repair will arrest further deterioration;
external damage such as dents, gouges, fretting (at supports) where structural integrity
needs to be restored;
internal corrosion, which may or may not be leaking, and there is a need to restore
structural integrity. In this case it is probable that corrosion will continue and the
assessment must take this into account;
structural strengthening to account for an increase in pressure rating or other loads in
local areas.

Note that if the purpose of the repair it to increase the original design conditions, e.g. higher
pressure rating then the PED (Pressure Equipment Directive) will apply.

Pipe services that are considered are:

utility fluids, diesel, seawater, air;
chemicals;
produced fluids, including gas and gas condensate.

The upper pressure/temperature limits are dependent on the type of damage being repaired
and the type of repair being used. These limits are determined by the qualification testing
requirements presented in the following sections. A lower temperature limit of -50
0
C can be
assumed but further considerations in the design are required. Also, the internal fluids and,
or external environment can reduce these pressure/temperature limits.

The composite materials considered within the document are those with glass (GRP) or
carbon (CFRP) reinforcement in a polyester, vinyl ester or epoxy matrix.

Use of this document outside these service ranges is possible subject to the comments
given below.

Examples where the details of the application are outside the above scope, but where the
intent of the design guidelines may be used coupled with a more complete analysis are:

other pipe specifications;
other tubular products, e.g. caissons;

==


AEA Technology 5
=

other pressurised parts, e.g. storage tanks and pressure vessels;
other pipe materials, e.g. alloyed steel;
other degradation mechanisms, e.g. wall loss due to erosion;
other service conditions, e.g. process fluids or higher operating envelope in terms of
pressure and temperature;
other composite material systems.

Elements of the procedures are also applicable to those repair systems with different design
features, e.g. those that use elastomeric seals or other means of containing the fluid.

The operational envelope described in this scope is intended to cover the majority of
applications and experience at the time the document was prepared. The allowable
pressure for repairs in leaking pipes is lower due to the fact that in these circumstances the
repair material is in direct contact with the process fluid and subject to loadings that are more
severe than in the non-leaking case. For the non-leaking case there is considerable
successful experience at high pressures especially for pipeline applications. There are some
examples where the composite repair option is in use or being considered for more arduous
conditions and for more complex repairs. This flexibility in materials and design options is
one of the key advantages with composites.

As a general guide the following Table summarises the types of defects that can be repaired
using composite repair systems

General wall thinning Y
Local wall thinning Y
Pitting Y
Gouges R
Blisters Y
Laminations Y
Circumferential cracks Y
Longitudinal cracks R
Through wall penetration Y

Where Y implies generally appropriate and R implies may be used, but requires special
caution.




==


AEA Technology 6
=

4. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY
It is intended that at the outset of a repair activity a risk assessment be carried out which will
determine the details of the design route to be taken and any requirements for supporting
technical documentation. This will also determine the design margin or factor of safety to be
used in the design.

A key point that must be considered in the design and application of a bonded repair is that
the combination of pipe material/surface preparation technique/composite is the basic design
unit. Data derived using one set of materials cannot be used to assist in the design of
another even if it is only one of the components comprising the arrangement that has
changed. Related to this is the fact that the most important aspect determining the
behaviour of a bonded connection is surface preparation. Failure to execute this task
correctly will lead to a reduced level of performance irrespective of the quality of the design.

There are two main approaches to the design of a composite repair, the main difference
being whether or not the original pipe is allowed to exceed its original design allowable. For
glass reinforcements that are of fabric or random mat type it is unlikely the repair will be
designed such that the steel exceeds yield. In this case it is the load share between the
composite and the steel that is the main design issue. For unidirectional glass or carbon
fibre materials, on the other hand, the full benefit of the repair may not be achieved unless
the system is allowed to operate at relatively high strains. Here it is assumed that the
contribution of the steel to the load carrying capability of the repaired section can be ignored.

In order to assess the contribution of the damaged steel pipe to the integrity of a repair API
579, BS 7910 or other fitness for service codes can be used. This document provides
calculation methods for the assessment of the remaining load carrying capability of pipe that
has been subjected to corrosion (general and localised, including pitting), mechanical flaws
(induced during fabrication or through abuse) and fire. Where the deterioration will continue
after repair, e.g. internal corrosion, the document takes this into account through measured
corrosion rates. The result of the calculations is a maximum safe or allowable working
pressure (MAWP) for the damaged pipe. This value is used as an input to the design of the
repair.

The design procedures for the repair laminate follow those that are well established in the
manufacture of composite process plant where the principle is to limit material strains below
the point where damage is generated. Whilst this is well below ultimate strengths it is
considered necessary for long term performance. Design strains for composite materials
currently cited in, for example prEN13121, are 0.25%. In circumstances where there is
potential for upset conditions it is considered acceptable to allow higher strains, up to 0.4%,
and these are used where the repair is limited to temporary service. In principal all types of
reinforcement can be used, e.g. woven and random fabrics or unidirectional. In some cases
the repair laminate will be anisotropic, i.e. the strength and stiffness in the direction of the
fibres will be greater than in other directions, and the design procedures address this issue
through the specification of different allowable strain values in different directions.
Composite strains are not a design issue where the intention is to contain loads such that
the steel remains below its allowable as the applied strains will be well below these levels.

An alternative design method based on performance testing where the repair is qualified
through a validation programme is also described. The important feature of this approach is
that test conditions are representative of those in service. Performance based methods are
also used in the process industry, for example ISO14692, which addresses GRP pipework

==


AEA Technology 7
=

design. It is likely that this approach will not be of primary interest to many suppliers due to
the costs of the test burden, but there is some benefit as the conservatism in design can be
reduced.

Repair of pipe sections that leak require an additional level of assessment. This is because
in these circumstances the repair material is exposed directly to pressure and the process
media from the pipe. Specifically, the combined action of these factors will tend to cause a
delamination along the interface between the composite and underlying steel. The design
method involves the use of a fracture energy value determined from testing representative
material.

Repairs that are currently supplied fall into two generic types, which in this suite of
documentation are denoted Type A and Type B. Type A represents those repair systems
that are supplied in a pre-packed form and are often held as a stock item and applied by
maintenance personnel on the facility. Type B represents the alternative situation where the
repair is specified and designed on an on demand basis. Currently, these systems are
usually applied by specialist contractors. The procedures described in the documentation
described in this report are appropriate to both sets of types of repair, although the timing of
certain of the qualification and design activities may vary. For example, suppliers of Type A
repair systems will need to provide design details prior to the identification of individual repair
situations. It is envisaged that use will be made of the procedures described in the
documentation to produce a technical manual detailing under what circumstances the
particular repair system can be used.

The choice of 0.25% as a baseline design strain will be conservative where the pipe is not
leaking as the composite will not be exposed to the process media. Allowable design limits
derived from performance data are likely to be higher. The 0.25% is an established value for
GRP and it has been assumed that CFRP material should be limited by a similar value.
There is less experimental data in corrosion resistance applications available for carbon
reinforced materials compared to those reinforced with glass. The fact the modulus of CFRP
is greater than the equivalent value for GRP means that, although limiting strain values are
the same, CFRP will have a greater load carrying capability. Where the pipe is leaking the
strain in the laminate is less relevant as it will be the quality of the bond with the parent
component that will determine performance.


==


AEA Technology 8
=

5. RISK ASSESSMENT
For each repair situation a risk assessment shall be carried out. In most cases the risk
assessment will be carried out by the owner/user. The objective of the assessment shall be
to establish the Class of the repair and this determines the detail of the design method to be
carried out together with the requirements for supporting documentation. The risk
assessment shall include consideration of the hazards associated with system service, the
availability of the personnel with the necessary skills, the ease with which it is practicable to
execute surface preparation operations, the availability of design data, leak before break,
inspectability, and performance under upset and major incident situations including fire,
explosion, collision and environmental loading.

The risk assessment shall also provide information and data describing any hazards for
inclusion in the repair method statement to be used on site.

Leak before break is a general characteristic of composite materials under internal pressure
loading. Generally, failure is through weeping of the process media through the wall
thickness of the laminate. For repairs, there will be an additional failure mechanism due to
possible delamination of the repair from the parent steel. This type of failure will also be
characterised by leak before break. Suppliers of repair materials will have experience
relating to their specific products and confirmatory test information from any qualification
testing that has been carried out.


==


AEA Technology 9
=

6. DEFINITION OF REPAIR CLASS
Specific repairs shall be allocated to a particular class following completion of the risk
assessment. Repair Classes are defined in Table 1.

Class 1 repairs cover pressure ratings up to 10 bar g and therefore are appropriate to the
majority of the utility service systems on an offshore facility. This Class is intended for those
systems that do not relate directly to personnel safety or safety critical systems.

Class 2 repairs cover pressure ratings up to 20 bar g but exclude hydrocarbons . This Class
is appropriate to those systems that have specific safety related functions. (Class 150)

Class 3 repairs cover all fluid types and pressure up to the qualified upper pressure limit.
This Class is appropriate for many of the systems transporting produced fluids on an
offshore facility. Hazards for these systems derive primarily from the nature of the fluids
they convey.

For applications where the service conditions are more onerous or not included in the above,
they shall be designated as Class 3.


Repair Class

Typical Service Pressure Temperature
Class 1
Low specification duties,
e.g. static head, drains
Cooling medium, sea
(service) water, non-
leaking utility
hydrocarbons
< 10 bar g -20
0
to 40
0
C
Class 2 Fire water/deluge systems < 20 bar g -20
0
to 100
0
C
Class 3
Produced water and
hydrocarbons, flammable
fluids, gas systems.
Class 3 also covers
operating conditions more
onerous than described.
Qualified
upper limit
-50
0
to
qualified upper
limit

Table 1: Repair classification

The ASME PCC-2 (high risk metal pipe) standard refers to Class 2 and Class 3 systems.
This is because the scope of the ASME standard in terms of potential applications is
significantly wider than this guideline for off-shore use and attempting to define a generic
Class system would be too complicated.

The ASME PCC-2 (low risk metal pipe) standard is equivalent to Class 1 systems.

The definitions for Class 1 to 3 given in Table 1 cover the majority of composite repairs
carried out at the present time. It is not intended that the data presented in Table 1 should
preclude the use of composites for other duties. For more onerous applications detailed
consideration between the owner/user and supplier is required.


==


AEA Technology 10
=

The derivation of the definitions for the repair classes involved the consideration of typical
repair situations and the repair options currently available. The intention is to ensure that
these procedures allowed the use of simple repair procedures and techniques for
straightforward scenarios (Class 1), whilst establishing a means of increasing the level of
conservatism for the higher risk duties (Classes 2 to 3). The selection of Class is governed
by the output of the risk assessment.



==


AEA Technology 11
=

7. DEFINITION OF REPAIR LIFETIME
The required lifetime (in years) of the repair shall be defined in the repair data sheet,
Appendix 1.

The minimum lifetime of the repair shall be 2 years.

Short lifetimes (2 years) are intended to denote those situations where the repair is required
to survive until the next shutdown, after which it shall be replaced.

Long lifetimes (up to 20 years) are intended to denote those situations where the repair is
required to reinstate the pipe to its original design lifetime or to extend its design life for a
specified period.

Once the lifetime of the repair has expired, the repair must be removed.



==


AEA Technology 12
=

8. REQUIRED DATA
The following data shall be supplied for each repair. The detail to which these requirements
are fulfilled will be determined by the output of the risk assessment. Original equipment
design data, and maintenance and operational histories shall be provided by the owner/user
and material data shall be provided by the supplier. The availability of relevant data should
feature as part of the risk assessment.

Examples of design data sheets are given in Appendix 1.

8.1 Original equipment design data
Piping line lists or other documentation showing process design conditions and a
description of the piping class including material specification, pipe wall thickness and
pressure- temperature rating.
Piping isometric drawings including sufficient details to permit a piping flexibility
calculation if this analysis is deemed necessary.
Specification of all operating mechanical loads not included in the above, including upset
conditions.
Original design calculations.

8.2 Maintenance and operational history
Documentation of any significant changes in service conditions including pressure,
temperature, fluid content and corrosion rate. Both past and future service conditions
should be reviewed and documented.
Summary of all alterations and past repairs local to the pipe section of concern.
Inspection reports detailing the nature and extent of damage to be repaired.
Lifetime requirements for the repair.
Maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) as calculated according to the
requirements of API 579. This should be carried out taking into account the current
position and any possible further degradation in the future.

[Note: API 579 requires additional information including inspection data and measured
corrosion rates for the assessment of the effects of defects on MAWP.]

8.3 Material data
The documentation and data related to repair materials that shall be provided by suppliers is
shown in Table 2. Details of the data to be provided by the suppliers are given in Appendix
2.




=

==


AEA Technology 13
=

Documentation
requirement
Class 1 Class 2 Class 3
Material documentation ! ! !
Design capability ! !
Surface preparation
documentation
! ! !
Short term test data ! ! !
Durability data ! !

Table 2: Documentation and data requirements for pipework repairs
Clarification of the terms used in Table 2 is as follows:

Basic material documentation. This should include a statement of the resins and
reinforcements used and any standards to which they are supplied. Basic data on
material compatibility with the working environment should also be available.

Design capability. Organisations who offer a repair option for pressurised parts need to
have an understanding of the design issues associated with their product and be able to
provide calculations with supporting data. Suppliers are required to have a competent
engineering capability.

Surface preparation. The durability of a bonded assembly under applied load is
determined to a large extent by the quality of the surface preparation used. Details of
surface preparation and how it is to be implemented in service are required.

Short term test data. These should include tensile strength and modulus values in both
the hoop and axial directions and basic information on the strength of the adhesive
connection between the repair and the steel. Details of the data required for design and
bond strength are given in Sections 9 and 11 of this document respectively.

Durability data. For the higher specification requirements demonstration of performance
through testing over extended timescales is necessary. Details of the data required for
design and bond durability are given in Sections 9 and 11 of this document respectively.

To summarise, Table 3 lists the data required to comply with the Class 3 requirements
(Appendix 2 has more details);

==


AEA Technology 14
=


Material Property Test method
Alternative test
methods
Mechanical
properties
Youngs modulus
Poissons ratio
Shear modulus

Thermal expansion coefficient
Glass transition temperature of
resin


Barcol or shore hardness


Bending modulus
ISO 527
ISO 527
ASTM D5379 (see
Figure 1)
ISO 11359
ISO 11357-2 or ISO 75



BS EN 59
ISO 868

ISO 178
ASTM D3039
ASTM D3039


ASTM E831
ASTM D6604 or
ASTM E1640 or
ASTM E831

ASTM D2583


ASTM D790
Adhesion
strength
Lap shear BS EN 1465
Performance
data
Long term strength (optional)
Energy release rate
Appendix 5
Appendix 4


Table 3: Qualification test requirements


Figure 1: The test specimen geometry from ASTM D5379

Whilst not a mandatory feature of this document it is common for operators to require some
level of third party validation of test data either through testing in independent laboratories or
witnessing by independent agencies.

It is important that those engaged in testing are familiar with the behaviour of composite
materials.


==


AEA Technology 15
=

9. DESIGN METHODOLOGY
The design of repair laminates shall be carried out using the procedures in the following
sections.

The minimum design thickness for the repair laminate shall be 0.005 m (5 mm). For
applications were the potential for external third party accidental impacts is considered
unlikely then the minimum design thickness requirement may be relaxed to the greater
thickness of either 2 wraps or 0.002 m (2 mm).

Equations (1) to (29) in the following sections assume the use of SI units throughout.

The minimum design thickness of 5mm was considered to be the norm at the time this
document was prepared. In most cases the cost of the material is not a significant element
in that for the total repair operation. There may be circumstances where this requirement
could be relaxed, e.g. the use of a GRP repair to provide external corrosion resistance to
significant lengths of pipe and there is little or no load carrying requirement for the
composite. Approximate calculations using analysis for a beam on an elastic foundation
indicates that the specified extent of repair laminate is satisfactory for leaking pipes.

It should be noted that use of the design methods in Sections 9.2 and 9.4 will result in the
parent steel pipe operating above its yield point. The basis of these methods is that the
composite material carries all of the applied loads. The steel will be required to operate
under these relatively high strains (constrained by the repair) during normal operation.

For the range of materials of interest and typical maximum operating conditions of up to 100
bar, then in most cases the thickness of the repair should not be greater than 25 mm.
Specific details on the design should be provided if repair designs are greater than 25 mm.

9.1 Design based on pipe allowable stress
Use of the design method in this section is appropriate if the contribution of the pipe is to be
included in the calculation for load carrying capability.

For piping systems Equations (1) and (2) should be used. In the derivation of these
equations it is assumed that the underlying substrate does not yield.

For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the minimum thickness for a repair laminate, t
min

(m), is given by:

( )
s
c
s
min
P P
E
E
s
D
t
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
2
(1)
For axial stresses due to internal pressure, bending and axial thrust the minimum thickness
for a repair laminate, t
min
(m), is given by:


|
.
|

\
|

|
|
.
|

\
|
=
s
a
s
min
P
D
F
E
E
s
D
t
2
2
2

(2)==

==


AEA Technology 16
=

The design repair thickness shall be the maximum value determined from Equations (1) and
(2).

Where the purpose of the composite repair is to increase the rating of an undamaged
section of pipe the value of P
s
shall be the original MAWP.

Where the purpose of the composite repair is to strengthen an undamaged section of pipe to
carry additional bending or other axial loads the value of F should be taken to be the
increased total axial load requirement and the value of P
s
shall be the original MAWP.

It is recognised that in this design option the amount of load carried by the composite is
modest. It is likely that this design method will be used as part of the assessment of leaking
pipes (in conjunction with Section 9.4).

Use of the MAWP for the steel pipe should ensure that the steel does not exceed yield
during operation or hydrotest so that the assumptions used in the derivation of Equations (1)
and (2) regarding load distribution will remain valid.

For pipelines Equations (3) or (4) should be used. In the derivation of these equations it is
assumed that the underlying substrate does yield and the repair is limited by the design or
allowable strain of the composite. Only hoop loading is considered in determining the
minimum wall thickness of the repair laminate.

For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the minimum thickness for a repair laminate, t
min

(m), is given by:


) t E t E (
D P
t E
t
s
t E
PD
s s min c
live
min c
s
min c
c
+
=
2 2
(3)
If the repair is applied at zero internal pressure, i.e. P
live
= 0, then Equation (3) can be
rearranged to give;

|
.
|

\
|
=
s
c c
min
st
PD
E
t
2
1

(4)
The design repair thickness, t
design
, shall be taken as the value determined from either
Equations (3) or (4).

The assumptions made in deriving Equations (3) and (4) are that the substrate material is
elastic, perfectly plastic, i.e. no strain hardening and that no defect assessment is performed
other than use of the minimum remaining wall thickness (of the substrate) to infer the internal
pressure at the point of substrate yield.

9.2 Design based on composite allowable strains
Use of the design method in this section is appropriate if the contribution of the steel pipe to
is to be ignored in the calculation for load carrying capability and if short term material
properties are to be used.

For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the minimum thickness for a repair laminate, t
min

(m), is given by:

==


AEA Technology 17
=



|
|
.
|

\
|
=
c c c
min
E D
F
E
PD
t


1
2
1
(5)
For axial stresses due to internal pressure, bending and axial thrust the minimum thickness
for a repair laminate, t
min
(m), is given by:


|
|
.
|

\
|
=
c a a
min
E
PD
E D
F
t

2
1 1
(6)==

Material Type Class 1 Class 2 Class 3
Repair lifetime (years) 2 10 20 2 10 20 2 10 20
For E
a
> 0.5 E
c

For E
a
< 0.5 E
c
- circumferential
- axial
0.40%


0.40%
0.25%
0.32%


0.32%
0.16%
0.25%


0.25%
0.10%
0.35%


0.35%
0.10%
0.30%


0.30%
0.10%
0.25%


0.25%
0.10%
0.30%


0.30%
0.10%
0.27%


0.27%
0.10%
0.25%


0.25%
0.10%

Note: For Class 3 detailed consideration between the owner/user and supplier is required.

Table 4: Allowable strains for composite laminates as a function of repair lifetime
Table 4 is used in the following manner. For example, for a Class 2 repair design lifetime of
8 years with (E
a
< 0.5 E
c
), then the allowable strains are taken from the next highest repair
lifetime, i.e. 10 years, implying the allowable circumferential and axial strains are 0.3% and
0.1% respectively.

The design repair thickness, t
design
, shall be the maximum value determined from Equations
(5) and (6).

For occasional loads, Class 1 minimum repair lifetime (1 year) strains may be used.
Occasional loads are defined as those that occur during short term, rarely occurring events,
typically less than 10 times in the life of the component and each duration less than 30 min.

The data presented in Table 4 for GRP assumes that the strain to failure of the un-reinforced
resin is greater than 2%. For resin systems where the strain to failure is less than 2%
special consideration is required. It is also assumed that the strain to failure of the repair
laminate is at least 4 times that taken from Table 4 and used in design. The strain to failure
can be derived from the test carried out to determine the tensile properties of the laminate
(ISO 527 or equivalent).

Some suppliers may choose to use laminate analysis to calculate modulus values for
laminates built up from a series of different layers. This is satisfactory provided that the
results from the analysis have been fully validated using measured data.

The strains given in Table 4 are typical of those used in the design of composite components
(see for example prEN 13121). The values are based on those required for long term
performance.


==


AEA Technology 18
=

9.3 Design based on repair allowable stresses
determined by performance testing
Use of the design method in this section is appropriate if performance based test data is
available.
Appendix 5 provides three methods for the determination of long term failure stress (or
strain).

If allowance for the pipe is not to be included, then Equation (7) shall be used.

For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the minimum repair laminate thickness, t
min
, is
given by:

|
|
.
|

\
|
=
lt perf
min
s f
PD
t
.
1
2
(7)
For axial stresses due to internal pressure, bending and axial thrust the minimum repair
laminate thickness, t
min
, is given by Equation (2) or (6) as appropriate.

The design repair laminate thickness, t
design
, shall be the greater of the values determined.

If allowance for the pipe is to be included, then Equation (8) shall be used.

For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the design repair laminate thickness, t
design
, is
given by:


( )
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
lt perf
s design
s . f
s t
PD
t
1
2
(8)
The service factor f
perf
is obtained from Table 5.

Test Data Class 1 Class 2 Class 3
Repair lifetime (years) 2 10 20 2 10 20 2 10 20
1000 hour data

Design life data
0.83

1
0.65

0.83
0.5

0.67
0.67

0.83
0.58

0.75
0.5

0.67
0.6

0.75
0.55

0.71
0.5

0.67

Note: For Class 3 detailed consideration between the owner/user and supplier is required.

Table 5: Service factor, f
perf
, for performance data of repair systems
The basis behind the performance bases design method is that established for GRP pipe
work systems. ISO 14692 provides further information. The 1000 hr duration for survival
testing has been selected, as at this time modes of failure tend to be more typical of those
over long time periods.


==


AEA Technology 19
=

9.4 Additional requirements for leaking pipes
Use of the design method in this section is appropriate if the pipe is leaking or deemed to be
leaking at the end of its life. The requirements of this section are in addition to those
described in Sections 9.1, 9.2 or 9.3.

A pipe shall be considered to be leaking if the wall thickness at any point of the affected area
is determined to be less than 1 mm at the end of its life.

For a circular or near circular defect the minimum thickness for a repair laminate, t
min
(m), is
calculated using:

+
)
`

=
2 4
3
2
2
64
3 1
512
3 1
d
Gt
d d
t E
) (
f f P
min min
leak T

(9)
Where the design incorporates a plug to allow the repair of a live line the procedure
described in this section should still be used. The tests carried out to determine the value of
(Appendix 4) should be conducted on the whole assembly including any plug arrangement.

Equation (9) is valid for defect sizes Dt d 6 (AEAT - 75484).

As the defect becomes large curvature of the pipe wall becomes important.

For non-circular defects that have an aspect ratio < 5 Equation (9) should be used where the
value of d (effective defect diameter) is selected such that it contains the defect.

For non-circular defects that have an aspect ratio > 5 Equation (10), (11) or Equation (12)
should be used where the value of W (effective slot width) is selected appropriate to the
aspect ratio.

For a circumferential slot type defect, where the axial width of the slot, W (m), satisfies;
min
Dt . W 65 1 , the minimum thickness for a repair laminate, t
min
(m), is calculated using;

+
|
.
|

\
|
+
+
)
`

=
2 4
3
2
2
1
2 5
4
16
3
4 24
1 1
W
) ( Gt
W W
t E
) (
f f P
min min
leak T

(10)
For a circumferential slot type defect, where the width of the slot, W (m), satisfies;
min
Dt . W 65 1 > , the minimum thickness for a repair laminate, t
min
(m), is calculated using;


==


AEA Technology 20
=


min
leak T
Et
D
f f
P 8
2
= (11)
For an axial slot type defect, where the circumferential width of the slot, W=D/2 (m), the
minimum thickness for a repair laminate, t
min
(m), is calculated using;

(
(
(

+
+ +

=
6
3
4
4
3
4 2
2
11520
2
4
384 8
1

min min
c
leak T
t
)
G
E
( D
t
D D
E
) (
f f P (12)
The value of the service factor, f
leak
, shall be set to;


) t ( .
leak
* . f
1 016 0
10 666 0

=

where t is the specified design lifetime in years.

Where long term performance test data is available according to Appendix 7, then the
service factor , f
leak
, shall be set to;


f leak
D f 666 . 0 =

The design repair thickness, t
design
, shall be the maximum value of the minimum repair
thickness determined from Equation (9), (10), (11) or (12) and the design repair thickness
derived in either Sections 9.1, 9.2 or 9.3.

Further information on the design method given in this section may be obtained from R
Mableson et al, Refurbishment of Steel Tubulars using Composite Materials, Rehabilitation
of Piping and Infrastructure Conf, University of Newcastle, 1999.

Where the repair laminate is anisotropic, i.e. the properties of the material are different in the
axial and circumferential directions, the value of E and
2
in Equations (9) to (12) should be
taken as (E
a
.E
c
)
0.5
and (
ac
.
ca
) respectively.

For very small defects such that d<<t
min
the bending contribution to the deformation of the
repair laminate becomes insignificant and the second term in the denominators of Equations
(9) to (12) can be ignored. Under these conditions Equations (9) to (12) simplify to:

d
E
f f P
leak T

) 1 (
2
2

=
and
W
E
f f P
leak T

4
) 1 (
2
2

=
respectively.

As the axial extent or size of the defect increases the response of the repair laminate will
change from that for a plate or beam under transverse loading to that for a cylindrical shell
under membrane loading. The latter circumstance is represented by Equation (11). For
large defects the response of the repair laminate becomes independent of defect size.

==


AEA Technology 21
=


9.5 Axial extent of repair
The design thickness of the repair laminate shall extend beyond the damaged region in the
pipe by the larger of 0.05 m or L
over
(m), where L
over
is given by;

For slot type defects Dt L
over
2 = (13)

For circular type defects Dt . d d L
over
5 0 4 < = where (14)
If the equality in Equation (14) is not satisfied then Equation (13) shall be used. Appendix 8
presents a look-up table of axial extent of repair as a function of both diameter and defect
size.

The total axial length of the repair, L (m), is given by,


taper defect over
L L L L 2 2 + + = (15)

Care shall be taken to ensure that the discontinuity in thickness at the edge of the repair is
designed such that the local stresses in this region are minimised. This is especially the
case where the stress in the steel is allowed to exceed its allowable in the repair section,
(Section 9.1). A minimum taper of at least 5:1 is recommended.

A check on the axial extent of the repair is required to ensure that the applied axial load can
be transferred from the substrate to the repair. Equation (16) describes this check or
inequality, which must be satisfied.

repair a a
over
t E
L > (16)
For most repair systems where the short-term strain to failure of the repair laminate is
greater than 1% then Equation (16) is generally satisfied. The concern primarily is with very
stiff, low strain to failure repair systems.

Where the geometry of the section to be repaired is such that it is not possible to achieve the
required axial extent of overlay, L
over
, this shall be considered as follows.

To account for the limited axial extent (i.e. less than 0.05 m) of available substrate (L
available
)
the design repair thickness, t
design
, determined from Sections 9.1, 9.2, 9.3 or 9.4 shall be
increased by the repair thickness increase factor, f
th,overlay
, defined as;


min overlay , th design
/
available
over
overlay , th
t f t
L
L
f =
|
|
.
|

\
|
= implying
3 2
(17)
A detailed engineering stress analysis of the adhesive layer demonstrating that the axial load
can be transmitted between the repair and the substrate shall be performed. The analysis
shall demonstrate that the average principal stress is less than 3 times the average principal
stress value from lap shear test data (BS EN 1465).


==


AEA Technology 22
=

The minimum axial extent of available overlay length that repairs can be applied to is defined
as either L
available
shall be at least 0.025 m or f
th,overlay
shall be no greater than 2.5.

When there is limited axial extent of available substrate it will not be possible to taper the
repair laminate. For this case the transition between the repair laminate and the restraining
substrate, e.g. flange face, should be a smooth as possible to minimise stress
concentrations.

The total axial extent of the repair for reduced axial extent is therefore;

2 1 , available , available defect
available taper defect over
L L L L
L L L L L
+ + =
+ + + =
extent, axial reduced sided two For
extent, axial reduced side one For
(18)

where the larger of the two values of f
th,overlay
is taken to determine the design thickness of
the repair, Equation (18).



==


AEA Technology 23
=

10. ELEVATED TEMPERATURES
The maximum service temperature within the scope of this document is 100
o
C. Higher
service temperatures may be considered but will require appropriate qualification testing at
this elevated temperature.

For service temperatures greater than 40
o
C individual laminate systems shall not be used at
temperatures higher than the glass transition (T
g
) less 30
o
C in the case of epoxies or higher
than the heat distortion temperature (HDT) less 20
o
C in the case of polyesters and vinyl
esters. For resin systems which do not exhibit a clear transition point, i.e. a significant
reduction in mechanical properties at elevated temperatures, e.g. polyurethane, then a upper
temperature limit, T
m
, shall be defined (or quoted by the repair supplier). For polyurethane a
default upper temperature limit of 70
o
C is recommended.

For repairs where the pipe is not leaking or the repair has a design lifetime of less than 2
years the temperature limit can be relaxed to T
g
less 20
o
C or HDT less 15
o
C. T
g
or HDT
shall be measured in accordance with ISO 113572 or ISO 75 (or equivalent) respectively.
Table 6 summarises the upper temperature limit of the repair.

Substrate Leaking
T
m

Substrate not Leaking
T
m

T
g
measured T
g
30
o
C T
g
20
o
C
HDT measured HDT-20
o
C HDT-15
o
C

Table 6: Service Temperature Limits for Repair Systems

For service temperatures less than 40
o
C adequate cure of the repair laminate should be
demonstrated by Barcol hardness values measured in accordance with BS EN 59 or Shore
hardness in accordance with ISO 868. Measured values should be no less than the
minimum obtained from qualification laminates.

For service temperatures less than 40
o
C no acceptance criteria linked to T
g
or HDT are
stipulated. This is to ensure that repairs do not require elevated temperature post cures,
which experience has demonstrated are not necessary. Adequate resin cure is ensured
through the Barcol or Shore hardness testing.

In principle T
g
measurements can be taken from any representative sample of material, but
the values obtained are sensitive to the extent of cure the material has experienced. For
these reasons the laminate used should be of similar thickness to repair material and have
been laid up using the same procedures and under the same conditions as would be present
during site application.

For service temperatures greater than 40
o
C the allowable strains to be used in Equations (5)
and (6), and the service factors to be used in Equations (7), (8), (9) and (10) shall be down-
rated by the factors given in Table 7. In Table 7 T
d
is the design temperature and T
m
is the
upper temperature limit for the system (HDT - 20
o
C, T
g
-30
o
C or T
g
-20
o
C as appropriate).
Factors for intermediate temperatures may be obtained by interpolation.



==


AEA Technology 24
=

Temperature (
o
C) Temperature Factor,
f
T1

T
d
= T
m
0.70
T
d
= T
m
- 20 0.75
T
d
= T
m
- 40 0.85
T
d
= T
m
- 50 0.90
T
d
= T
m
- 60 1.00

Table 7: Composite allowable strain service factors for elevated temperatures
Thermal expansion coefficients for composites are different than those for steel so thermal
stresses will be generated where operating temperatures vary from installation. Where this
absolute temperature change is greater than 40
o
C the effect of differential thermal expansion
between the composite and the steel shall be considered in the design assessment. This
shall be done by subtracting the thermally induced strains from the allowable strains in Table
4. The temperature factors listed in Table 7 should be applied to the allowable strain in
Table 4 before subtraction of the thermally induced strains. The thermal strains shall be
calculated by:


( )
) (
0 1
0 1
a s a T a
c s c T c
T f
T f


=
=
(19)
where
c0
and
a0
are from Table 5.

The additional requirements for leaking repairs are qualified through testing. To allow for
designs at higher temperatures than the qualification test temperature Table 8 defines the
temperature de-rating factor, f
T2
, that shall be applied to Equations (9), (10), (11) and (12).

Temperature (
o
C) Temperature Factor,
f
T2

T
d
- (T
test
-T
amb
) = T
m
0.70
T
d
- (T
test
-T
amb
) = T
m
- 20 0.75
T
d
- (T
test
-T
amb
) = T
m
- 40 0.85
T
d
- (T
test
-T
amb
) = T
m
- 50 0.90
T
d
- (T
test
-T
amb
) = T
m
- 60 1.00

Table 8: Additional requirements for leaking repairs temperature de-rating factor
Transients causing temperature excursions shall be considered in design if they are
considered to be a frequent occurrence, although composites are noted for their capacity to
absorb thermal shocks of short duration.

Factors for elevated temperatures were derived from prEN 13121.


==


AEA Technology 25
=

11. MINIMUM BOND STRENGTH
The achievement of a minimum bond strength shall be demonstrated for all repair laminate
combinations. This is a requirement regardless of whether or not the steel pipe is (or will be)
leaking. The minimum average lap shear strength of the bonded connection shall be 5 MPa
for carbon steel and other metal substrates when tested in accordance with BS EN 1465 or
similar test method.

Alternatively, it shall be demonstrated that the adhesive bond is stronger than the shear
strength of the composite material by assessing the surface of the steel used in a lap shear
specimen after testing. The presence of remaining composite laminate over at least 30% of
the bonded surface of the steel shall be evidence of a satisfactory bond.

Where evidence of long term durability on the bond between the composite and steel is
required (see Table 3) and performance based testing has not been carried out to provide
data for design (see Section 9) water immersion tests shall be carried out. Lap shear
specimens shall be immersed in water at the service temperature for 1000 hrs after which
the residual lap shear strength shall be at least 30% of the unaged values.

Lap shear tests shall be carried out on the steel/surface preparation/composite combination
to be used in service.

It shall be ensured that any chemical interaction between the composite and steel will not
cause further degradation in the surface of the steel. Consideration may need to be given to
the effects of the resin systems and their associated curing agents. Particular attention may
need to be given to CFRP laminates and the potential for galvanic corrosion.

The objectives of the tests in this section are not to produce data for use in design. The
intent is to demonstrate that bonds can be achieved of adequate strength and durability with
the selected materials and surface preparation methods. It should be noted that short term
strength measurements are not necessarily a good indicator of long term performance.

The ASME standard PCC-2 requires a minimum bond strength of 4 MPa.


==


AEA Technology 26
=

12. OPTIONAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
12.1 Impact
The supplier shall demonstrate that the repair is capable of withstanding a low velocity 5
Joule impact representative of a dropped tool. Tests should be carried out in accordance
with the procedure described in Appendix 6.

12.2 Cyclic loading
Cyclic loading is not necessarily limited to internal pressure loads. Thermal and other cyclic
loads should also be considered when assessing cyclic severity.

If the predicted number of pressure or other loading cycles is less than 7000 over the design
life, then cyclic loading does not require consideration (ISO 14692).

If the predicted number of pressure or other loading cycles exceeds 7000 over the design life
then cyclic loading should be considered.

If the predicted number of pressure or other loading cycles exceeds 10
8
over the design life
then if the following Equations (20) and (21) N should be set to 10
8
.

For Sections 9.1 and 9.2, the composite allowable strain in both circumferential and axial
directions,
c
and
a
, (Table 4), shall be de-rated by the factor, f
c
, where f
c
is given by;


|
|
.
|

\
|

+ = ) 1 (
108 . 7 ) Log( 888 . 2
1
2 2
c c c
R
N
R f (20)
For Section 9.4, the service factor, f
leak
, in Equations (9), (10), (11) or (12) shall be replaced
by;


|
|
.
|

\
|

+ = ) 1 (
108 . 7 ) Log( 888 . 2
1
333 . 0
2 2
c c leak
R
N
R f (21)
These equations are intended for cyclic internal pressure loading only, but may be applied
with caution to axial loads provided they remain tensile, i.e. the equations are not applicable
for reversible loading.

12.3 Live repairs
When repairs are applied to pipe systems under live conditions then the strength and the
fracture toughness of the bond between the composite laminate/steel pipe interface should
be assessed for the specific case during operation when the internal pressure, P
after
, is less
than the internal pressure, P
live
, when the repair was applied, i.e. P
after
< P
live
.

To assess the strength of the bond of the repair interface, the tensile stress acting on the
bond should be compared to the minimum bond strength, defined in Section 11.


==


AEA Technology 27
=

Denoting the conditions when the repair is applied as
live
and by for conditions after the
application of the repair as
after
, Figure 2 schematically describes the key variables;

D
P
Pipe before
(live)
Pipe - after
t
s
Repair
q tensile pressure on interface


Figure 2: Schematic diagram of live repair situation
where t
s
is the substrate wall thickness (m). The tensile stress, q, acting on the interface is
given by;


D
t E
) T T )( (
) t E t E (
t E
) P P ( q
s s
after live s c
design c s s
s s
after live
2
1 +
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
= (22)
where is the thermal expansion coefficient (defined in Section 10). The value of q should
be compared with the minimum bond strength, Section 11 to confirm that q is less than the
minimum bond strength.

To assess the possibility of delamination of the repair interface the energy release rate, G,
for a delamination of crack length, c, should be assessed and compared to the critical
energy release rate, , (defined in Appendix 4). Figure 3 schematically describes the key
variables;



==


AEA Technology 28
=

L/2
a
h
q tensile pressure on interface
q c
M

Figure 3: Schematic diagram for energy release rate determination
The energy release rate, G, is given by;


2 2
2
4
2
2
1 12
1 1
2 2 1
1
s
repair steel s s
t D
) (
) EI ( I E )) c L ( cos( )) c L ( exp(
q
G

=
|
|
.
|

\
|

|
|
.
|

\
|

=
+
where
(23)
where L is the axial length of the repair and I is the second moment of area and the subscript
steel+repair
refers to the combined region of the repair laminate the steel substrate.

The value of G should be compared with the critical energy release rate, , (Appendix 4) to
confirm that G is less than i.e. the interface will not delaminate.

12.4 Fire Performance
The requirements for fire performance shall be identified in the risk assessment. Flame
spread and smoke generation shall also be considered in the assessment. Due account
shall be taken of the response of the complete system (original pipe and the repair). In
many cases additional fire protection will not be necessary, as the damaged steel pipe may
still be able to perform satisfactorily during the short duration of a fire event.

Strategies for achieving fire performance include the following:


==


AEA Technology 29
=

application of additional repair material such that enough basic composite will remain in
tact for the duration of the fire event;
application of intumescent external coatings;
application of intumescent and other energy absorbent materials within the laminate;
use of resin formulations with specific fire retardant properties.

Further guidance on the design and testing of composites for fire performance may be
obtained from ISO14692.

12.5 Gas service
For steel pipe that is not leaking repairs can be carried out as with liquid systems.

For pipe systems that do or are predicted to leak within their lifetimes composite repair
systems will be satisfactory within the operating envelope defined in the scope of this
document.

The approximate permeability of GRP composites is quoted as 1 10
-9
cm
2
/s/bar and this is
equivalent to 100 10
-15
m
3
/s for a repair of 1 cm
2
area, 5 mm thick under 50 bar. Typical
allowable gas leak rates from valve glands are in the region of 50 -100 ft
3
/yr (45 - 90 10
-9

m
3
/s), i.e. very much greater than gas leakage thought typical thickness' of composite
laminates. Explosive decompression is not reported to be a problem at the pressures
considered in this document.

12.6 Environmental Compatibility
The suitability for use of the repair system in the service environment shall be based on the
following considerations. The service environment is the environment that will contact the
repair laminate. It may be either the external or internal environment.

The qualification of the repair system (Section 8.3) will ensure that the repair system is
compatible with aqueous and hydrocarbon environments at the qualification temperature. In
general, thermoset resins are compatible with a wide range of environments but
consideration needs to be given when the environment is strongly acidic (pH<3.5), strongly
alkaline (pH>11) or is a strong solvent, e.g. methanol, toluene in concentration greater than
25%.

When the compatibility of the repair system is unknown then the repair laminate supplier
shall provide the one of the following to demonstrate compatibility;

Environmental compatibility data from the resin supplier, demonstrating that the
environment is no more aggressive than aqueous or hydrocarbon environments at
the design temperature.

If no compatibility data from the resin supplier is available, then specific
environmental testing is required. Results from tests according to one of the following
test procedures, ASTM D543, ASTM C 581, ASTM D 3681, ISO 10952 or equivalent,
comparing the exposure of the specific environment and aqueous environment to the
repair laminate at the design temperature shall be performed. The Repair System
shall be considered compatible to the specific environment if the test results from the
specific environment are no worse than for the aqueous environment.


==


AEA Technology 30
=

The quoted test standards should be used as a guide on how to age and test aged
composites. The standards may not need to be followed to their exact letter, it is the
guidance within the standard that is important.

The quoted test standards refer to tests on GRP pipes or rings. The repair laminate should
be manufactured into a comparable geometry as described by the relevant test method.

12.7 External Loads
To resist external pressure or vacuum applied to the Repair System, the minimum repair
thickness, t
min
, is given by;


3 1
2
2
1 3
/
c
e
min
E
P ) (
D t
(

(24)
For soil loads, to prevent the collapse of a buried repaired pipeline, the external soil pressure
P
ext,soil
must be less than the collapse resistance of the Repair System, P
c
,


g )
D
h (
D
)
D
h ( D
D
P
D
t
) (
E
P
soil soil , ext
min c
soil , ext

(
(

+ + + =
|
.
|

\
|

<
2
2
3
2
2 3
1
8 2
4
1 3
2
where
(25)
where
2
is defined as (
ca
2
.E
a
/E
c
).

The design repair thickness, t
design
, shall be the maximum value of the minimum repair
thickness determined from Equation (23) or (24) and the design repair thickness derived in
Section 9.


==


AEA Technology 31
=

13. REPAIR OF OTHER COMPONENTS
The supplier shall demonstrate that the design of repairs to components other than straight
pipework complies with the intent of the design through prototype pressure testing.

Prototype testing is recommended for repairs to other piping system components. Equations
(1) to (12) assume circular geometry, whereas the external surface of the component is likely
to be more complex leading to local variations in stress. Testing will confirm that these
features do not adversely affect the performance of the repair. ASTM D1599 provides
guidance on pressure testing procedures.

13.1 Clamps and other repair systems

Clamps are generally applied over defects much smaller than themselves. However, when a
clamp is repaired it is possible that a poor level of bonding will be achieved. Furthermore, the
clamp will protrude or stand-off from the pipework. Therefore the size of the defect to be
considered for the design of the repair is the axial extent of the clamp plus an extra axial
distance of 3 times the stand-off distance. Under these circumstances Equation (11) is
appropriate.

If perfect bonding can be demonstrated over the clamp surface, the size of the defect to be
considered is limited to a circumferential defect at each end of the clamp of axial extent, 1.5
times the stand-off height. Under these circumstances either Equation (10) or (11) is
appropriate.

The design of composite repair for other repair systems may be carried out using the
procedures given in Section 9 of this document. Unless it can be demonstrated otherwise
the size of the defect to be considered in the design calculations shall be the total area of the
existing repair.

13.2 Piping system components
The following piping system components are considered;

Bends
Tees
Reducers
Flanges

The repair design procedure for each piping system component is a comparative approach
based on the equivalent straight pipe component. The repair design process is to calculate
the thickness of the repair for an equivalent straight pipe section followed by a further
calculation of a multiplicative factor, called the repair thickness increase factor, which
accounts for the stress intensification due to the geometry of the component.

The first step in the design approach, therefore is to calculate the thickness of the repair for
the equivalent pipe section, Section 9, i.e. same diameter and wall thickness, t
design,straightpipe
.


==


AEA Technology 32
=

The second step is to calculate the repair thickness increase factors based on the stress
intensity factor corresponding to the piping system component, f
th,stress


The design repair thickness for the piping system component is given by the product of the
repair thickness increase factor times the repair thickness for the equivalent straight pipe
section, i.e.;

stress , th e raight pip design, st mponent design, co
f t t = (26)
Table 9 presents repair thickness increase factors for each piping component. They are a
function of the geometry of the component.

AEAT 75484 contains derivations of these factors plus their verification.

Piping system
component
Repair thickness
increase factor,
f
th,stress

Comment
Bend 1.2
Tee
25 0
2
2
1
4 1
.
b
b
D
t
t
D
.
|
|
.
|

\
|
(


Minimum value, f
th,stress
= 1.2
Maximum value, f
th,stress
= 3
Flange
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
f
t
t
. 1 064 0 1
t
f
> t where t
f
is the wall thickness of
the flange
Reducer
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
2
2
1 064 0 1
D
D
.
r

D > D
r
where D
r
is the (smaller)
diameter of the reducer

Table 9: Repair thickness increase factors for piping system components
The axial length of repair shall be based on the (larger) dimension of the main body and
applies to both the axial length of repair along the main body and branch (where
appropriate).

For the repair of tees, the maximum allowable design pressure for the repair laminate design
thickness, t
design,component
, is restricted to;


b
component , design c c
D D
t E
P
+

2
(27)
13.3 Tank and vessel components
The following tanks and vessel components are considered;

Cylindrical vessels
o End dome, main body connection
o Supports/saddles/rigid attachments
o Tees/nozzles
Spherical vessels
o Supports/saddles/rigid attachments
o Tees/nozzles

==


AEA Technology 33
=


The repair design procedure for each vessel component is the same as described in a
Section 13.2.

Table 10 and Table 11 present repair thickness increase factors for cylindrical and spherical
tank and vessel component respectively. They are a function of the geometry of the
component.

Cylindrical vessel
component
Repair
thickness
increase factor,
f
th,stress

Comment
End dome, main body
connection
2
2
032 0 1
d
D
D
. +
D > D
d
where D
d
is the (smaller) diameter of the
dome end
Supports/saddles/rigid
attachments
( )
4 3
2
2
1 K K
Dt
D
a
+ +

D
a
is equivalent area of attachment and

( ) ( )
3 0 5 0
4
3
2
4 0 1 8 1
2
22 0
.
al
rt
.
ha
al rt
) C ( Log
) C ( Log
Cos C . . K
C ) C ( Log
Cos . K
|
.
|

\
|
=
|
.
|

\
|
=
L
C
C
D
C
t
D
C
C
C
C
a
al
i
a
i
i
rt
a
h
ha
2
, 128 ,
2
=
|
|
.
|

\
|
= =
h a a
C C . D 35 2 =

Note: Minimum value, f
th,stress
= 1.2, maximum value,
f
th,stress
= 3
Tees/nozzles
45 0
2 1
522 5
.
r
) t . (
.

+

t
t
t ,
Dt
D
b
r
b
= =
2


Note: Minimum value, f
th,stress
= 1.2, maximum value,
f
th,stress
= 3

Table 10: Repair thickness increase factors for cylindrical vessel components

==


AEA Technology 34
=


Spherical vessel
component
Repair thickness increase
factor, f
th,stress

Comment
Supports/saddles/rigid
attachments
( )
4 3
2
1 K K
Dt
D
a
+ +


D
a
is equivalent area of attachment
and

|
|
.
|

\
|
(

=
|
|
.
|

\
|
(

=
5 0
4
25 0
3
287 1
2 2 2 1
287 1
3 2 38 0
.
a
.
a
Dt
D .
. Exp . K
Dt
D .
. Exp . K

Note: Minimum value, f
th,stress
= 1.2,
maximum value, f
th,stress
= 3
Tees/nozzles
( )
(
(

+
31 0
88 0
95 0 75 0 1
2
.
r
.
r
t
t . .
t
t
t ,
Dt
D
b
r
b
= =
2


Note: Minimum value, f
th,stress
= 1.2,
maximum value, f
th,stress
= 3

Table 11: Repair thickness increase factors for spherical vessel components

The solution for the repair thickness increase factors for supports, saddles and rigid
attachments for either a cylindrical or a spherical vessel is conservative.

The axial length of repair shall be based on the (larger) dimension of the main body and
applies to both the axial length of repair along the main body and branch (where
appropriate).

For the repair of tees or nozzles on either a cylindrical or spherical vessel, the maximum
allowable design pressure for the repair laminate design thickness, t
design,component
, is restricted
to;


b
component , design c c
D D
t E
P
+

2
(28)
AEAT 75484 contains derivations of these factors plus their verification.

The application of repairs to vessels may not be fully circumferential around the vessel body.
It has been demonstrated both by design and experiment that a patch repair has identical
performance to that of a fully circumferential repair assuming that the extent of the repair is
at least that of the appropriate overlay lengths.

==


AEA Technology 35
=

14. RE-QUALIFICATION
Where there has been a change to the materials comprising the repair laminate, including
surface preparation, the design shall be re-qualified. Guidance on the type of change
requiring re-qualification may be obtained from ISO14692.

Where re-qualification has not taken place, the allowable strains and service factors for the
original design may be used provided that it has been demonstrated that the laminate
strength of the material variant, and lap shear strength of the adhesive connection, is at least
as good as the original. This may be done using short term tests except where evidence of
the long term durability of the bond between the composite and steel is required (see Table
3). In this case lap shear specimens shall be immersed in water at the service temperature
for 1000 hrs after which the residual lap shear strength of the variant shall be at least that of
the original.

15. INSPECTION AND TESTING
Procedures for system hydrotesting are described in AEAT - 57756.

Information on inspection methods can be obtained from AEAT 75394.

16. HEALTH AND SAFETY
All repair materials shall be designed to minimise operator exposure to chemical agents. The
principle of as low as reasonably possible shall apply in all circumstances. The supplier shall
provide all relevant COSHH documentation for the materials in use.

17. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
All repair materials shall be designed to allow for satisfactory disposal according to prevailing
environmental regulations. Special attention should be given to the disposal of unused
chemicals and resins that may be left after a repair operation. The material supplier shall
provide appropriate guidance.


==


AEA Technology 36
=

18. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Background standards and references are given in the following sections.

Reference Standards

1 ISO 14692, Specification and recommended practice for the use of GRP piping in the
petroleum and natural gas industries.
2 ISO 15649, Petroleum and natural gas industries -- Piping
3 ISO 13623, Petroleum and natural gas industries -- Pipeline transportation systems
4 prEN 13121, GRP tanks and vessels for use above ground.
5 API 579, Recommended practice for fitness for service.
6 BS 7910, Guide on methods for assessing the acceptability of flaws in fusion welded
structures.
7 BS 8010, Code of practice for pipelines. Pipelines on land
8 ASME B31.1, Power Piping
9 ASME B31.3, Chemical plant and refinery piping
10 ASME B31.4, Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other
Liquids
11 ASME B31.8, Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
12 BS EN 1465, Determination of tensile lap shear strength of rigid to rigid bonded
assemblies.
13 ISO 75, Plastics - Determination of temperature of deflection under load.
14 ISO 113572, Plastics - Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC).
15 ISO 527, Plastics - Determination of tensile properties.
16 ISO 178, Plastics - Determination of flexural properties.
17 BS EN 59, Measurement of hardness by means of a Barcol impressor.
18 ASTM D2583, Standard test method for indentation hardness of rigid plastics by
means of a Barcol impressor
19 ISO 868, Plastics and ebonite - Determination of indentation hardness by means of a
durometer (Shore hardness)
20 ASTM D1598, Test method for the time to failure of plastic pipe under constant
internal pressure.
21 ASTM D2992, Practice for obtaining hydrostatic or pressure design basis for glass
fibre reinforced thermosetting resin pipe and fittings.
22 ASTM D1599, Test method for short time hydraulic failure pressure of plastic pipe,
tubing and fittings.
23 ISO 11359-2:1999 Plastics - Thermomechanical analysis (TMA) - Part 2:
Determination of coefficient of linear thermal expansion and glass transition
temperature
24 ASTM D5379/D5379M-98 Standard Test Method for Shear Properties of Composite
Materials by the V-Notched Beam Method
25 ASTM D543, Standard Practices for Evaluating the Resistance of Plastics to
Chemical Reagents
26 ASTM C581, Standard Practice for Determining Chemical Resistance of
Thermosetting Resins Used in Glass-Fiber-Reinforced Structures Intended for Liquid
Service
27 ASTM D3681, Standard Test Method for Chemical Resistance of Fiberglass (Glass-
Fiber-Reinforced Thermosetting-Resin) Pipe in a Deflected Condition

==


AEA Technology 37
=

28 ISO 10952:1999 Plastics piping systems -- Glass-reinforced thermosetting plastics
(GRP) pipes and fittings -- Determination of the resistance to chemical attack from
the inside of a section in a deflected condition
29 ASTM G8, Standard Test Methods for Cathodic Disbonding of Pipeline Coatings
30 ASME PCC-2, Repair Standard, Non-metallic composite repair systems for pipelines
and pipework: High risk applications
31 ASTM D3039, Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Polymer Matrix
Composite Materials
32 BS 5500, Specification for unfired fusion welded pressure vessels

Reference Publications

1 Mableson, R, Patrick, C, Dodds N and Gibson G, Refurbishment of steel tubulars
using composite materials, Rehabilitation of Piping and Infrastructure Conf, University
of Newcastle upon Tyne, 1999
2 AEAT - 57756, Installation procedures for composite repairs, January 2004
3 AEAT - 75394, NDT Methods for composite repairs, January 2004
4 AEAT - 02529, Documentation for the use of composite repairs, January 2004
5 AEAT - 75484, Composite repairs for piping systems, tank and pressure vessel
repair, January 2004
6 AEAT - 57394, Composite repairs - medium term testing and analysis, January 2004







==


AEA Technology 38
=

APPENDICES

CONTENTS
Appendix 1: Design data sheets
Appendix 2: Qualification requirements
Appendix 3: Short term pipe spool survival test
Appendix 4: Measurement of for leaking pipe calculation
Appendix 5: Measurement of performance test data
Appendix 6: Measurement of impact performance
Appendix 7: Measurement of the degradation factor
Appendix 8: Axial extent of repair



==


AEA Technology 39
=

Appendix 1: Design data sheets

This Appendix provides an example of a design data sheet as referenced in Section 8

PIPE REPAIR DATA SHEET

This document will form the basis of the clients scope of work and be used in the
preparation of a design solution. One sheet is to be completed for each type of repair
required.

Where possible, (digital) photographs of the defective areas are to be provided.

Customer Details
Contact
Company
Address



Postcode Country
Telephone
Fax
E-mail
Job Reference

Pipe Details
Installation
Location
Quantity
Pipe Identification
Pipe Reference
Pipe Specification
Material / Grade
External Diameter
Wall Thickness
Medium
Operating Temperature Minimum Maximum
Pipe Coating (existing)


==


AEA Technology 40
=


Risk Assessment (see Section 5)
Repair Class
Repair Lifetime
Other Data


Pipe Loading Operating Design Test Comments
Pressure Rating
Axial Load
Bending Moment
Shear Load
Torsion
Other loads
Notes:
1. Any original design calculations, piping isometrics should be appended
to this datasheet
2. Loads should be defined as either sustained or occasional in the comments column

Details of Defect Area
Attach drawings of pipe system, inspection reports, etc where available. Indicate
any access restrictions and proximity to other equipment.














Repair Specification
Type of Defect
Nature of Defect
Current Size Area Depth
Projected Size Area Depth
Cause Corrosion Erosion
Effect External Internal
Perforated
MAWP (API 579)
Note: MAWP is the maximum allowable working pressure as defined in API 579 or other
calculation method.

==


AEA Technology 41
=


Anticipated Conditions during Implementation of Repair
Pipe Temperature Minimum Maximum
Ambient Temperature Minimum Maximum
Humidity
External Environment
Constraints


Facilities to be Provided by Client / Installation (surface prep. etc.)





Other Information



Note
1. This should include any remarks on previous repairs, fire protection requirements, etc



Prepared by:
Date:


==


AEA Technology 42
=

Appendix 2: Qualification requirements

Introduction

This Appendix describes the qualification data that suppliers must provide to be in
compliance with this design specification.

It is a requirement that all tests are carried out using laminate materials, laminating
procedures and surface preparation methods that will be used to carry out repairs.

Data for Repair Laminates

For all repair classes the following data is required:

Tensile modulus and strength in the circumferential direction determined by test
according to Table 3;
Tensile modulus and strength in the axial direction determined by test according to Table
3;
Poisson's ratio for the composite laminate determined by test according to Table 3;
Barcol hardness determined by test according to Table 3;
Glass transition temperature (T
g
) or heat distortion temperature (HDT) for the resin
system determined by test according to Table 3;
Thermal expansion coefficient in the axial and circumferential directions determined by
test according to Table 3.

Data for Repair/Pipe Interface

For all repair classes the following data is required:

Lap shear strength determined by test according to Table 3. This short term test shall be
used to determine the average shear strength (minimum value 5 MPa) or the locus of
failure (composite remaining on a min of 30% of the bonded area). The substrates used
in this test should be identical. Alternatively, it shall be demonstrated that the adhesive
bond is stronger than the shear strength of the repair laminate by assessing the surface
of the substrate material used in a lap shear specimen after testing.

For Class 3 repairs the following data is required:

Where evidence of long-term durability of the adhesive bond between the repair laminate
and the substrate is required and performance based testing has not been carried out to
provide data for design (see Section 9.3), a long-term lap shear strength determined by
test according to Table 3 shall be performed. This test shall be carried out following
immersion in water (or other relevant medium) at the design temperature (minimum 40
0
C
) for 1000 hrs. The average shear strength determined from this test shall be at least
30% of the values from the short-term lap shear tests determined above.

Additional Requirements for Structural Repairs to Non-Leaking Pipes

The objective of the following test is not to produce data for use in design. The intent is to
demonstrate that for a severe defect adequate strength of the repair system can be
achieved.

==


AEA Technology 43
=


Short term pipe spool survival test, Appendix 3.

Additional Requirements for Leaking Pipes

For all repair classes the following data is required:

Bending modulus for the composite laminate determined by test according to Table 3.
Alternatively, the tensile modulus for the laminate may be used as a conservative
estimate for the value in bending;
Shear modulus determined by test according to Table 3. Alternatively, the shear modulus
of the polymer matrix may be used.
Fracture toughness parameter determined by test according to Appendix 4;
Impact performance determined by test according to Appendix 6.

Performance Testing

The supplier may carry out performance testing to determine design allowables in
accordance with Appendix 5. This is not a mandatory requirement.

The following design allowables are determined:

Long term strength, either from 1000 hour survival test or regression testing;
Long term strain to failure from representative repair laminate regression testing.


==


AEA Technology 44
=

Appendix 3: Short term pipe spool survival test

Introduction

This Appendix describes the test method for demonstration of the repair system for non-
leaking defects.

Method

The following test shall be completed using a steel pipe of at least 100mm diameter, and
minimum length of six times the diameter in addition to the length of the repair.

The repair system supplier can select the size of the defect, i.e. amount wall loss. The repair
system shall be qualified only for defects sizes up to this chosen size.

A fully circumferential defect of at least 150 mm in width and to a depth equivalent to the wall
loss for which the repair system is being qualified shall be machined into the external pipe
wall.

The test pressure of the spool shall be calculated using Equation (29):


D
ts
P
SMYS
f
2
= (29)
where t is the wall thickness of the undamaged spool, s
SMYS
is the specified minimum yield
stress (SMYS) of the steel.

A repair laminate shall be applied to the pipe to restore the pipe spool to pressure, P
f
. The
thickness of the repair shall be calculated using Equation (4), where s is replaced by s
SMYS
of
the steel, t
s
is the remaining wall thickness of the pipe spool at the defect and
c
is replaced
by the ultimate short-term strain to failure of the composite repair in the hoop direction.

The repaired spool shall be pressurized to P
f
. Pressure testing shall be in accordance with
ASTM D1599. Measurement of short-term failure strain shall be in accordance with ASTM
D3039 or an equivalent standard.

Qualification requires the repaired pipe to survive the loading to P
f
.

Report

A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, details of the Repair System and the
individual test results.




==


AEA Technology 45
=

Appendix 4: Measurement of for leaking pipe
calculation

Introduction

This Appendix describes the test method for measurement of the toughness parameter for
the composite steel interface, , to be used in Equations (9), (10), (11) and (12) in Section
9.4.

Method

Sections of steel pipe of minimum diameter 100 mm and minimum thickness of 3 mm shall
be used. To represent typical defects circular holes shall be drilled through the wall
thickness and the repair applied using the relevant materials and surface preparation
methods. It is important that the laminating procedures to be applied for site repair are those
that are employed in the preparation of specimens. All samples should be laminated with
the holes in the 6 o'clock orientation.

The steel pipe section used for the preparation for the test specimen should be appropriate
for the anticipated failure pressure of the repair. Yielding of the steel pipe prior to failure
should not take place.

Internal pressure shall be applied and the value at which the repair begins to leak shall be
recorded.

The test shall be carried out at the temperature at which the repair is to be used.

The test pressure shall be increased uniformly until the specimen fails. The loading rate shall
be such that failure occurs between 60 and 70 seconds. Failure Further guidance on
pressure testing procedures may be obtained from ASTM D1599.

A number of tests shall be carried out covering a range of hole sizes, typically of diameter
10, 15 and 25 mm. For the larger diameters the flaw may be simulated by using a smaller
hole and a circular polymeric release film of the appropriate diameter placed over the hole
prior to application of the repair. A minimum of 3 test shall be done for each hole size.
Alternatively a minimum of 9 tests should be performed over a range of hole sizes varying
from 10 to 25 mm.

Failures should take the form of delamination of the composite from the substrate followed
by leaking from the edge of the laminate. At small hole sizes failure can occur through
weeping of the test fluid through the thickness of the laminate or through yielding of the steel
pipe. In this event the tests should be repeated with a larger hole size. All failure points
should relate to the delamination failure mechanism.

Calculation of

The value of shall be calculated by fitting Equation (9) in Section 9.4 to the data.

The following procedure shall be followed;

Definitions;

==


AEA Technology 46
=


n = the number of observed data points (A(d
i
), P
i
)
P
i
= the pressure at failure of observation i, where i = 1,n
A(d
i
) = the function of defect size and repair laminate properties of observation i,
where i = 1,n (see below for definitions of A(d
i
))

Note: A(d
i
) is defined as;


i i i
d A P ) ( =
The mean energy release rate,
mean
, is calculated from;


2
1
2
1
) (
) (
|
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=

=
=
n
i
i
n
i
i i
mean
d A
P d A
(30)
The lower confidence limit of the energy release rate,
LCL
, is calculated from;


2
1
2
1
2
1
) (
1
) (
) (
(
(
(
(

= =
=
n
i
i
v n
i
i
n
i
i i
LCL
d A
t
d A
P d A
(31)
where, is the variance of measurement of pressure and is given by;


) 2 (
) ) ( (
1
2

=
n
d A P

n
i
mean i i
=
and where t
v
is the Students t value and is based on a two-sided 0.025 level of significance,
i.e. 95% lower confidence limit. Values of t
v
are given as a function of number of variables, n,
in Table 12.

==


AEA Technology 47
=


n
Number of
variables
n-2
Degrees of
freedom
Students t(0.025)
5 3 3.163
6 4 2.969
7 5 2.841
8 6 2.752
9 7 2.685
10 8 2.634
11 9 2.593
12 10 2.560
13 11 2.533
14 12 2.510
15 13 2.490
16 14 2.473
17 15 2.458
18 16 2.445

Table 12: Students t value for double sided 0.025 level of significance
The value of calculated by Equation (30),
LCL
should be used in Equation (9) to predict the
performance capability of the repair.

The value of calculated by Equation (30),
LCL
may also be used in Equations (10), (11) and
(12).

Definitions of A(d
i
);

For circular defects (Equation (9)), i.e. d is the diameter of the defect;

+
)
`

=
2 4
3
2
64
3 1
512
3 ) 1 (
1
) (
d
Gt
d

d
t E

d A

For circumferential width slots (Equation (10)), i.e. d is the width of the slot;

+
|
.
|

\
|
+
+
)
`

=
2 4
3
2
) 1 (
2 5
4
16
3
4 24
1 ) 1 (
1
) (
d

Gt
d

d
t E

d A

For large circumferential width slots (Equation (11)), i.e. d is the width of the slot;


==


AEA Technology 48
=

Et
D
A 8
1
=

In this last example, A is independent of the slot width. Therefore Equation (30) for the
energy release rate,
LCL
, simplifies to;


2
2
1
1
1
(
(
(
(

=
nA
t
A
P
n

v
n
i
i
LCL

For axial width slots (Equation (12)), i.e. d is the width of the slot;

(
(
(

+
+ +

=
3 2
6
3
4 2
180
) 2
4
(
24 4
) 1 (
1
) (
t D
G
E
d
t
d d
E
d A



where in the above equations t is the average thickness of the repair.

Qualification of other substrates

If the repair system has been fully qualified for one substrate then a simplified qualification
procedure is available for other substrates. In this procedure only 3 tests are required to be
completed. The 3 tests should be identical to three of the nine tests in terms of repair
thickness and defect size used in the full qualification test programme.

The value of for this substrate, substrate 2,
LCL,substrate 2
, is given by;


1
2
1 2
substrate , mean
substrate , mean
substrate , LCL substrate , LCL

=

In this equation, mean, implies the average of the 3 tests (for both substrates).

Report

A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, details of the repair method including
the materials of construction and surface preparation technique, the individual data points
and the derived value of .

==


AEA Technology 49
=

Appendix 5: Measurement of performance test data

Introduction

This Appendix describes the test methods for measurement of the design allowables to be
used in Section 9.3. The test methods are:

1) Survival testing where the repair system is subjected to a period of sustained load for
1000-hrs for measurement of the long term strength.
2) Regression testing based on a series of tests on the repair system over different time
periods and extrapolation to design life for measurement of the long term strength.
3) Coupon testing based on regression testing of representative coupons followed by
confirmation of long-term coupon test results with survival testing for measurement of
the long term strain.

All tests shall be carried out at the maximum temperature at which the repair system is to be
used in service.

Methods
1) Survival testing

Sections of pipe of minimum diameter 100 mm and minimum thickness of 3 mm shall be
used and the repair system applied.

A value of internal pressure shall be applied (defined by the supplier) and sustained for 1000
hrs. If any deterioration of the repair laminate in the form of cracking, delamination or
leaking occurs the repair system will be deemed to have failed the test. Three identical tests
shall be performed and repair qualification is only possible if all three tests survive.

The 95% lower confidence long-term stress is calculated using;


( )
s s c
c test
lt
t E t E
DE P
s
+
=
min
2


Further guidance on survival pressure testing procedures may be obtained from ASTM
D1598.

2) Regression testing

Sections of pipe of minimum diameter 100 mm and minimum thickness of 3 mm shall be
used and the repair system applied.

A series of test specimens shall be subject to sustained pressures of different values. The
time at which the repair laminate shows signs of deterioration defined as cracking,
delamination or leaking shall be recorded. The results shall be plotted (log/log) and the
required pressure determined by a regression analysis using the 95% lower confidence limit
and extrapolation to design life. The conversion from pressure to stress within the repair
laminate for each data point shall be according to;


==


AEA Technology 50
=


( )
s s c
c test
t E t E
DE P
s
+
=
min
2


At least 18 results are required in order to carry out the regression analysis. ASTM D2992
provides further guidance on the long term testing of composite materials and ISO 14692
provides guidance on the analysis of the data to calculate s
lt
.

3) Representative coupon testing

Representative coupons of the repair laminate should be made up and tested in a
comparable manner to the actual repair system laminate. Representative implies same
laminate constituents, volume fraction and fibre orientation. Comparable loading implies
coupons should be loaded identically as the in-service repair laminate (e.g. uni-axial tension
or bi-axial tension).

At least 18 coupons should be tested under constant load to failure (data points in terms of
number and length of time of testing according to ASTM D2992, with the statistical analysis
of data according to ISO 14692).

Output of these coupon tests is the regression gradient, G, in terms of either log(stress or
strain) against log(time).

To determine the long-term failure stress or strain of the repair system, 5 medium term tests
(according to ASTM D1598) shall be performed on sections of pipe of minimum diameter
100 mm (4 inch) and minimum thickness of 3 mm (0.12 inch). In these tests the pressure is
fixed and the time to failure recorded. It is recommended to select a test pressure so that
failure occurs after about 1000 hours.

The lower confidence limit (in terms of time) for these five tests is calculated according to the
mean failure time minus 2 standard deviations. The long-term design strength (or strain) of
the Repair System is the extrapolation of the lower confidence limit to the design lifetime
using the measured regression gradient from the coupon tests.

Further guidance on survival pressure testing procedures may be obtained from ASTM
D1598.

Further guidance on long term testing and data interpretation may be obtained from ISO
14692.

Report
=
A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, details of the repair method including
the materials of construction and surface preparation technique, the individual data points
and the derived performance design data.



==


AEA Technology 51
=

Appendix 6: Measurement of impact performance

Introduction

This Appendix describes the test method for measurement impact performance. The
supplier shall demonstrate that the repair is capable of withstanding the impact from a low
velocity 5 J impact representative of a dropped tool.

Methods
A section of steel pipe of minimum diameter 100 mm and minimum thickness of 3 mm shall
be used and the repair applied using the relevant materials and surface preparation
methods. The steel pipe shall have a representative defect of 10 mm. The details of
specimen preparation are described in Appendix 4.

The repair shall be subject to a 0.5 kg weight with a 12 mm hemispherical indentor dropped
from a height of 1 m. The pipe shall be supported so that the hole is in the 12 o'clock
orientation and the weight shall strike the repair at the position of the hole in the steel pipe.
The pipe shall be empty for the duration of the impact test.

The impacted specimen shall be subject to a pressure test as described in Appendix 4. The
failure pressure obtained shall be no less than the minimum of the pressure test results
obtained from specimens not subject to impact.

Report
=
A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, details of the repair method including
the materials of construction and surface preparation technique, the individual data points
and the derived performance


==


AEA Technology 52
=

Appendix 7: Measurement of the degradation factor

Introduction

This Appendix describes the test method for measurement of the degradation factor for the
leaking repair situation through using a low speed loading rate test. Within Section 9.4 a
service factor for down-rating the predicted failure pressure is set at 0.333. This factor is
based on the product of two effects, the degradation from short term to long term failure plus
a safety factor, derived from ISO 14692 of 0.67. Within Section 9.4 the default value for the
degradation factor is set at 0.5.

Method
=
Sections of steel pipe of minimum diameter 100 mm and minimum thickness of 3 mm shall
be used. Circular holes shall be drilled through the wall thickness and the repair applied
using the relevant materials and surface preparation methods. It is important that the
laminating procedures to be applied for site repair are those that are employed in the
preparation of specimens. All samples should be laminated with the holes in the 6 o'clock
orientation (to minimise the ingress of resin into the defect).

The steel pipe section used for the preparation for the test specimen should be appropriate
for the anticipated failure pressure of the repair. Yielding of the steel pipe prior to failure
should not take place.

The thickness of all repairs shall be identical to that used in Appendix 4.

Internal pressure shall be applied and the value at which the repair begins to leak shall be
recorded.

The test shall be carried out at the temperature at which the repair is to be used.

The test pressure shall be increased daily until the specimen fails. The loading rate shall be
such that failure occurs after approximately 1000 hours.

Note: As a guide to selecting the daily increment in pressure the estimated 1000 hour failure
pressure will be approximately 0.75 of the short term failure pressure. p
sthp
.

The low speed loading rate test is defined by the following;

t P P t P
&
+ =
0
) (
where P
0
is the initial pressure (bar) and P
&
is the fixed linear increase in pressure (bar/hour),
AEAT - 57394.

It is recommended to set the initial pressure, P
0
(bar) to
sthp
P P 1 . 0
0
= and the linear increase
in pressure, P
&
bar/hour) to
sthp
P P
3
10 * 9 . 0

=
&
. In terms of units bar/day, then
sthp
P P 0216 . 0 =
&


Five tests shall be carried out in total, with a defect diameter set at 25 mm.


==


AEA Technology 53
=

Failures should take the form of delamination of the composite from the substrate followed
by leaking from the edge of the laminate.

Calculation of the degradation factor

The short term failure pressure shall be calculated using the following formula;

+
)
`

=
2 4
3
2
64
3 1
512
3 ) 1 (
d
Gt
d

d
t E


P
mean
sthp


where t is the average thickness of the repair.

The average failure pressure of at least 5 medium term tests shall be calculated and defined
as, P
mthp


The regression gradient, B, (see AEAT 57394) shall be calculated according to;


1
log
log
1

|
|
|
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
mthp
sthp
sthp
P
P
P
P
B
&
(32)
The degradation factor, D
f
, shall be calculated as, where it is assumed that the design life of
the repair is 20 years;


B
f
D
24 . 5
10

= (33)
Report
=
A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, details of the repair method including
the materials of construction and surface preparation technique, the individual data points
and the derived value of the degradation factor.

==


AEA Technology 54
=

Appendix 8: Axial extent of repair

Axial extent of repair look-up table

Defect size - diameter (mm)
5 10 15 20 25 slot
Pipe size
(inch)
Pipe outside
diameter
(mm)
Wall
thickness
(mm)
Schedule Axial length (mm)
2 60.3 3.9 40 50 50 50 50 50 50
5.5 80 50 50 50 50 50 50
3 88.9 5.5 40 50 50 50 50 50 50
7.6 80 50 50 52 52 52 52
4 114.3 6 40 50 50 52 52 52 52
8.6 80 50 50 60 63 63 63
6 168.3 6.6 40 50 50 60 67 67 67
9.5 80 50 50 60 80 80 80
8 219.1 6.4 20 50 50 60 75 75 75
7 30 50 50 60 78 78 78
8.2 40 50 50 60 80 85 85
10.3 60 50 50 60 80 95 95
12.7 80 50 50 60 80 100 106
10 273 6.4 20 50 50 60 80 84 84
7.8 30 50 50 60 80 92 92
9.3 40 50 50 60 80 100 101
12.7 60 50 50 60 80 100 118
15.1 80 50 50 60 80 100 128
12 323.8 6.4 20 50 50 60 80 91 91
8.4 30 50 50 60 80 100 104
10.3 40 50 50 60 80 100 116
14.3 60 50 50 60 80 100 136
17.5 80 50 50 60 80 100 151
16 406.4 6.4 10 50 50 60 80 100 102
7.9 20 50 50 60 80 100 113
9.5 30 50 50 60 80 100 124
12.7 40 50 50 60 80 100 144
16.7 60 50 50 60 80 100 165
21.4 80 50 50 60 80 100 187
20 508 6.4 10 50 50 60 80 100 114
9.5 20 50 50 60 80 100 139
12.7 30 50 50 60 80 100 161
15.1 40 50 50 60 80 100 175
20.6 60 50 50 60 80 100 205
26.2 80 50 50 60 80 100 231
24 610 6.4 10 50 50 60 80 100 125
9.5 20 50 50 60 80 100 152
14.3 30 50 50 60 80 100 187
17.5 40 50 50 60 80 100 207
24.6 60 50 50 60 80 100 245

==


AEA Technology 55
=

31 80 50 50 60 80 100 275
30 762 7.9 10 50 50 60 80 100 155
12.7 20 50 50 60 80 100 197
15.9 30 50 50 60 80 100 220
36 914 7.9 10 50 50 60 80 100 170
12.7 20 50 50 60 80 100 215
15.9 30 50 50 60 80 100 241
19 40 50 50 60 80 100 264

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen