December 2016, Vol. 243, No. 12


ILI Metal Loss Growth Analysis: Pipe Joint vs. Anomaly to Anomaly

As inline inspection continues to grow in popularity for assessing steel pipelines, new automated tools and techniques will continue to be developed for analysis and management of results. PHMSA guidance and FAQs now state that a pipeline operator must consider previous assessments when developing mitigation plans and also contain a requirement to develop a corrosion rate that can be applied to anomalies to support reassessment interval calculations. Specifically, CFR 192 protocol F.01 and F.04, ASME B31.8S-Appendix A1.5, and API 1160 section 10 discuss the requirement to include previous assessment data in the response analysis. This article summarizes a study that was performed comparing

Log in to view this article.

Not Yet A Subscriber? Here are Your Options.

1) Start a FREE TRIAL SUBSCRIPTION and gain access to all articles in the current issue of Pipeline & Gas Journal magazine.

2) Start your full access subscription to Pipeline & Gas Journal and gain UNLIMITED access to this article, the current issue, all past issues in the technical archive, access to all special reports, special focus supplements and more. Pricing start at $395/year.   

*Access will be granted the next business day.


Related Articles


{{ error }}
{{ comment.comment.Name }} • {{ comment.timeAgo }}
{{ comment.comment.Text }}