STD-API/PETRO RP S79-ENGL 2000 m@ 0732290 Ob2040L 360 mm Jan, 2000 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOR FITNESS-FOR-SERVICE e2t Figure 6.5 Additional Parameters For The Analysis Of A Localized Region Of Pits g ~~ Cylindrical Shett (a) Cylinder With Localized Pitting (©) Section A-A + | == =a! a y 7 r | rk 1 (©) Equivalent Plate Section For LTA AnalysisSTD-API/PETRO RP S?79-ENGL 2000 MM 0732290 Ob20407 277 mm 622 ‘API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE $79 Jan, 2000 Figure 6.6 Pitting Damage Confined To An LTA _--LTA with Pitting Damage Cylindrical Shell (@) Cylinder With Piting Damage Confined to an LTA (b) Section A-A Notes: . The dimensions s and ¢ define the region of localized piting damage. 2. Acombined RSF is used in the assessment (see paragraph 6.4.2.2)STD-API/PETRO RP S79-ENGL 2000 mm 0732290 Ob20408 133 mm Jan, 2000, RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOR FITNESS-FOR-SERVICE 623 Figure 6.7 Layered Shell Model To Evaluate Pitting Damage On Both Surfaces (2) Pit Damage From Both Surfaces Does Not Overtap (b) Overlapping Pit Damage From Both Surfaces Notes: 1. In Figure 6.7(a) five ofthe six layers are used to model the pit damiage, layer four designated by fy is not included in the calculation of the RSF (see paragraph 6.4.3.2,1.2) because there is no pitting damage in this layer. 2, The number of layers used in the assessment are established based on the deepest penetration of the individual pts included in the pit-couple data. A layer is assigned based on the depth of each pit until all pits are accounted for. Using this procedure, a single layer of material will exist (see Detail (a) above) as long as the depth of pitting damage from the inside and outside surface of the component does not overlap (see Detail (b) above), 3. Overlapping pit damage from both surfaces is not acceptable in a Level 1 or Level 2 Assessment.STD.API/PETRO RP S79-ENGL 2000 mm 0732290 Ob20409 07T mm 624 ‘API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 679 Jan, 2000, 6.11 Example Problems 6.11.1 Example Problem 1 — Widely scattered pitting has been discovered on the cylindrical section of a pressure vessel during an inspection. The vessel and inspection data are shown below. The vessel was designed and constructed to the ASME B&PV Code, Section Vill, Division 1. Determine ifthe vessel is acceptable for continued operation at the current MIP and temperature. Vessel Data Design Conditions = 500 psi @ 450°F Inside Diameter = 60inches Wall Thickness = 1-1/8 inches Uniform Metal Loss = 003 inches Future Corrosion Allow. 0.05 inches Material ‘SA516 Grade 70 Weld Joint Efficiency = 085 {Inspection Data Inspection Data Pitcounle |B 4, dy We a, Wye inches | Degrees | inches | inches inches inches 7 35, 1 05, 05, 06 Om, 2 42 15 16. 06 18 0.65 3 27) 2 09) 05: 08 0.75 4 24 30. 1.0) O7 12 06 5 46 5 o7, 06 12 05 6 Bt 15 11 05: 22 0.45 7 29 20 08 0.65 05 06 8 34 45 05 4 1.0 0.75 3 26 60 13 od 08 02 10 22 0 04 0.55 03, 0.75 4 18 10 15 04 08 05: 12 25 20 06. 0.75 05) OT, 13 38 35 24 05, 1.6 0.75 74 19 90. 04, 0.25 0.8, 05, 15 18 0 1.0) 07 08 05 16 1.0 Pa 06; 0.75 02 07, 7 25 45 08 03 12 04 18 15 67 06 05; 08 07 19 13 90 08 04 05 O7 Perform a Level 1 Assessment per paragraph 6.4.2 ‘Step 1 - Determine the following parameters:STD-API/PETRO RP S79-ENGL 2000 m™ 0732290 Ob20420 692 om Jan, 2000 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOR FITNESS-FOR-SERVICE 6.25 D=60" LOSS = 0.03" FCA=005" RSF, =09 tg ~ LOSS = 1.125"-0.03) 09s" ‘Step 2 ~ Determine the parameters for each pit couple being evaluated. The pit diameters, pit-couple ‘spacing and orientation are shown in the table of inspection data. ‘Step 3 - Calculate the minimum required thickness, 1... , based on the current design pressure and temperature (see Appendix A) s +0.03"+0.05" = 30.08" (500psig)(30.08") ; .6(500 psig) (S00psig)(30.08") 2(17500 psi)(0.85) + 0.4(500 psig) = max{1.032", 0501"] = 1.032" = 1032" 0501" Ls ‘Stop 4— Determine the actual depth of each pit in all pit-couples. For example, the actual and ‘average depths for the first pit-couple are: 1487" 0387" W, = 050"-(1.095"-0.05"~1.032") W,, = 0.40"-(1.095"-0.05"-1.032" (0.487"+0.387") 2 oe =0437" ‘The average pit depth forall pits is: 05435" ‘Step 5 - Determine the average pit diameter and pit-couple spacing. The average diameter for the first pit-couple is: =055" ‘The average diameter and pit spacing for all pits is: dy = 09237" Py = 25842" ‘Step 6 — Calculate the Remaining Strength Factor, RSF6.26 STD-API/PETRO RP S79-ENGL 2000 mm 0732290 0620422 726 mm ‘API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 579 Jan, 2000 = 0.6426 3 re (0.6426) = 05565 RSF = min] {19 95435" , 05565(1095"-005"+055435"-1032")] 14] | ga754 1.032" 1.032" ‘Step 7 ~ Evaluate results based on the type of pitting damage: Widespread pitting with (RSF = 0.7734) <(RSF, reduced operating pressure for continued operation is: 9); therefore arerate is required, The RSF. oy 0.7734) _ MAWP, mane EE) (500 pe fan = 30psi ‘Step 8 ~ Check the recommended limitations on the pit dimensions. All pit depths should be checked. In this example problem, only the first pit of pit-couple number one is examined to illustrate the procedure. Pit Dimensions and Remaining Thickness Ratio: W= mh, = 0487" 1.032"-0.487"-0.05" 1.032” = 048 ° } fom Table 44; 0 = 055 (4=05")<(QYDr,,, = 055(2-3008")(1032") =43") True Perform a Level 2 Assessment per paragraph 6.4.3 ‘Stop 1 - Determine the following parameters (see Step 1 of the Level 1 Assessment) D=60" LOSS = 0.03" FCA =0.05" RSF, =09 L095" Step 2 ~ Determine the parameters for each pit couple being evaluated. The pit diameters, pit-couple ‘spacing and orientation are shown in the table of inspection data.STD-API/PETRO RP S79-ENGL 2000 ml 0732290 Ob20412 bb4 om Jan, 2000 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOR FITNESS-FOR-SERVICE e27 ‘Step 3 Calculate the minimum required thickness, £,,,,, based on the current design pressure and temperature (see Stop 3 of the Level 1 Assessment) pig = 1.032" ‘Step 4 — Determine the actual depth of each pit in all pt-couples (see Step 4 of the Level 1 Assessment): W,, = 0.487" W,, = 0387" ‘Step 5~ Calculate the components of the membrane stress field, o and c, (see Figure 6.4). 1095"-005"= 1,045" c_ PR. S00 psig ( 30.08" . = =| — +06 | = ———=| —_. =17285 Beas (2 ¥ ) 085 | 104s" °° Lae o,- of = P| Rog) — S0psiv{ 3008" _ 9.4) _ 9348 psi 2E\4, 2(0.85) ( 1.045" ‘Step 6 - Compute the remaining strength factor for each pit couple — an example calculation for the first pit couple is shown below: Ways = 0437" from Step 4 of Level 1 dy, = 055" from Step 4 of Level | Mg, =P OSE - 08429" tons = 350 Put ee = 20507 psi a Se 9904 psi ' = (08429) max{]20507|, |9904}, {20507 - 9904]] = 17285 psi ¥, =[cos* 10° sin?(2-10°)](20507)' — jee 10] (20507)(9904) + [sin* 10°+-sin?(2-10°)|(9904)" “¥, = 4.207(10°) psi?STD.API/PETRO RP S79-ENGL 2000 mM 0732290 Ob20413 STO mm 628 ‘API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 579 Jan, 2000 17285 psi y= min] 22285 Pst 4[4207(10) ps RSF, = f{ 0.437" 08427(1.095"-0.05"+0.437 10-——— 1.03: 1.032 10 ‘Step 7 - Repeat Step 6 forall pit-couples. Determine the average value ofthe total number, 11, of the Remaining Strength Factors, RSF, , found in Step 6 and designate this value as RSF for the region of pitting The calculation results forall pt-couples is shown in the following table. 7 0.8427 X 2 0.5956 0.7678 3 (0.6703 0.8130 4 0.4863 0.6891 5 0.7934 0.9026 6 (0.4860. 0.7678 7 (0.7785. 0.8786 i 0.8386. 0.9228 9 (0.7860. 0.9401 70 (0.8409 0.9125 11 0.3611 0.7341 12 0.7827 (0.8600 13 (0.54844926 0.7054 14 1.0, 1.0 15 0.5000 0.7220 16 (0.6033, 0.7340 17 0.8416 0.8911 18 (0.8904 (0.9490. 19 1.0000 1.0000 ‘The RSF for the assessment is taken as the average value forall pit-couples: RSF = LY RSF, =08491 Step 8 — Evaluate results based on the type of pitting damage: Widespread pitting with (RSF = 0.8418) <(RSF, = 0.9); therefore a rerate is required. The reduced operating pressure for continued operation is: awe, = Mawe| 2. RSF, ‘Step 9 - Check the recommended limitations on the dimensions, see Step 8 of the Level 1 Assessment for an example calculation,STD.API/PETRO RP S75-ENGL 2000 m@ 0732290 Ob20414 437 om Jan, 2000 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOR FITNESS-FOR-SERVICE 629 6112 Example Problem 2 ~ A region of localized pitting has been found in a pressure vessel during an inspection The vessel data is shown below. The vessel was designed and constructed to the ASME BPV Code, Section Vill, Division 1. The inspection data for the localized pitting is provided in Example 1. ‘The region of localized pitting is located 60 inches away from the nearest structural discontinuity. Determine if the vessel is acceptable for continued operation at the current MAWP. and temperature. Vessel Data Design Conditions = 280 psi @ 700F Inside Diameter = 120inches Wall Thickness = 1.375 inches Uniform Metal Loss = 0.03 inches Future Corrosion Allowance = 0.06 inches SA 285 Grade © Efficiency = 1.0 Inspection Data Pit-couple data — see Example 1. Characteristic dimensions of localized pitting (see Figure 6 5) s=40" c= 20" Region with localized piting is away from all weld seams. Perform a Level 1 Assessment. Perform a Level 1 Assessment per paragraph 6.4.2.1 ‘Step 1 ~ Determine the folowing parameters: D=120" FCA=0.06" LOSS = 0.03" RSF, =09 1 = bygq ~ LOSS = 1375"-0.03" = 1345" ‘Step 2~ Determine the parameters for each pit couple being evaluated. The pit diameters, pit-couple ‘spacing and orientation are shown in the table of inspection data in Example Problem 1 Step 3~ Calculate the minimum required thickness, 1,,,., based on the current design pressure and ‘temperature (see Appendix A).STD-API/PETRO RP S79-ENGL 2000 MM 0732290 0620415 373 mm ‘API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 579 Jan, 2000 oe 0.03"+0.06"= 60.09" (280 psig)(6009") (13,300 psi)(1.0) - 0.6(280 psig) (280 psig)(60.09") 1281" ‘ese ~ 3(13,300 psi)(L0) + 04(280 psig) fig = Max[1.281", 0.630"] = 1.281" +0.0"= 0.630" ‘Step 4 ~ Determine the actual depth of each pit in all pit-couples. For example, the actual pit depth for the pits in the first pit-couple are: WW, = 0.50"-(1.345"-0.06"-1.281") = 0.496" W,, = 0.40"-(1.345"-0.06"-1.281") = 0396" es (0.496 0398) are. ‘The average pit depth for al pts is: Wig = 05528" ‘Step 5 — Determine the average pit diameter and pit-couple spacing. _ (050"+0.60") 4, Lega = =055" “The average diameter and pit spacing for all pts is: dg = 0.9237" Pig = 2.5842" ‘Step 6 ~ Calculate the Remaining Strength Factor, RSF: _ 2584-09237 Mog 16426 2584 Engg =~ (0.6426) = 05565 RSF = min| {10 95528" , 05565(1345"-006"405528"-1281")] 4] _ gg1o3 1.281" 1281" Step 7 — Evaluate results based on the type of pitting damage. The pitting is localized; therefore, determine an equivalent remaining thickness for use in an LTA assessment and perform a Section 5, Level 1 Assessment. = RSF -tyiy = (08103)(1.281"STD-API/PETRO RP S79-ENGL 2000 MM 0732290 Ob204%b 20T mm an, 2000 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOR FITNESS-FOR-SERVICE 631 Determine the acceptability for continued operation — Perform a Section 5, Level 1 Assessment of the equivalent LTA. ‘Step 7.1 — Determine the Critical Thickness Profiles(s) and the following parameters. D=120" FCA = 0,06" g, is not required for the analysis of an LTA Lyog = 60" MAWP = 280 psig Step 7.2— Calculate the minimum required thickness, /,,,, based on the current design pressure and temperature, =1281" ‘Step 7.3 Determine the minimum measured thickness, 1, the flaw dimensions (see Section 5, paragraph 5.3.3.2), and the shell parameter, 4 ‘There is only one LTA in the vessel; therefore, the flaw-to-law spacing criteria does not need to be checked. (ag = 1034" .034"-0.06" 128)" Step 7.4 Check the limiting flaw size criteria for a Section 5, Level 1 Assessment. (R, =0.7603)> 0.20 True (ton ~ FCA = 1.034"-0.06" = 0.974") > 0.10" True (Zug = 60") 2 (18,/120"(1281") = 22") True Step 7.5~ Check the criteria for a groove-lke flaw. This step is not applicable because the region of localized metal loss is categorized as an LTA. A= 4145 ‘Step 7.6 ~ Evaluate the longitudinal extent of the flaw. From Figure 5.6 with { vast the longitudinal extent of the flaw is unacceptable. The rerate pressure is:632 STD-API/PETRO RP S79-ENGL 2000 m@ 0732290 Ob20417 14b om ‘API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 579 Jan, 2000 M, = (1+ 048(4.145)° y° = 3041 = 08254 MAWP. = (280, ie Sa) 2568 psig 090 €_ 20" ‘Step 7.8 - Evaluate circumferential extent of the flaw. From Figure 5.7 with D120" . R, = 0.7603 the circumferential extent of the flaw is acceptable. ‘Step 8 - Check the recommended limitations on the dimensions (all pits should be checked, only the ith pit in first pit-couple is evaluated in this example). Pit Dimensions and Remaining Thickness Ratio: True Pit Depth: (R, =0565)2020 True Perform a Level 2 Assessment per paragraph 6.4.3.2 Stop 1 — Determine the following parameters (the pit diameters, pit-couple spacing and orientation are shown in the table of inspection data, see Example Problem Number 1) D=120" LOSS = 0.03" FCA =0.06" RSF, =09 t= 1345" it-couple ‘Step 2 ~ Determine the parameters for each pit couple being evaluated. The pit diameters, spacing and orientation are shown in the table of inspection data in Example Problem 1. ‘Step 3~ Calculate the minimum required thickness, f,,, , based on the current design pressure and temperature (see Step 3 of the Level 1 Assessment).STD-API/PETRO RP S?4-ENGL 2000 mm 0732290 Ob20418 O82 mm Jan, 2000 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOR FITNESS-FOR SERVICE 633 Syig = 1281" Step 4 - Determine the actual depth of each pit in al pt-couples. For example, the actual pit depth for the first pit in the first pit-couple is (see Step 4 of the Level 1 Assessment) W,, = 0.50"-(1.345"-0.06"-1.281") = 0.496" W,, = 0.40"-(1345"-0.06"-1281") = 0396" ‘Stop Calculate the components of the membrane stress field, and c, see Figure 6.4). 1, = 1345"-0.06"= 1.285 o=05=2(Rs06 = Hops (OO 406) = 3262p E\t, 10 \ 1285" o-ot= Pog ~ pes (So y ) 6491 psi " 2E\t, 2(1.0) 1.285" ‘Step 6 - Compute the remaining strength factor for each pit couple — an example on how to compute the remaining strength factor for a pit-couple is shown in Step 6 of the Level 2 Assessment in Example Problem Number 1. Step 7 - Repeat Step 6 forall pit-couples. Determine the average value of the total number, 7, of the Remaining Strength Factors, RSF, , found in Step 6 and designate this value as_RSF for the region of pitting, ‘The calculation results for all pit-couples is shown in the following table. Pit-couple Eves RSF, 7 0.8425 osa7e 2 0.5959 0.8058 3 (0.6708 0.8424 4 0.4869 0.7426 5 0.7934 0.9143 6 0.4682 (0.8058. 7 0.791 0.8952 & 0.8396 0.9309 9 (0.7853 0.9443. 70 0.8409 0.9222 1 0.3611 0.7765 2 0.7832 0.8803, 13 0.4932 0.7557 14 4.0000. 1.0000. 15 (0.5000 0.7688 16 (0.6037 0.7787 7 0.6424 0.9052 18 0.887 0.9504 19 1.0000 1.0000. ‘The RSF for the assessment is taken as the average value for al pit-couples:STD-API/PETRO RP S?9-ENGL 2000 mM 0732290 0620419 T19 Mm 634 ‘API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 579 Jan, 2000 RSF = oD RSF, = 08720 Step 8 Evaluate results based on the type of pitting damage. The pitting is localized; therefore, determine an equivalent remaining thickness for use in an LTA assessment and perform a Section 5, Level 4 Assessment, RSF tag = (08720)(1.281") = 1117" Determine the acceptability for continued operation ~ Perform a Section 6, Level 1 Assessment of the equivalent LTA ‘Stop 8.1 — Determine the Critical Thickness Profles(s) and the following parameters D=120" FCA =0.06" g, is not required for the analysis of an LTA Lg = 60" MAWP = 280 psig 90 ‘Step 6.2 Calculate the minimum required thickness, f,,.. based on the current design pressure ‘and temperature. ig = 1.281" ‘Stop 8.3 - Determine the minimum measured thickness, t,,, the flaw dimensions (see Section 5, paragraph 5.3.3.2), and the shell parameter, ‘There is only one LT in the vessel; therefore, the flaw-to-flaw spacing criteria does not need to be checked. oe L117". " p= MIT =006" 1.281" 40" 7 1.285(40") = 08251 145 ‘Step 8.4 ~ Check the limiting flaw size criteria for a Level 1 Assessment.STD-API/PETRO RP S79-ENGL 2000 mM 0732250 Ob20420 730 mm Jan, 2000 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOR FITNESS-FOR-SERVICE 6.35 (R, =08251) > 020 True (tom — FCA =1.117"-0.06" = 1.057") = 0.10" True (Zane = 60") = (18,f120°(1.281") = 22") True ‘Step 8.6 - Check the criteria for a groove-like flaw. This step is not applicable because the region of localized metal loss is categorized as an LTA. 2=4145 wt tnt ntact ron rae [2A longitudinal extent ofthe flaw is unacceptable. The rerate pressure is: M, = (I+048(4.145)')" = 3041 RSF = — Bt = 08755 1-——(1-08251) Zoai ) 08755 MAWP, =(280 psig | = 272.4 psi = ( sie: no ) psig © _ 20" ‘Step 8.8 ~ Evaluate circumferential extent of the flaw. From Figure 5.9 with } D120” R, = 08251 1167 the circumferential extent ofthe flaw is acceptable, ‘Step 9 - Check the recommendation for limitations on the pit dimensions, see Step 8 of the Level 1 ‘Assessment for an example calculation7A 72 724 7.22 723 7.2.3.4 STD-API/PETRO RP S79-ENGL 2000 MM 0732290 Ob20421 b77 mm SECTION 7 — Assessment Of Blisters And Laminations (Jan, 2000) General Fitness-For-Service (FF) assessment procedures for pressurized components with hydrogen blisters and laminations, excluding HIC or SOHIC damage, are provided in this Section. The assessment procedures for blisters and laminations are shown in the flow charts contained in Figures 7.1 and 7.2, respectively. Hydrogen blistering is caused by hydrogen accumulation at imperfections in the steel, such as laminations or inclusions. Blistering typically occurs in low temperature wet HS or hydrofluoric acid environments which charge atomic hydrogen into the steel. The hydrogen combines at imperfections to form molecular hydrogen which is too large to difluse out. The hydrogen accumulates and results in the build-up of high pressure which causes local stresses that exceed the yield strength of the material in the vicinity of these imperfections. The yielding of the material and subsequent plastic deformation in the form of bulging due to pressure loading results in a blister. Sometimes cracks can extend from the periphery of a blister and can propagate in a through-wall direction, particularly if the blister is located near a weld Laminations are a plane of non-fusion in the interior of a steel plate that results during the stee! manufacturing process. Laminations are usually detected during an ultrasonic examination, Laminations that are parallel to the plate surface and are not in close proximity to structural discontinuities are not detrimental, unless they are in a hydrogen charging service and are in close proximity of a weld Applicability And Limitations Of The Procedure The FFS assessment procedures described below may be used to evaluate the acceptabilty of blisters and laminations subject tothe limitations in this section. The assessment procedures cover both internally and externally bulged blisters. The assessment procedures also include analysis methods for laminations which are paraliel to the surface of the plate or that have a through-thickness component (i.e. the lamination is not parallel to the surface of the plate). Calculation methods are provided to rerate the component if the acceptance criteria in this section are not satisfied. For pressurized components (pressure vessels and piping), the calculation methods can be used to find a reduced maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) andlor Coincident temperature. For tank components (shell courses), the calculation methods can be used to determine a reduced maximum fil height (MFH). Specific details pertaining to the applicability and limitations of each of the assessment procedures are discussed below. ‘The Level 1 and 2 assessment procedures for blisters apply only if all ofthe following conditions are satisfied: ‘a. The original design criteria were in accordance with a recognized code or standard (see Section 1, paragraphs 1.2.2 or 1.2.3). ‘The operating temperature is less than 204.4°C (400°F) for carbon stee! or low alloy steels, or |s below the applicable design curve in API 941, whichever is greater. Blisters associated with high temperature hydrogen attack are specifically excluded from this assessment.STD-API/PETRO RP S74-ENGL 2000 m™ 0732290 Ob20422 S03 mm ‘API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 579 Jan, 2000 7232 7233 73 734 732 733 7.334 ©. The material is considered to be ductile and is not subject to embrittlement during operation due to temperature or the process environment (see Section 5, paragraph §.2.3.1.c) d. The component is not in cyclic service (see Section 4, paragraph 4.2.3.1.d). fe. There is physical bulging which is discovered by visual or UT examination. If physical bulging is not present, the defect should be evaluated as a lamination. {The component geometry is one of those cited in Section 4, paragraph 4.2.3.1. 9. The applied loads are limited to internal or external pressure. h. The assessment procedures in this section are not applicable to HIC or SOHIC damage (see ‘Appendix G, paragraph 6.3.5). A Level 3 assessment for bisters should be performed when the requirements of paragraph 7.2.3.1 are not satisfied, the blister is located in close proximity to a weld seam (see paragraph 7.4.2.1.b.5) ‘or major structural discontinuity (see paragraph 7.4.2.1.b.6). In addition, a Level 3 assessment is, required to evaluate @ component with a muttitude of closely spaced blisters (see Figure 7.3). The Level 1 and 2 assessment procedures for laminations apply only if the lamination is located parallel to the plate surface and does not have any through thickness cracking associated with it If the lamination is not parallel to the surface of the plate, then the flaw shall be evaluated as a crack- like flaw using the procedures of Section 9, Data Requirements Original Equipment Design Data ‘An overview of the original equipment data required for an assessment is provided in Section 2, Paragraph 2.3.1. Maintenance And Operational History ‘An overview of the maintenance and operational history required for an assessment is provided in ‘Section 2, paragraph 2.3.2. Required Data/Measurements For A FFS Assessment ‘The required data and measurements for a blister evaluation are as follows: a. Blister Dimensions ~ The size ofthe biister to be used in the assessment is based on the following requirements. 1. Blister Diameter - The blister dimensions to be recorded depend on the assessment level and are defined below. a) _ Level 1 Assessment — The largest dimension, s or c should be taken as the diameter (see Figure 7.4). b) Level 2 Assessment — The blister dimensions in the longitudinal and circumferential directions, s and c, should be recorded consistent with the method used to characterize a region of localized metal loss in Section 5.STD-API/PETRO RP S79-ENGL 2000 mm 0732290 Ob20423 44T om Jan, 2000 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE FOR FITNESS-FOR SERVICE 73 73.32 7333 73.4 73.44 2. Blister-To-Blister Spacing, L, - Measurements should be made to determine the biister- to-blister spacing (including all nearest neighbors, see Figure 7.3). This information should be detailed and provided on an inspection sketch. If there are multiple blisters in ‘lose proximity to one another, the size of the blister to be used in the assessment is, established considering the effects of neighboring blisters using the criterion for local ‘metal loss described in Section 5 (see Figure 5.5). In addition, if the distance between {wo adjacent blisters (measured edge-to-edge) is less than or equal to two times the ‘nominal plate thickness, the blisters should be combined and evaluated as a single blister. b. Bulge Direction and Projection, B, ~The blister bulge direction, inside or outside of the pressure containing component, and the blister projection above the shell surface (see Figure 7.4) should be recorded. ©. Blister Minimum Measured Well Thickness, {,,,~ For an internal blster this is the distance {rom the outside surface to the blister, and for an external blister, this is the distance from the inside surface to the blister (see Figure 7.4). d. Blister Periphery Cracking ~ The blister should be examined to determine if there are any ‘cracks extending in the plane of the blister and/or in a through-thickness direction. This type of cracking typically occurs at the periphery of the blister and can lead to cracking in the through thickness direction. @. _ Blister Crown Cracking And Vent Holes ~ Cracks on the crown of blisters (see Figure 7.5) affect the strength calculation; therefore, the dimension , should be recorded if cracks are present. Alternatively, the blister may have previously been vented (see Figure 7.6) to relieve the intemal pressure thereby decreasing the possibility of future growth. If So, the diameter of the vent hole can be used for s, 1. Blister Spacing To Weld Joints, L, ~ Measurements should be made to determine the ‘spacing of blisters from weld joints (see Figure 7.7). This information is important because if the blister is close to the weld, through wall cracking may occur. This information should be detailed and provided on an inspection sketch, 9. Blister Spacing To Major Structural Discontinuities, L.,,y ~ Measurements should be made to determine the location of the blister to major structural discontinuities such as cylindrical to conical transitions and nozzle attachments. This information should be detailed and provided on an inspection sketch. ‘The above information should be recorded in a format similar to the one shown in Table 7.1. In addition, the creation of a detailed sketch at the time of the inspection showing the information in Paragraph 7.3.3.1 is recommended. ‘The required data and measurements for a lamination are similar to those of blisters, but are limited to paragraphs 7.3.3.1.a, c, d, f, and g. The above information should be recorded in a format similar to the one shown in Table 7.1.” In addition, the creation of a sketch at the time of the inspection showing the information in paragraph 7.3.3.1 is recommended, Recommendations For Inspection Technique And Sizing Requirements Blisters are usually discovered by visual observation of surface bulging on either the inside or outside of the equipment. During an in-service inspection/monitoring blisters may also be discovered with UT ‘examination.