Best Practice for Risk Based Inspection

Recommendations

Info

♦ CSWIP 3 : Personnel Certification is available at Levels 1 and 2 (General Engineering or Welds categories) and at Level 3 (General category - Welds, Castings and Wrought products). Relevant Standards: - BS EN 970:1997 - Visual Examination of Fusion Welds (replaces BS 5289: 1976). - BS EN 12454:1998 - Visual Examination/Castings. - BS ISO 3057:1998 - Metallographic Replica Techniques of Surface Examination (replaces BS 5166:1974). - BS ISO 3058:1998 - Aids to Visual Inspection/Selection of Low-Power Magnifiers (replaces BS 5165:1974). b) Penetrant Testing (PT): In penetrant testing, liquid penetrant is drawn into surface-breaking flaws by capillary action; application of a developer draws-out the penetrant in the flaw producing an indication on the component surface. Penetrant testing is a low-cost method to apply and is very fast (large area coverage). It is usually a six stage process: (i) Surface cleaning. (ii) Application of penetrant to component surface. (iii) Removal of excess penetrant. (iv) Application of developer. (v) Inspection of component surface for flaws (vi) Post-cleaning. Penetrant testing can be applied to any non-porous clean material, metals or nonmetals, but is unsuitable for dirty or very rough component surfaces. Red-dye penetrant is the most commonly used; fluorescent penetrants are used when maximum flaw sensitivity is required. Penetrant testing can be fully automated, however, in the field, the method is manually applied. Limitations - Can only detect flaws open to the surface (the component surface on which the penetrant is applied). In addition, the flaw must not be filled with foreign material as this prevents the penetrant from entering the flaw. Cannot determine flaw through-thickness dimension. Typical Equipment Used: • Solvent Cleaner • Red-dye Penetrant • Developer (+ UV Lamp for Fluorescent Penetrant) 3 CSWIP – Certification Scheme for Weldment Inspection Personnel, operated by The Welding Institute (TWI). 67
Relevant Personnel Certification: ♦ PCN: Personnel Certification is available at Levels 1, 2 and 3 (General Engineering category - covers Welds, Castings and Wrought Products) and at Level 2 and 3 (Welds, Castings and Wrought Products categories). ♦ CSWIP: Personnel Certification is available at Levels 1 and 2 (General Engineering or Welds categories) and at Level 3 (General category - Welds, Castings and Wrought products). Relevant Standards: - BS EN 571-1:1997 - General Principles (replaces BS 6443: 1984). - BS EN 1371-1:1997 - Liquid Penetrant Inspection/Castings (replaces BS 4080: Part 2:1989). - BS EN 10228-2:1998 - Penetrant Testing of Steel Forgings. - BS EN 1289:1998 - Acceptance Levels/Welds. c) Magnetic Particle Inspection (MT or MPI): In MPI, the component is magnetised either locally or overall. If the component is sound the magnetic flux is predominantly inside the material, if, however, there is a surface-breaking flaw, the magnetic field is distorted, causing local flux leakage around the flaw. The flux leakage is displayed, by covering the surface with very fine iron particles, usually suspended in a liquid. The particles accumulate at the regions of flux leakage revealing the flaw as a line of iron particles on the component surface. MPI is applicable to all metals that can be magnetised. With MPI, it is important to ensure that the direction of the magnetic flux is appropriate for the flaws expected. A variety of equipment is available, the most common method of magnetisation being the application of a permanent or electromagnet (AC yoke) to the component surface. The equipment is manually operated. Limitations - Can only detect flaws in ferromagnetic materials. Can only detect surface flaws (some sub-surface capability exists with this method but detection can be unreliable). Cannot determine flaw through-thickness dimension. Typical Equipment Used: • AC Yoke • Black Magnetic Ink • White Background Paint (UV Lamp for Fluorescent Ink) • Flux Indicators Relevant Personnel Certification: ♦ PCN: Personnel Certification is available at Levels 1, 2 and 3 (General Engineering category - covers Welds, Castings and Wrought Products) and at Level 2 and 3 (Welds, Castings and Wrought Products categories). 68
Page 1 and 2:
HSE Health & Safety Executive Best
Page 3 and 4:
© Crown copyright 2001 Application
Page 5 and 6:
5.3. PUBLISHED DATA, EXPERIENCE AND
Page 7 and 8:
Any feedback or comments on the con
Page 9 and 10:
Duty Holders inspect plant to manag
Page 11 and 12:
inspection planning processes are b
Page 13 and 14:
when a root cause has led to deteri
Page 15 and 16:
plant database containing an invent
Page 17 and 18:
Fig. 1.1 Process diagram for plant
Page 19 and 20:
using suitable techniques, includin
Page 21 and 22:
With this information the manufactu
Page 23 and 24:
isk assessment carried out under Re
Page 25 and 26: CEOC recognises that it would seem
Page 27 and 28: • The second details how to estim
Page 29 and 30: a) Amount of equipment within item.
Page 31 and 32: 2.9 SAFed - Guidelines on Periodici
Page 33 and 34: 3.2. CRITERIA FOR APPLICATION Good
Page 35 and 36: 3.3. DRIVERS TOWARDS RBI The reason
Page 37 and 38: 4. THE RBI TEAM 4.1. COMPOSITION AN
Page 39 and 40: assessment and inspection may affec
Page 41 and 42: 5. PLANT DATA REQUIREMENTS 5.1. ESS
Page 43 and 44: If the need for repair or modificat
Page 45 and 46: 5.2. FAILURE CONSEQUENCES ASSESSMEN
Page 47 and 48: • Accident Databases. Many user o
Page 49 and 50: detected by periodic examination. D
Page 51 and 52: • Use of check-lists and mechanis
Page 53 and 54: Step 1. Determine and score (on a s
Page 55 and 56: The main problem with this approach
Page 57 and 58: Methods used to assess the release
Page 59 and 60: 6.8. SUMMARY OF MAIN POINTS a) Risk
Page 61 and 62: within a written scheme. It may be
Page 63 and 64: For equipment purchased second hand
Page 65 and 66: (b) Industry guidelines The Institu
Page 67 and 68: Conversely, it would be prudent to
Page 69 and 70: HSE commissioned research (7.9) to
Page 71 and 72: They provide a basic proof of leak
Page 73 and 74: uncertainty will exist. For equipme
Page 75: 8. ACHIEVEMENT OF RELIABLE INSPECTI
Page 79 and 80: Relevant Standards: BS EN 1711: 200
Page 81 and 82: measurements will more than likely
Page 83 and 84: Probability of detection (POD) resu
Page 85 and 86: • D-scan presentation: the displa
Page 87: Table 1 Generally accepted methods
Page 91: Table 4 NDT method versus damage ty
Page 95 and 96: 8.2. REMOTE SCREENING TECHNIQUES Re
Page 97 and 98: The technique is particularly appli
Page 99 and 100: AE can be a very sensitive test met
Page 101 and 102: Because of the interdependence of t
Page 103 and 104: 8.3.3. Discussion of POD and Flaw M
Page 105 and 106: a) A Technical Justification, and b
Page 107 and 108: ecommended. In particularly difficu
Page 109 and 110: 8.7 HSE Project: ‘Programme for t
Page 111 and 112: Fig. 8.2 Example of Receiver Operat
Page 113 and 114: 9. FEEDBACK FROM RISK BASED INSPECT
Page 115 and 116: 9.2. RISK OF REPAIRS AND MODIFICATI
Page 117 and 118: It is considered best practice if t
Page 119 and 120: 9.6. A DYNAMIC PROCESS - THE NEED F
Page 121 and 122: 10. EVIDENCE OF EFFECTIVE MANAGEMEN
Page 123 and 124: Evidence of good co-operation can u
Page 125 and 126: • Fitness-for-service assessments
Page 127 and 128:
10.12. SUMMARY OF MAIN POINTS (a) D
Page 130 and 131:
A1. INTRODUCTION This Authoritative
Page 132 and 133:
fed via pressure system 0019 - S -
Page 134 and 135:
Probability of Failure Internal Cor
Page 136 and 137:
(a) Vessels B1, B2 and B3 : Jackete
Page 138 and 139:
(b) Vessel B4: Catalyst Column Prob
Page 140 and 141:
Examination Periodicity: The freque
Page 142 and 143:
(d) Vessel B6 : Catchpot Probabilit
Page 144:
APPENDIX B AUDIT TOOL FOR RISK BASE
Page 147 and 148:
1. Assess the requirements for inte
Page 149 and 150:
B1.5. HOW DO INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT A
Page 151 and 152:
B3. SPECIFYING THE RBI MANAGEMENT T
Page 153 and 154:
B4. ASSEMBLY OF THE PLANT DATABASE
Page 155 and 156:
B5.5. HOW HAS THE LIKELIHOOD OF FAI
Page 157 and 158:
B6.5. WHAT METHODS AND FACTORS ARE
Page 159 and 160:
B7.6. IS EVIDENCE OF NDT CAPABILITY
Page 161 and 162:
B9. FEEDBACK FROM INSPECTION B9.1.
Page 164:
APPENDIX C TECHNIQUES FOR IDENTIFYI
Page 167 and 168:
Fault tree analysis is a very usefu
Page 170 and 171:
TYPES OF DETERIORATION AND MODES OF
Page 172 and 173:
Fig.D3 Creep fissure in pipework wa
Page 174 and 175:
Fig.D6 Stress corrosion cracking in
Page 176 and 177:
maximum permissible pressure must b
Page 178:
APPENDIX E SOFTWARE PACKAGES SUPPOR
Page 181 and 182:
These modification factors reflect
Page 184:
APPENDIX F GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Page 187 and 188:
Duty Holder Within this report, the
Page 189 and 190:
Qualitative Risk Analysis Qualitati
show all

Best Practice for Risk Based Inspection

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?