IBP1106_19

ULTIMATE HIGH PRECISION LOADING LINE

INSPECTION
Luciano Baptista , Johannes Keuter , Guenter Sundag3,
1 2

Alex Malagon4

Copyright 2019, Brazilian Petroleum, Gas and Biofuels Institute - IBP

This Technical Paper was prepared for presentation at the Rio Pipeline Conference and Exhibition 2019, held
between 03 and 05 of September, in Rio de Janeiro. This Technical Paper was selected for presentation by the
Technical Committee of the event according to the information contained in the final paper submitted by the
author(s). The organizers are not supposed to translate or correct the submitted papers. The material as it is
presented, does not necessarily represent Brazilian Petroleum, Gas and Biofuels Institute’ opinion, or that of its
Members or Representatives. Authors consent to the publication of this Technical Paper in the Rio Pipeline
Conference and Exhibition 2019.

Abstract

Loading lines do provide a vital link from producer to consumer. They are located
in a high consequence subsea environment and repairs or replacement are difficult and
costly. These are critical assets that, with the increase in the need of either importation
or exportation of refined or crude production, represent an important portion of
companies’ revenue and are associated to a high environmental risk if not properly
handled. Another key element for loading lines inspection is the fact that they have no
standard pigging receiver but a subsea PLEM (Pipeline End Manifold), so a bi-directional
approach for the in-line inspection is mandatory. The safe and reliable operation of a
loading line is therefore key. Hence, a reliable and accurate assessment is essential.
Pipeline operators are challenged to maintain their premises in a position to operate
safely, reliably and efficiently. Pig inspections have proved economically and technically
viable and inspection companies are trigged to make intensive research and to develop
inspection tools able to provide the best possible and accurate diagnose to the pipeline
integrity, which means using the correct technology/methodology to find, size and report
each feature precisely, no matter its origin, shape or position. A combination of the highest
precision technologies was applied to a loading line in the Caribbean Sea, such as MFL-A
Ultra – developed to not only detect even the smallest pipeline defects, but also to define
the exact structure of defect groups and complex corrosion –, extended high resolution
geometry and XYZ inspection with subsea georreferencing accuracies less than one meter.
We want to demonstrate how such a complex project has been successfully executed as
well as comparing the achieved results to previous inspections using different
technologies.

______________________________
1
Mechanical Engineer - ROSEN Brazil
2
Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering and Management– ROSEN RTRC
3
Electrical Engineer BC – ROSEN USA
4
Spc, Metallurgical Engineer – Oleoducto Central S.A. OCENSA
 Rio Pipeline Conference and Exhibition 2019

1. Subsea Pipeline Configuration

The OCENSA subsea pipeline was constructed in 1997 with a total length of 12.3 km with and
a OD of 42 inches, located in the “Golfo de Morrosquillo” in the Colombian Caribbean Sea.
The material of the pipeline is carbon steel with specification API 5L X65 PSL2. At the end,
the pipeline is connected to the pipeline end manifold (PLEM) and this in turn connects with
the underwater hoses toward the SPM monobuoy called TLU2. No trap receiver system was
installed in the PLEM during the construction, the pipeline only has one launcher trap located
in the onshore terminal that works as a launcher and receiver trap in the pigging activities.
The main function of the pipeline is to allow the exportation of 12million barrels. of the
crude oil from the inner region of the country in a continuous operation.

Figure 1 - Configuration of the OCENSA offshore system

2. Integrity Threats of the Submarine Pipeline

OCENSA started the construction of the submarine pipeline in 1994 and finished in 1997. Since
that, the pipeline has been operated and inspected in three campaigns with bidirectional tools
that included cleaning, calibration and different technologies of inspection such as MFL-A,
UTWM, IMU and geometric. Those inspections have allowed the identification of the following
integrity threats:

2.1. External Corrosion

OCENSA has three barriers in order to protect the pipeline. Main threats are described below:

Coating and concrete: The whole pipeline was protected with fusion bounded epoxy (FBE) and
shrinkable sleeves over the girth welds.

Cathodic protection: During construction, sacrificial anodes were installed along to the entire
pipeline in order to generate an additional barrier that protects the pipeline in case of coating
failure.

2
 Rio Pipeline Conference and Exhibition 2019

Wall Thickness: The design of the pipeline contemplated a corrosion allowance with a heavy
wall thickness in order to mitigate the phenomena of external corrosion.

The results of previous inspections with MFL-A standard and UTWM have permitted
the identification of anomalies associated to external corrosion close to welds; those anomalies
were characterized and sized to conclude that their origin was caused by microbiological
corrosion (MIC) because of its circular morphology.

2.2. Weather and External Forces (WOF)

OCENSA has a program associated to inspection and monitoring of pipeline and RoW state in
order to assess the weather and external forces threat. Activities associated with this program
are described below:

RoW Surveillance: The pipeline has been inspected with intervals not exceeding one (1) year,
and six (6) months in critical zones, in order to identify issues like free span caused by erosion
areas that may require immediate actions.

The results of the inspections with IMU (Inertial Mapping Unit) has not identified areas
with bending strain caused by a free span zone, nevertheless, the technology used in the first
two inspections had a low resolution, so it was necessary to improve the resolution less than
1:1000 m.

2.3. Third Party Damage

OCENSA uses the same program described in numeral 2.2 to assess the third party damage
threat in order to identify impacts such anchors blows given the proximity of the anchorage
areas of the tankers with the geographical location of the pipeline.

Any anomaly associated to affectation of the internal diameter has been detected in the
last inspections with the geometric tool.

3. The Challenge

The subsea OCENSA pipeline requires a complete risk and integrity assessment in order to
establish a maintenance plan with the best cost-benefit-ratio in the short and long term.

In order to carry out an ILI campaign, OCENSA had to stop the continuous operation
to run different tools that were needed to assess the integrity of the subsea pipeline. A tanker
was necessary to receive the batch of the corresponding crude oil (64 thousand barrels
approximately). This procedure allowed running the tool at the end of the pipeline at 50 meters
close to the PLEM. Once the tool was in place, the tanker returned the batch of the crude oil to
the terminal to allow the return of the tool to the pig launcher/receiver; this was the input to the
first challenge, since bidirectional tools were required for all technologies.

The objective was to develop tools with the highest resolution possible to detect and
size small anomalies associated to microbiological external corrosion close to the welds. By
using these tools, complete box matching will precisely determine the length and depth of all

3
 Rio Pipeline Conference and Exhibition 2019

MIC anomalies. Remaining strength evaluation for each anomaly or cluster will then be
performed, allowing prioritization in the intervention plan.

Figure 2 – Example of critical features to be detected

Another important requirement was to guarantee a good resolution while georreferencing the
pipeline (less than 1:1000m), to make an accurate bending strain analysis in free span zones
with possible Vortex Induced Vibrations.

Previous inspections have been carried out by using standard free swimming
bidirectional tools. This time, an extra mile had to be covered; therefore, the inspection tools’
detection capabilities had to be increased while keeping the bi-directional requirement for all
tools. The main project challenges were:

 Cleaning of the pipeline using the asymmetric approach;

 Extended High Resolution Geometry (RoGeoXT);
 MFL-A Ultra (RoCorr MFL-A Ultra) combined with XYZ mapping;
 Subsea Georreferencing and heavy duty magnet markers installation;
 Subsea pig tracking for tools PLEM approach;
 Tight schedule between contract award and inspection date.

4. The Solution

The first challenge faced by the design engineers was to provide a suitable configuration for the
Extended High Resolution Geometry and for the MFL-A Ultra tools that had to be designed,
manufactured assembled and tested in a period of three months.
Not less important than the geometry and MFL tools, the asymmetric cleaning pigs and
heavy duty magnet markers had also to be prepared to enable the start of operations as planned
and agreed.
The team got together and, after exploring some possibilities, decided to modify an
existing unidirectional RoGeo XT tool and convert it to a bi-directional one. No loss on
accuracy or reduction in specifications was acceptable.
The approach required the tool to have touchless sensors that would allow the tool to
travel in both directions (launcher to PLEM and vice-versa) without any risk of getting damaged
or stuck in the line.
The second and biggest challenge was to come up with a bi-directional MFL-A Ultra
tool, a completely new approach that had never been done before. Also, it had to be completed

4
 Rio Pipeline Conference and Exhibition 2019

in the set timeframe. After some rounds of discussion, the design team decided to use the tool
body from a conventional bi-directional MFL-A tool and convert it to MFL-A Ultra.

Figure 3 – Difference between MFL-A and MFL-A Ultra sizing

This step of the project was most critical once a full set of new parts had to be designed,
manufactured, assembled and tested prior to shipping the tools. Once the plan was set, there
was no time to loose and production started at full capacity.

5. The Execution

While the design, manufacturing and assembly teams were busy preparing the inspection tools,
the field execution crew was already starting the project at their end.
Subsea georreferencing is a very complex task that needs time, effort and the right
people, equipment and software to be done properly. The concept of magnet markers and DGPS
coordinates measuring is the same as the one performed onshore. In order to acquire the same
submetric precision, a shorter interval between reference points needs to be used and a special
procedure to compensate the water depth and sea movement has to be implemented, resulting
in a precise location of each of the magnet markers and ensuring that the pipeline trajectory will
be fully covered and properly recorded by the inspection tools.

Figure 4 – Subsea magnet markers installation and DGPS measuring

Once the factory got all parts ready, tools started to be simultaneously assembled in different
locations such as Colombia, Germany and USA. Just a few weeks prior to the inspection
deadline, the real scale tests started. Artificial features have been introduced to the test pipes
and the tools had to prove their bi-directional capabilities. At this point, there was no time for
failing the tests or re-engineering.
After some short corrections in the analysis algorithms the tests have been accepted and
tools released to be shipped for the job.

5
 Rio Pipeline Conference and Exhibition 2019

By the time all tools reached the site, all resources were available including a dedicated tanker.
Several teams, onshore for pigs launching and receiving and offshore for tracking purpose,
worked 24 hours per day to guarantee the success of the inspection in the given time frame of
7 (seven) days.
A total of 4 (four) asymmetric cleaning runs have been performed and enabled the
pipeline to be clean and ready to receive the inspection tools.

Figure 5 – Cleaning pig after the run

Geometry and MFL-A Ultra tools have also successfully completed their inspections and the
campaign ended one day earlier than planned.

Figure 6 – Geometry pig after the run

Figure 7 – MFL-A Ultra pig after the run

6
 Rio Pipeline Conference and Exhibition 2019

6. Results

After completion of the field work, all the results from the inspections should prove to be good
and all effort, investment and expectations to be worth. Although field results have shown good
inspection data for both Geometry and MFL-A Ultra inspections, in-house analysis confirmed
good quality and the data set was ready for evaluation. Some preliminary results have been
pulled out aiming for some field correlations to guarantee the correct filters and parameters to
be used during the complete pipeline analysis.
From the obtained ILI results, the most relevant outcome can be shown as follows:

6.1. Cleaning

The asymmetric cleaning approach proved to be efficient by keeping the PLEM free of debris
and pushing it back to receiver side, improving pipeline throughput and enhancing the data
acquisition by the inspection tools.

Figure 8 – Debris collected after cleaning run

6.2. Extended High Resolution Geometry

Minor geometry deformations have been identified. Nevertheless, the high precision inspection
data set allows a detailed analysis of each one of these deformations such as a FEM (Finite
Element Modeling) with 3D modeling and a dent strain analysis to ensure that the shape of
these features is not leading the pipeline to a critical condition nor to fatigue failure at these
points.

6.3. XYZ Mapping and Subsea Georreferencing

All heavy duty magnet markers have been detected by the MFL-A Ultra tool and have been
used for features correlation, pipeline 3D trajectory definition, bending strain and pipeline
movement assessments, allowing the integrity engineer to precisely detect any unwanted
pipeline curvature originated by free span, anchor, stream or ground movement.

7
 Rio Pipeline Conference and Exhibition 2019

6.4. MFL-A Ultra

With 100% sensor acquisition, the first comparison with the previous UTWM inspection
showed the advantages of such selection in a real and complex environment.
As an example, the same feature detected in both inspections (UTWM in 2014 and
MFL-A Ultra in 2018) clearly show a more precise sizing.

Figure 9 – Comparison of UTWM and MFL-A Ultra signals

Figure 10 – Comparison of UTWM and MFL-A Ultra signals

By applying the enhanced detection and sizing capabilities of this technology, it was possible
to conclude by the ERF anomaly plot that a less conservative and more realistic result was
obtained, giving the operator the confidence to keep operating the pipeline safely and reliably.

Figure 11 – Comparison of UTWM and MFL-A ERF plot

8
 Rio Pipeline Conference and Exhibition 2019

Further integrity assessments are in place by means that the most relevant features will be
compared with previous inspections allowing the integrity engineers to prioritize and plan repair
interventions as well as predict the next inspection campaign.

As a golden project closure, ROSEN has been awarded with the “Transformation and
Innovation” prize from OCENSA, giving us the confidence about the quality, importance and
satisfaction with the services delivered.

Figure 12 – Award by operator

7. Acknowledgements

Authors take the opportunity to thank OCENSA for supporting this publication, in particular
Mr. Alex Malagon.