Rationalizing Application Concept Between Spot UT vs Scan UT for in-Service Inspection of Assets for Better Reliability and PoD - Resolving the Conflict of Interest

Debasis Mitra

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14

Research Article |

| Peer-Reviewed

Rationalizing Application Concept Between Spot UT vs Scan UT for in-Service Inspection of Assets for Better Reliability and PoD - Resolving the Conflict of Interest

Debasis Mitra

Published in International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Engineering (Volume 12, Issue 1)

Received: 17 October 2023 Accepted: 2 November 2023 Published: 23 January 2024

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The key purpose of asset integrity inspection is to protect human being, environment, animals and business by preventing costly asset failures and hazardous leaks by enhancing inspection reliability, effectiveness, spirit of asset condition monitoring and ultimately boosting up the probability of detection (PoD) of various types of defect. I believe that safety is a state of mind and management perception. NDE procedures and selected application techniques need to be always 100% focused on “what, why and how we want to inspect?” and over and above to be on the top of 100% HSE governance. This paper wants to discuss the ill effect on some old house heritage strategy and practice by many Oil & Gas operators / refiners / other Business Areas on execution and misuse of local spot UT during in-service inspection of process plant assets. This paper will try to highlight and resolve the conflict of interest of many operators on application intent between point spot UT and Scan UT during in-service inspection of operating plant asset. As asset integrity management is all about intelligent housekeeping of assets, we should not work on GIGO (Garbage IN-Garbage OUT) mode but should deploy sense full and meaningful NDE governance model. The issue may look simple but has dire consequences on plant operations, business integrity and continuity.

Published in	International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Engineering (Volume 12, Issue 1)
DOI	10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14
Page(s)	31-35
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Spot UT, Scan UT, PoD, Effectiveness, Corrosion Damage, Good Data, Uncertainty, Reliability

References

[1]	API 570 - In-Service Inspection, Rating, Repair and Alteration of Piping System.
[2]	API 574- Inspection Practices for Piping System Components.
[3]	API 510 - In-Service Inspection, Rating, Repair and Alteration of Pressure Vessels.
[4]	API 571 - Damage Mechanism affecting Fixed Equipment in the Refining Industry.
[5]	Challenging Baseline Inspection Paradigms for Oil & Gas Upstream Equipment, By George C. Williamson, VP of Integrity, Risk Management & Litigation Support at Integrity & Emission Reduction Partners, LLC, and Dr. Bill Hedges, Independent Consultant.
[6]	CML OPTIMIZATION: EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT COVERAGE AND PLACEMENT, By RYAN MYERS, Operational Excellence Manager at PinnacleART and RIAN MARINO, Engineering Specialist at PinnacleART.
[7]	Increasing the effectiveness of CML optimization through condition monitoring optimization- A Pinnacle eBook.
[8]	Special Emphasis Programs and TML Placement as Entry Points for RBI Implementation, By Stephen P. Webb, P. E., Asset Integrity Engineer at Metegrity.
[9]	Quantifying the Value of Your Inspections, By Lynne Kaley, Director of Reliability Strategy at Pinnacle, Siddharth Sanghavi, Product Manager at Pinnacle.
[10]	API 581 - Risk Based Inspection Methodology.
[11]	Managing Corrosion of Pipelines that Transport Crude Oils, Material Performance Roundtable Q & A, By Kathy Riggs LaRsen, associate editor.
[12]	API 653 - In-Service Inspection, Rating, Repair and Alteration of Storage Tanks.
[13]	THE 101 ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS IN A PRESSURE EQUIPMENT INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM. By John T. Reynolds is a Principal Consultant with Intertek AIM.
[14]	ASME B 31.3 - Process Piping.
[15]	ASME B31.8S - Managing System Integrity of Gas Pipelines.
[16]	A Work Process for Petroleum Refining Piping CML Placement and Testing Determinations, By Jim McVay, Sr Manager, Metallurgy and Inspection, Andeavor.
[17]	ASME PCC-2 - Repair of Pressure Equipment and Piping.
[18]	Practical hands on Experiences and Technicians Feedback.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Mitra, D. (2024). Rationalizing Application Concept Between Spot UT vs Scan UT for in-Service Inspection of Assets for Better Reliability and PoD - Resolving the Conflict of Interest. International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Engineering, 12(1), 31-35. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Mitra, D. Rationalizing Application Concept Between Spot UT vs Scan UT for in-Service Inspection of Assets for Better Reliability and PoD - Resolving the Conflict of Interest. Int. J. Oil Gas Coal Eng. 2024, 12(1), 31-35. doi: 10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Mitra D. Rationalizing Application Concept Between Spot UT vs Scan UT for in-Service Inspection of Assets for Better Reliability and PoD - Resolving the Conflict of Interest. Int J Oil Gas Coal Eng. 2024;12(1):31-35. doi: 10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14,
  author = {Debasis Mitra},
  title = {Rationalizing Application Concept Between Spot UT vs Scan UT for in-Service Inspection of Assets for Better Reliability and PoD - Resolving the Conflict of Interest},
  journal = {International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Engineering},
  volume = {12},
  number = {1},
  pages = {31-35},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ogce.20241201.14},
  abstract = {The key purpose of asset integrity inspection is to protect human being, environment, animals and business by preventing costly asset failures and hazardous leaks by enhancing inspection reliability, effectiveness, spirit of asset condition monitoring and ultimately boosting up the probability of detection (PoD) of various types of defect. I believe that safety is a state of mind and management perception. NDE procedures and selected application techniques need to be always 100% focused on “what, why and how we want to inspect?” and over and above to be on the top of 100% HSE governance. This paper wants to discuss the ill effect on some old house heritage strategy and practice by many Oil & Gas operators / refiners / other Business Areas on execution and misuse of local spot UT during in-service inspection of process plant assets. This paper will try to highlight and resolve the conflict of interest of many operators on application intent between point spot UT and Scan UT during in-service inspection of operating plant asset. As asset integrity management is all about intelligent housekeeping of assets, we should not work on GIGO (Garbage IN-Garbage OUT) mode but should deploy sense full and meaningful NDE governance model. The issue may look simple but has dire consequences on plant operations, business integrity and continuity.
},
 year = {2024}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Rationalizing Application Concept Between Spot UT vs Scan UT for in-Service Inspection of Assets for Better Reliability and PoD - Resolving the Conflict of Interest
AU  - Debasis Mitra
Y1  - 2024/01/23
PY  - 2024
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14
T2  - International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Engineering
JF  - International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Engineering
JO  - International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Engineering
SP  - 31
EP  - 35
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2376-7677
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14
AB  - The key purpose of asset integrity inspection is to protect human being, environment, animals and business by preventing costly asset failures and hazardous leaks by enhancing inspection reliability, effectiveness, spirit of asset condition monitoring and ultimately boosting up the probability of detection (PoD) of various types of defect. I believe that safety is a state of mind and management perception. NDE procedures and selected application techniques need to be always 100% focused on “what, why and how we want to inspect?” and over and above to be on the top of 100% HSE governance. This paper wants to discuss the ill effect on some old house heritage strategy and practice by many Oil & Gas operators / refiners / other Business Areas on execution and misuse of local spot UT during in-service inspection of process plant assets. This paper will try to highlight and resolve the conflict of interest of many operators on application intent between point spot UT and Scan UT during in-service inspection of operating plant asset. As asset integrity management is all about intelligent housekeeping of assets, we should not work on GIGO (Garbage IN-Garbage OUT) mode but should deploy sense full and meaningful NDE governance model. The issue may look simple but has dire consequences on plant operations, business integrity and continuity.

VL  - 12
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Debasis Mitra

Independent Freelancer Consultant (Ex. ADNOC), Delhi, India

Contact Email

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Mitra, D. (2024). Rationalizing Application Concept Between Spot UT vs Scan UT for in-Service Inspection of Assets for Better Reliability and PoD - Resolving the Conflict of Interest. International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Engineering, 12(1), 31-35. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Mitra, D. Rationalizing Application Concept Between Spot UT vs Scan UT for in-Service Inspection of Assets for Better Reliability and PoD - Resolving the Conflict of Interest. Int. J. Oil Gas Coal Eng. 2024, 12(1), 31-35. doi: 10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Mitra D. Rationalizing Application Concept Between Spot UT vs Scan UT for in-Service Inspection of Assets for Better Reliability and PoD - Resolving the Conflict of Interest. Int J Oil Gas Coal Eng. 2024;12(1):31-35. doi: 10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14,
  author = {Debasis Mitra},
  title = {Rationalizing Application Concept Between Spot UT vs Scan UT for in-Service Inspection of Assets for Better Reliability and PoD - Resolving the Conflict of Interest},
  journal = {International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Engineering},
  volume = {12},
  number = {1},
  pages = {31-35},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ogce.20241201.14},
  abstract = {The key purpose of asset integrity inspection is to protect human being, environment, animals and business by preventing costly asset failures and hazardous leaks by enhancing inspection reliability, effectiveness, spirit of asset condition monitoring and ultimately boosting up the probability of detection (PoD) of various types of defect. I believe that safety is a state of mind and management perception. NDE procedures and selected application techniques need to be always 100% focused on “what, why and how we want to inspect?” and over and above to be on the top of 100% HSE governance. This paper wants to discuss the ill effect on some old house heritage strategy and practice by many Oil & Gas operators / refiners / other Business Areas on execution and misuse of local spot UT during in-service inspection of process plant assets. This paper will try to highlight and resolve the conflict of interest of many operators on application intent between point spot UT and Scan UT during in-service inspection of operating plant asset. As asset integrity management is all about intelligent housekeeping of assets, we should not work on GIGO (Garbage IN-Garbage OUT) mode but should deploy sense full and meaningful NDE governance model. The issue may look simple but has dire consequences on plant operations, business integrity and continuity.
},
 year = {2024}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Rationalizing Application Concept Between Spot UT vs Scan UT for in-Service Inspection of Assets for Better Reliability and PoD - Resolving the Conflict of Interest
AU  - Debasis Mitra
Y1  - 2024/01/23
PY  - 2024
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14
T2  - International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Engineering
JF  - International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Engineering
JO  - International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Engineering
SP  - 31
EP  - 35
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2376-7677
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ogce.20241201.14
AB  - The key purpose of asset integrity inspection is to protect human being, environment, animals and business by preventing costly asset failures and hazardous leaks by enhancing inspection reliability, effectiveness, spirit of asset condition monitoring and ultimately boosting up the probability of detection (PoD) of various types of defect. I believe that safety is a state of mind and management perception. NDE procedures and selected application techniques need to be always 100% focused on “what, why and how we want to inspect?” and over and above to be on the top of 100% HSE governance. This paper wants to discuss the ill effect on some old house heritage strategy and practice by many Oil & Gas operators / refiners / other Business Areas on execution and misuse of local spot UT during in-service inspection of process plant assets. This paper will try to highlight and resolve the conflict of interest of many operators on application intent between point spot UT and Scan UT during in-service inspection of operating plant asset. As asset integrity management is all about intelligent housekeeping of assets, we should not work on GIGO (Garbage IN-Garbage OUT) mode but should deploy sense full and meaningful NDE governance model. The issue may look simple but has dire consequences on plant operations, business integrity and continuity.

VL  - 12
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download