Proceedings of the ASME 2015 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference

PVP2015
July 19-23, 2015, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

PVP2015-45938

EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF RISK BASED INSPECTION (RBI) APPROACH IN

ASSET INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT OF OIL AND GAS FACILITIES

Joseph Akanni
Senior Inspection Engineer
Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Co,
Nigeria

Oladipo Alonge
Materials, Corrosion and Inspection Engineer
Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Ltd.

ABSTRACT or production facility by considering all credible damage

Effective implementation of asset integrity
management in oil and gas facilities requires a structured
approach to the inspection of all equipment to get
maximum value for time and resources. This is what Risk
Based Inspection (RBI) strives to achieve by optimizing
inspection and monitoring efforts based on degradation
effects and other associated risks. The risk based
approach entails a detailed assessment of all possible
degradation mechanisms for equipment, operating
context of the facility as well as the health, safety and
environment impact of equipment failure. All these
assessments and considerations extend the impact of
RBI beyond its initial objective of achieving an optimised
inspection frequency to also ensuring process safety,
increased understanding of degradation risk and assuring
asset integrity.
This paper focuses on the workflow, process, benefits
and challenges of a typical RBI implementation for static
equipment in facilities.
INTRODUCTION
The objectives of Risk Based Inspection (RBI) are to
determine inspection scope, extent, locations and
optimised inspection cycle for static equipment based on
susceptibility to failure, the health, safety, environmental
and economic risks of its operation and remnant life of the
equipment. Thus, RBI is a process which comprises risk
analysis to develop effective/optimized inspection
plan/requirements for static process equipment in a plant
mechanisms that could be expected to affect an
equipment and identification of other risk-reducing
actions. Risk levels are prioritized in a systematic manner
so that an inspection programme can be planned that
focuses resources on higher risk equipment while
reducing lower value inspection activities.
The RBI plan produced combined with a set of integrity
operating windows for process units in a facility provide
the basis for asset integrity management in oil and gas
facilities. Technical integrity is maintained by executing
inspections and process monitoring at the right locations
using appropriate techniques with the appropriate
coverage and at the right frequencies.
Corrosion control and mitigating impact of degradation is
a general business challenge and areas for consideration
include but are not limited to the following:
• Effective management of degradation
• Optimal use of existing and new inspection methods
• Fixed inspection intervals for all equipment regardless
of degradation mechanisms, operating environment and
process conditions.
• Deferment of production/extended turn around for
unnecessary inspection
RBI implementation is a proactive approach to addressing
these business challenges by replacing time based
inspection with the application of flexible periodic
inspection programmes using risk assessment based on

1 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 operational, materials, environmental parameters and the
operating conditions of equipment in a facility.
RBI is applicable to static equipment such as process
piping, pressure vessels, heat exchangers, above ground
storage tanks and pressure relief devices, boilers and
heaters. It takes into account only degradation
mechanisms related to the operation of an installation
(corrosion, fatigue, etc.). Failures resulting from
excursions outside the defined Integrity Operating
Window (IOW) are not considered.
• Generating the loop descriptions (loop, process
and corrosion)
• Reviewing loop description and development of
integrity operating window
• Assessing criticality of failure, confidence rating
and inspection interval
• Determine the maximum inspection intervals
• Recommend appropriate inspection strategy for
non-age related failure
• Inspection and process monitoring planning

NOMENCLATURE

CUI Corrosion Under Insulation

IOW Integrity Operating Window
MIC Microbial Induced Corrosion
RBI Risk Based Inspection
Stf Susceptibility to failure

RBI ASSESSMENT WORKFLOW

The implementation of RBI in any asset starts with an

assessment process which typically requires a workshop.
The RBI assessment is a multidisciplinary task and it is
best to nominate a core team consisting of the:

• Inspector;
• Asset operator; Figure 1: RBI Assessment Workshop Workflow
• Maintenance engineer
Asset Integrity Data
• Process engineer/Technologist
• Materials & Corrosion engineer The RBI process starts with a precise definition of its
• Representatives of local legislative body boundaries and identifying all static equipment to be
included. The next step is to compile and check all
The RBI team may be supplemented by additional relevant asset integrity data such as:
expertise including production chemist and IT support • Process data and drawings
engineer on an ad hoc basis. • Engineering design data
• Description and evaluation of degradation
It is essential to bring together all relevant information mechanisms
including asset integrity data in preparation for the RBI • Compilation of inspection history
assessment. After completion of the preparation, the
workshop which is preferably off-site can be organised. It The RBI is a live process and must include update of the
is best practise to schedule the RBI workshop as full week asset integrity database with results of inspections,
or 2 week session depending on the asset and equipment monitoring and process/asset changes. This will
to be assessed. progressively eliminate uncertainties in assessments and
calculations, and result in an effective inspection
The RBI assessment workflow is represented in Figure 1 programme.
and also stated below:
Corrosion Loop Definition
• Review of asset integrity data
• Identification of corrosion loops All facilities are subjected to several potential degradation
• Marking of the loops on PEFS mechanisms, which need to be carefully controlled to

2 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 avoid unsafe situations and /or high costs. Corrosion
loops are means to describe and control degradation
mechanisms in sections of a facility. They contribute
immensely to improving the application of correct
inspection techniques. A corrosion loop is a section of a
facility that:
• Consists of similar materials of construction: this
means that pipings are made of similar piping
classes and equipment are made of comparable
materials.
• Operates under similar process conditions: this
means that for each corrosion loop, the corrosive
species shall be the same throughout the loop
and temperatures shall be such that no stepwise
changes in corrosion phenomena occur.
• Exposed to similar degradation/corrosion
mechanisms and rates.
The RBI assessments consider all possible degradation
mechanisms that the equipment is exposed to. The
mechanisms are considered as age related and non-age
related. Age related degradation rate can be measured
and its trend established over time while non-age related
failures tend to occur suddenly and it is usually not
possible to estimate a degradation rate or remnant life, as
they are dependent more on process conditions and
generally associated with excursions outside the IOW.
Some of the commonly addressed degradation
mechanisms include CO2 corrosion, Microbial Induced
Corrosion (MIC), Oxygen corrosion, under deposit
corrosion, erosion corrosion, fatigue and Corrosion Under
Insulation (CUI) etc.
Criticality Assessment
Criticality is the combination of two parameters; the
susceptibility to failure (StF) and the consequences of
failure. Criticality is failure mode related and for each
important failure mode, the aforementioned parameters
have to be determined.
The susceptibility to failure is subdivided into 4 classes:
negligible, low, medium and high. It is assessed using
questionnaires based on relevant information regarding
process conditions, degradation mechanisms and also the
materials, corrosion and inspection knowledge.
Three consequence categories are considered for a
failure mode: economic, health/safety and environment.
3 Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
The worst case determines the overall consequence
class.
The economic consequence considers the financial effect
of a failure on assets and production. Damage to assets
typically includes material and labour costs of repair
and/or replacement of equipment. Costs associated with
product value such as lost revenues due to production
losses are also determined. Production loss is deferred
income plus product wasted.
Health and safety consequences consider impact effects
of equipment failure on humans and also mitigating
factors. Exposure of people in a hazardous zone and the
possibility of averting a hazardous event are also
considered.
The environmental consequences of an incident consider
the effects of liquid release on soil and water and also the
release of gas which result in pollution of the atmosphere.
Confidence Rating
This reflects the confidence that the inspector and the
corrosion engineer have in the assessment of
Susceptibility to Failure and for age-related failure failures,
the remnant life. It depends on their judgement on the
stability and control of degradation mechanisms; the
number and quality of inspections carried out; and
whether reliable process (Integrity Operating Window)
monitoring is carried out.
Confidence rating is one of the parameters that determine
inspection intervals or process monitoring extent.
Remnant Life Determination
The assessment of remnant life of equipment with regard
to degradation mechanism and failure characteristics is
essential to the RBI process.
For non-age related (random) failure characteristics, the
remnant life cannot be assessed because the onset and
rate of degradation cannot be predicted. These failure
characteristics require a separate approach based on
control of internal and/or external operating conditions. A
proper monitoring scheme for the integrity operating
window should be agreed for such cases.
 Age related (trendable) degradation mechanisms allow a
quantitative determination of the remnant life. For
degradation mechanisms that cause wall thinning, the
remnant life can be assessed by considering the
remaining corrosion allowance and the corrosion rate.
Remnant life = Remaining corrosion allowance/Selected
corrosion rate.
When an item’s failure mechanism is a result of
simultaneous degradation, calculation of the remnant life
should be based on the worst case corrosion rate, e.g.
addition of internal and external corrosion rates.
Alternatively, the remaining corrosion allowance may be
split over the competing degradation mechanisms.
Inspection/Process Monitoring Plan
For age related degradation, the criticality values together
with the confidence rating are used to determine the
maximum inspection interval as a fraction of remnant life.
This fraction, inspection interval factor is established by
combining the confidence rating and criticality. The
remnant life is multiplied by the interval factor to derive a
maximum inspection interval.
Maximum inspection interval = Interval factor X Remnant
life
A recommended maximum inspection interval defined by
local legislation may only be exceeded after approval by
the statutory body.
For non-age related degradation, it is not possible to
estimate a remnant life as this form of degradation is
more dependent on process conditions and it is very
difficult to establish a time-dependent degradation rate.
Very high degradation rates and rapid changes are
possible if the process conditions are not properly
controlled. For this reason, it should be recognised that
time based inspections cannot help in preventing the
failure of these equipment. Process monitoring (Integrity
Operating Window) monitoring is most essential here.
An inspection task is defined by the following parameters:
Location: This refers to the location representative of the
condition of the subject equipment or system.
Representative locations (affected area) can usually be
derived from the corrosion description/analysis for the
4 Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
corrosion loop. Examples are welds, nozzles and dead
legs.
Technique: An inspection technique matching the credible
degradation mechanisms must be selected. For example,
to monitor pitting in small-bore piping, radiography is more
appropriate as opposed to the use of ultrasonic wall
thickness measurements. However, the latter technique is
more suitable for monitoring general wall loss. Similarly,
appropriate process monitoring to reliably monitor the
integrity operating window must be selected.
Coverage: The inspection coverage describes the amount
of affected area to be inspected to confidently monitor the
condition of an item and where possible, predict its
remaining life.
Frequency: This is the frequency determined by the
criticality, confidence rating and remaining life of
equipment. This frequency may vary as the confidence
rating and remaining life can change over time.
Update/Review
After the inspection tasks have been executed, it is
important to update the asset database. Information like
inspection and test results, condition monitoring data and
actual condition revealed during the maintenance tasks
shall be fed back into the system. It is necessary to review
RBI analyses regularly. Events that typically prompt a
review are plant shutdown, major integrity operating
window excursion and major plant change including
changes in process conditions.
In order to realise the full benefits of an RBI study, it is
necessary to link the output of RBI to the maintenance
management system or processes. This will enable the
workflow to be managed, equipment condition to be
recorded and performance trends to be analysed.
RBI Team Responsibilities
The section gives a typical description of the
responsibilities in the RBI process. The Table 1 below
delineates process steps and also who is responsible.
“RBI” in the table stands for the complete RBI team, “M”
for the materials and corrosion engineer, “I” for the asset
inspector, “PO” for the process/operations engineer and
“ME” for the maintenance engineer.
 Table 1: Typical RBI Responsibility Chart The IOW is established from only measurable and
controllable parameters and is usually determined for a
Responsible definite corrosion loop based on design, operational
S/N Section Contents Party considerations and economic considerations to
1 Asset integrity Acceptance of data in the I assure asset integrity. The IOW is the basis for risk
database asset integrity database assessment and operating outside of the defined
limits will have negative impact on the integrity of the
2 Production Define production loss PO
asset/equipment and inspection strategies derived
loss equation rate (dollars per hour) in
from the analysis.
case of business
interruption for The parameters used to define IOW should have one
subsequent time intervals or more of the following characteristics:
3 Repair cost Calculate all costs and ME
and time time required to restore a • IOW parameters are either single,
failed equipment to its independently controlled process variables
required performance
such as temperature, pressure, pH, chemical
4 Labour cost Calculate the labour costs ME
related to a specific injection rate, concentration, etc. or they are
failure calculated variables such as flow ratios, dew
5 Corrosion loop Define corrosion loops on RBI point conditions etc.
definition process diagrams
6 Corrosion loop Prepare descriptions of all O&M • The IOW can be based on a physical
description credible corrosion condition of the equipment, such as degree of
mechanisms, their vibration.
morphologies, areas of
susceptibility and In order to achieve a controllable IOW, the
materials of construction parameters establishing the IOW must meet the
7 Process Prepare a corrosion PO
following criteria:
description oriented process
description for each loop
8 Criticality Answer probability and RBI • All IOW parameters must be quantifiable and
rating consequence questions the measurement of each parameter must
9 Equipment Briefly outline historical I become an established procedure
history inspection results and
calculate actual corrosion • All IOW parameters must be either controlled
rates by the operating or inspection staff or they
10 Confidence Assign confidence rating RBI should themselves control the maintenance
rating and inspection schedules.
11 Remnant life Determine remnant life RBI
12 Inspection Inspection scope, I It is important to monitor the operating parameters
plan strategy and specific identified as part of the IOW during the RBI study.
recommendations This monitoring of the integrity operating window is a
condition of assuring the validity of the maximum
INTEGRITY OPERATING WINDOW (IOW) inspection intervals recommended in the RBI study. The
monitored parameters are also to be used in trending of
The integrity operating window (IOW) is a key deliverable relevant degradation mechanisms and fitness for purpose
for the RBI assessment. It represents a further limitation assessment of facilities as they approach end of design
within the broader plant Operating Window, and refers to life. Hence, quantification and monitoring of IOW
the recommended range of values for relevant operating parameters results in building higher confidence in the
(corrosion and process) parameters to be monitored in carious degradation modes, increasing remnant life of
the process fluid. The broader plant Operating Window is equipment and improving equipment integrity.
established from the process and equipment design and
is safeguarded by alarms, trips, pressure relief valves and RBI BENEFITS
other delimiting devices, but it may not have fully
addressed all possible degradation issues. The Benefits of implementing RBI on a facility are
numerous with positive impacts on the business, process

5 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 safety, people and the overall technical integrity of assets
as listed below:
Business
• Reduced maintenance cost: cost saving from
optimized inspection cycle and reduced
scheduled deferment
• Effective use of resources with less unplanned
inspection
• Increased equipment availability and reduced
shutdown scope: RBI provides basis for
lengthening inspection intervals and optimising
maintenance and inspection scope for less critical
items. Also, equipment can be monitored on-
stream in lieu of the traditional out-of-service
methods.
• Basis for assurance of asset technical integrity to
stakeholders (Regulators/Audits)
Process safety
• Identification of highly critical static equipment
and required inspection
• Identification of safe integrity operating window
• Improved knowledge of the facility risk and
degradation mechanisms
• Enhance assessment for impact of process
change on asset integrity
• Compliance with changing Health, Safety and
Environment (HSE) and legal requirements
People
• Collaboration among relevant disciplines
responsible for asset integrity
• Cross-discipline competence development:
improved corrosion/degradation knowledge for
plant operators and plant operations knowledge
for inspectors
• RBI awareness for workshop participants across
all disciplines
• Enhance inspector’s competence in risk based
monitoring approach
Industry
• Identifying areas for application of new
technologies in facilities
RBI IMPLEMENTATION CRITICAL SUCCESS
FACTORS
There are certain factors and conditions that contribute to
a successful implementation of RBI approach. These
critical success factors are:
6 Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/30/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
• Company leadership commitment for
implementation
• Commitment and competence of members of RBI
team
• Timely availability of resources
• Quality of asset integrity data available
• Ownership of RBI implementation process by
plant/asset team
• Participation of local regulatory bodies – capturing
concerns and demonstrating compliance
CHALLENGES
Typical Challenges encountered in implementing RBI are:
• Unavailability of adequate Inspection history
which makes it difficult to establish actual
corrosion rates
• Data quality and assurance
• Limited inspection tools/methods in place
• Insufficient information to fully assess some non-
age related failures
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations for improvement of the process and to
obtain maximum value for work done are:
• Deploy enhanced inspection method – improved
techniques and other non-intrusive methods
• Ensure effective monitoring of Integrity Operating
Window (IOW) to assure the validity of inspection
tasks recommended in the RBI study
• Conduct Fitness for Service (FFS) assessment of
critical equipment. An assessment of fitness for
continued service is a key part of RBI
implementation as it further helps to accomplish
effective degradation risk reduction.
• Ensure update of asset integrity database and
review RBI analysis either on a period or ad-hoc
basis to ensure that most recent inspection and
maintenance information are included.
REFERENCES
1. Akanni Joseph, Oseahon Edmund, “Managing
Corrosion with Risk Based Inspection (RBI)” Paper at
Offshore West Africa (OWA) Conference 2015
2. Risk-Based Inspection Downstream Segment
API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 580
Second Edition, November 2009