ners of petroleum storage tanks are required by local regulators to conduct inspections that conform with requirements suchas those ofthe American Petroleum Institute (AP) or the Engineering Equipment & Materials Usrs Associaton (EEMUA). These regulators speci that inspections are conducted every x yarsto ensure storage tanks do rot leak though essential, compliance with these requirements is costy and time consuming, notably for operators of Indust sale tank farms. To avoid downtime, ouners increasingly use ontream inspection technologies such as etal visual inspection or acoustic emission testing, Being visual or qualitative only, such inspections must be seen as contol measures permitting ony limited concusions tater than ful scale examination tol Nevertheless if these onsieam technologies are property apple! and al findings are cautiously analysed by a qualified tank integrity March 2010 | HYDROCARBONENGINEERING 123‘assessor such methods provide a viable supplement to quantitate off ‘Stream inspection methods. Introduction ‘The uate goa of every tank owner isto strike an optimal balance between maximum inservice time and minimum rk Often operational constraints force operators to postpine or cance laned shutdowns. tis therefore very important thatthe relay team develops ahigh confidence inspection plan based on facts rather than assumptions. Reliable input data an sound engineering judgment are indspensabe in assessing whether the integrity ofthe anki assured forthe intended service period. However, determining the quality ofinput data for such assessments is a complex isue:rlailty engineers spend a considerable amount of time careful analysing inspection resus to eliminate noorborated findings othe greatest extent possible ‘n several jurisdictions itis stfient to conduct an in-service visual Inspecton in accordance wit AP 6SS/EEMUATS* coupled wit an acoustic emission (ET) ett sats the local authritesregulars. ‘Ahough on the face ofthis practice allows operctors ovoid the cost of emptying and clearing their tanks to achieve a complete intemal Seemann, Nona Inspacton Figure The utimate goals of any tank operating cast pra: reducing tut of service tie (an-aalblity cost. minimising total maintenance and inspection cost. and optimising the balance between in-service time end acceptable risk Figura Z.leowticnse oignatog from ay. an actin ara ares trove in al recone wih he [| stellt andi picked up and anayed by an ET yt Grade A: very minor Grade B minor Grade C: intermediate Grade D. active Ss Grade E highly active Figura 3. Ipical AE result fr a tank. The tan inthis example is classified as Grade’ meaning that active corrosion is detected and is lation i illustrated by the black dats 124, | HYDROCARBONENGINEERING | March 2010 inspection, such in-service tests cannot fui high confidence resus. ‘This means that there is currently no substitute for emptying the tank and conducting intemal examination and tests: only an ou of service baseline inspection can refaly establish the intemal condition ofthe tank and ‘notably ts corrosion rate On the bass of these resis, time interval cycle can then be formatted forthe next out of service inspection. Such a baseline inspection wil aso determine the amount of repair needed to bridge the planned inspection interval Nevertheless, if onstream technologies are applied correct, all findings ae cautiously analysed by a qualified tank integrity assessor and ‘notably if corroborated supplementary information is avaiable, a higher level of confidence can be achieved. The next section highlight the “important oe of inspection data gathered in boosting confidence inthe ‘decision making proces regarding postponement rescheduling of shutdowns Acoustic emission testing (AET) ‘Ametod for assessing te contion of ark botoms ostream, ATs teen coinuousl developed over the ast 20 years Atul fhe meta? publshedin 198 showed how AE test resus compared to irteal inspection eins fr 18 tanks hldg vary of products rom rae ait disiates a bleed products Athough there was some uncer wh regard othe pecs amount of exising damage, AT was tnt seo tel te iference between an ntact tank and oe wth corrosion damage but clear coreation exited between the assigned AE «rade andthe severity of actual damage. Oval A st eit was highest fo tanks defined as ‘god ras having'no activ carasion’ But wats AT? ‘oats omission dlrs rom most ther non-dstctie testing (No tetniques in wo regards Fest stad ot upping energy the ject under examination, AT simply etc the energy natural released ty the object Snce the product onan in te trk proves a suitable medium fx propagating signals and geting acoustic emissions, AE tess are typical permed while thease e inspected sin operon Te second terece sat AT tons Oram processes changes, a mater This parca significant as onl acne fetes such a cosin ar hight. Unfortu. AE systems can ol qualitatively gauge to what extent a structure damaged node to obtain quantitative resuts about se, depth and the eral acceptably of spect areas, ter NOT metads ar necessary, other drtack of AE stems rm extraneous nose interference wit the sionals, notably ud sevice environments 9. ump, vn and ran To ensure succestl ppcaton signal RWT the actual thickness, in inches (miimetes), measured at the time of inspection fora given locaton or component. > tin) - the required thickness, in inches (milimeters), atthe same Jocaton or component as the actual) measurement, computed by the design formuas (e. minimum allowable thickness, > CA the corason allowance in inches (nm). > CR the measured corasion rat in inchesyear (mm). ‘The responsible eablty engneer and his team of specialists must select the corrosion rate that best reflects the curent process. statistical approach may be used to determine the caosion rat, and, ntrecty, the remaining ife ofthe tank considered inorder to define the optimal inspection interval. However, care must be taken to ensure that the statistical treatment of results reflects the actual condition of the tank. Its advisable to er onthe side of cauton when applying statistics. Most important al statstcal models used shouldbe supported by asset speatic inspection data Practical example The tank bottom of hed oo tark FR bitin 1980 with a dlameter: height too 16:12 m was inspected in 2000 n accordance wth AP G53 requirements. > Thickness determined from last inspection (LID), RWT 0.15 in. (3.81 mm). Measured corason rat (CR) {© 0.005 indy (0.125 may). 2 tiaimam aowsbetekness 1 010'n.254 mm), > Corrosion allowance (CA) 10.15 in. ess 0.10 in (481 mm less 254 mm, Remaining life (RL) 10 yearsDetermining the coreson rate (C) to be used in remaining ie assessments fs not an easy task Comprehensive data and long experience ‘are needed to achieve high confidence inthe outcome ofthe assessment Figure 5ilustrates the typical problem faced by reliability engineers and their team. In defining a corrosion rate for remaining ite assessment, reiabilty engineers have several options. They could base their calculations on: The deepest corasion faw detected. “The average ofa fas found. ‘The average above aoxtan threshold, ‘The average plus the standard deviation calcusted, Whatever approach i chosen relay engineers must define and record the conoson rate used inthe quality documents for future relerence and aut abt. A recent addon to AP1 653, Append H, Similar Service Assessment, now provides guidance on how to conduct out of ‘service assessments to establish inspecton intervals for ‘cancidate' tanks inwhich corosion rates have not been dretly measured. However, this ‘method requires thatrelabe data be oolected from a control tank asa source of comparative values. ‘Another typical problem that realty engineers have in their assessment is determining the real VUES 1" turn yy especially no design data fs available (ginal documents lst or ‘previous measurements are date or unavailable Asa resi ofthis lack of ‘eiabe data relay engineers requenty use assumptions based on ‘roessional experience. This means, however, that a numberof Uncertainties ar often present in remaining ite assessments. ‘Ahigh degree of confidence in RL assessment important, as ‘determines wether the net shutdown dates feasible and safe. In (genera, the more high quality datas avaiable, the more accurate te remaining life assessment and hence te higher the confidence level ot the baseline and inspection pan, silustratedin Figure 4. Other ‘parameters impacting on confidence levels include: The isk evel ofthe object under consideration forthe particular failure mectanism, >The degree of stability ofthe degradation mectanism, > The extent to which the operational process conditions are monitored (operational window), Mitigation measures taken to cur risks inthe event of an accident. >The tools used for inspecting the tank too (Lethe flor scanner, as they determine the quality ofthe inspection data. ‘Several commercial tank bottom flor scanners are available each with their own technology and specifications. Iti very important to understand the lmitatons of and ferences between these scanners. In ‘ation itis essential to realise thatthe qualified inspector operating the tool dictates the overall quay ofthe inspection resus. Tank owners should consider a vertcation test conducted bythe inspection company. This permits certain degree of confidence inthe subsequent RL. assessment, since the scanner resis provide a bass for RL calculations. must therefore be ensured in advance thatthe inspection too tobe used ‘an discriminate between internal and external defects, that thas accurate sizing capitis, high quality of output reporting and ejection tresholds) nd sufficient inspection coverage, and tha the effect of ning ‘onthe resis fs known. Only ifthe reibilty of al these aspects has been «established should operators confident rly on the prediction model ilutratedin Figure 4. ‘All corosion measurements are subject to erors and uncertainties, Sz enor are sytemate, i. intrinsic othe measurement technique, ‘thus resulting in a genera tendency to ether oversize or undersize cresion features, Sizing uncertainties are random and can be thought of 28 variations resting from repeat measurements by the same or ferent inspectors Hee oo statistical models algorithms) may assist the inspector in determining the actual dimensions ofa given flaw. Toa Catan extent the combination of opertor experience and toot Figure 6 Certified inspector runing an MFL/EC too vera lined tank bottom to detect unwanted internal and sol side metal las. speetiaton determines how accurately the next inspection date is defines, Tobe sure that the next out of service date defined on the basis ofthe ‘maintenance and inspection plan is safely reached, tis necessary that ‘tank owners routinely perform onstream visual inspections to monitor the actual condton of ther tanks. The overall maintenance and inspection plan must include both off and onstream inspection as well as ‘maintenance task ofctcal tems and process parameters. In ation, close monitoring indicates the need for crective maintenance. Aough onstream visual inspection i cst efectve users ofthis technique experience certain common problems: nat only it cut to ‘replicate inspection results, but only approximately 85% of all anomalies ‘resent are typically identified, Looking for certain anomalies is similar to looking at a newspaper cartoon with 10 differences in two otherwise identical pictures. Despite best eos andthe knowdedge tat the itferences ar ther itis sometimes impossible to spot them. Apart fram the fact that inspection findings are subject to interpretation inspection limitations may resltin missing singe but crucial pit inthe floor, which ‘could be the cause of leak. T Inspect for topside corosion or leaks, tis essential thatthe tank flooris cleaned. Although expensive its the only way of uncovering defects. Infact, tank intery costs ae typically ‘dominated by cleaning/sluige removal prior inspections as well as confined space entry precautions rater than the actual inspection cost. ‘The real purpose of monitoring isto detect problems that might ‘develop before the scheduled off steam maintenance date and to avoid failure and detect problems wel before they gt out of hand. Regular AET and visual inspections can help operators monitor their orginal plan (.. the baseline) provided that they are aware othe imitations ofthe incivdual inspection technologs. By providing ditional information AT ‘and oer onstream inspection technologies enable fine turing of tank itegrty assessments, thereby enhancing data confidence levels. Conclusion AET provides afastand eile non-intrusive meted or rang the active corasin condition of storage tank flor with minimal disruption to norma operations. Wile high AE severty indication correlate wel wth ‘major repair requirements as established by other methods, the most striking findings the demonstrated 100% coreation between A grades no ative corrosion assigned onthe basis fA testing and confirmation by follow up ft steam inspections that no reais are require. The main argument fr using AE test mtd that helps ‘operators avoid the need to interupt operation. Dispensing with such césrupions i desiable oa, gen the high time and expense associated ith ak cleanout and product removal. However since AET snot ‘March 2010 | HYDROGARBONENGINEERING | 127cent viable substitute for out of service baseline inspections of atmospheric above ground storage tks, aviting off stream inspections altogether is nota feasible option yet. Instead off stream inspections must be performed by qualified tank inspectors entering the tank and checking its technical integrity. ‘Making use of information such as tank history data (eg bottom inspection ests in adton to AET findings significant improves the corelaton between AET and other inspection resuts. The use of tank bottom flor scanners for baseline inspections is becoming more and ‘more aoceped by tank omer, since they understand the significance ot FL assessments. The measurement accuracy of these scanners is extremely important, since itis onthe basso this data thatthe next shutdown date is defined. fal curently available inspection technologies, bottom floor scanners ae the only tos that can provide real assistance to operators in making the transition from the corwentonal time based to condion based maintenance and inspection approach tat wil save both time and expense. 1H References “ark nspecson, pat, aeration. aed constucson, API Standard 653 rnspecion of amospherc and iow presse Storage aks, API Recommended Pracie 575 ‘Welded soo sorage tanks AP Standard 650, ‘Uses Gude the maintenance and inspection of above ground vericalefndica storage tanks’ EEMUA publication No. 19. VAN OE LOO, PJ. and HERMANN, 8, How relate @AET? The ‘uanties rests ofan AE user group corelation std’ paper presented 7 ECNDT Copenhagen 1988, 26029 May, 1998. VAN DE LOO, Pu and KRONEMEUER, DA, ‘Szening of tank totom earsion wih a sage pt AE doctor: AE spa paper ‘resorted athe 2” Europran Conference on Acouste Emission tesing, 24°26" May, 2000, Sons, France MEYER, RR. and HEKKEMA, BJ. Tho lovancy of high ually ingut data for acorston adr isk assessment pape presord at the Ppaine Rehabiltaion& Maintenance conerence, September 11" ~15%, 2006, tabu Try. MEYER, Rand BROEKMEULEN, C., Delivering tank maintenance, ‘hycrocarbon Engineering, March 2007 PANDOLPH. J, Acoust Emsion Testing — An ateratve to AP 659 out of service inspocton” June 1995,