• March 17, 2022
    8:00 am - 12:15 pm
Details Price Qty
Register $325.00 (USD)  

Gregory Quickel will present, “Pipeline Flaws and Degradation” on March 17, 2022


Early bird pricing though 2/21 (market price $375)


Course Description

This 4.25 hour webinar is intended for those who need familiarization with the range of typical manufacturing flaws, fabrication flaws, and forms of in-service degradation found in pipelines.  Knowing the specific types of vulnerabilities can guide determination of where to inspect and what data to collect.  The presentation will be supplemented with other publicly available reference materials and a list of other related resource materials available from the respective publishers.

  1. An introduction to flaws and causes of pipeline failure. Do all flaws of the same size have the same effect on long-term integrity of the pipeline?
    Flaws vs. defects. The influence of service conditions on long-term flaw stability.
  2. Flaws resulting from contemporary and early vintage field welding and other field fabrication methods; API and ASME standards as references
  3. Going beyond measurement of thickness change: Identifying and characterizing degradation resulting from various in-service conditions (external corrosion, internal corrosion, mechanical damage from impact, damage from ground deformation, SCC, erosion)
  4. An introduction to historical and current API 5L requirements related to pipe dimensions, marking, and workmanship: when is an imperfection not a defect? Using the right benchmark for judging acceptability of imperfections.

Provided

Certificate of completion with 4 PDHs
Course notes with Self-Assessment Quiz

Self-Assessment Quiz

Quiz answers to be discussed during webinar and provided post-webinar. Registrants are also encouraged to provide feedback on what else they would like discussed in during the webinar.

  1. Detailed nondestructive inspection of a lap seam finds no evidence of significant entrapment of impurities at the seam bondline. What other type of flaw associated with the seam formation process might be present?
  2. What type of flaw is commonly associated with the OD surface of early vintage seam arc welds in AO Smith pipe?
  3. Why is magnetic particle inspection of wrinkle bends often not useful?
  4. DSAW pipe has the seam close to the 12:00 position. Wrinkles in which circumferential location should be prioritized for inspection first? Why?
  5. Where are hook cracks usually found?
  6. What longitudinal features are sometimes present adjacent to the fusion line (within about ½ inch) of ERW pipe?
  7. A lamination is found a few feet from a weld and remote from the seam. Under what conditions could this lamination grow to failure?
  8. What is the typical or common criteria used for evaluating the acceptability of a “hard spot”?
  9. Why are planar (crack-like) flaws often more difficult to evaluate or assess than metal loss from corrosion? Assume NDT did a good job of measuring the dimensions of each flaw
  10. What is undercut, where is it found, and what key dimensions are required to determine acceptability?
  11. What is the potential disadvantage of having a Type B repair sleeve (repair sleeve with end fillet welds) that does not fit tightly around the circumference of the pipe?
  12. What kind of defects are commonly associated with welds made onto in-service piping and where are they most likely to be found in the weld joint area?
  13. What is one of the biggest potential integrity issues with old puddle weld repairs?
  14. When multiple flaws are found in close proximity to each other, why is it important to record how far apart they are, in addition to the size of each?
  15. What feature of a girth can make it abnormally susceptible to internal corrosion?
  16. A gas pipeline with imperfect dehydration transitions from horizontal to uphill flow to downhill flow on the other side of a hill. Where is internal corrosion most likely to be found?
  17. What inspection technique can help differentiate between near neutral pH SCC and high pH SCC?
  18. Hydrogen cracks in a thick weld metal deposit are most likely located in which direction relative to the length of the weld?
  19. Fatigue cracks can occur from improper loading and stacking of pipe in rail transportation.  Where are the cracks most likely to be found?
  20. DSAW pipe looks good on the OD and ID and mag particle inspection finds no flaws. What kind of seam flaw (responsible for major pipeline failures) can still be present?
  21. What is the most frequent kind of manufacturing flaw that is responsible for inadequate wall thickness in new ERW pipe?
  22. Linear flaws may have what unique feature or characteristic in seamless pipe?
  23. Low-frequency ERW seams have this type of seam flaw much more often than high frequency welded ERW seams.
  24. Name at least three types of pipe seams that may have oxides and other impurities trapped at the fusion line, resulting in low bond strength.
  25. What area of a weld is most likely to have the highest hardness and most dramatically different microstructure and therefore be most susceptible to hydrogen cracking and/or accelerated corrosion?

Feedback:

This webinar receives a 5.0- star out of 5.0-star rating!
“The instructor conveyed the class and content with great knowledge and professionalism.”
“Always enjoy Bill’s presentations.”
“Great course – lots of examples and discussion of root causes.”
“Excellent he kept it interesting and active.”
“Very knowledgeable – Please stay semi-retired to share all that info for years to come.”
“He is very experienced and he conveys the message on each page of the slides perfectly.”
“I really enjoyed the amount of visuals. I think the pace was perfect as well.”
“Very informative and great examples provided.”

Instructor Bio:

Pipeline Integrity, Metallurgical Engineering, Materials Selection, Welding Engineer

Gregory Thomas Quickel, Principal Engineer, DNV
Head of Section for Incident Investigation Labs & Testing Department

Mr. Quickel is a Principal Engineer with DNV and is Head of Section for Incident Investigation within the Labs & Testing Department.  He has worked on over 100 failure analysis projects in the oil and gas, utilities, and aerospace industry.  Some of the causes of failure he has worked on include stress corrosion cracking (SCC), caustic cracking, oxygen corrosion, carbonic acid corrosion, microbial influenced corrosion (MIC), selective seam corrosion, various seam weld defect failures, hydrogen cracking of girth welds, fatigue, corrosion fatigue, creep, and mechanical damage.  Mr. Quickel is a Licensed Professional Engineer (P.E.) in the state of Ohio and graduated from The Ohio State University with a B.S and M.S. in Materials Science & Engineering.

 

Venue:  

Description:

Join us for this event remotely by registering and logging in on your preferred digital device.