PETRONAS TECHNICAL STANDARDS

DESIGN AND ENGINEERING PRACTICE

MANUAL(SM)

DEVELOPMENT OF CORROSION
MANAGEMENT FOR NEW PROJECTS

PTS 20.209
JUNE 1990

PREFACE

PETRONAS Technical Standards (PTS) publications reflect the views, at the time of publication,
of PETRONAS OPUs/Divisions.
They are based on the experience acquired during the involvement with the design, construction,
operation and maintenance of processing units and facilities. Where appropriate they are based
on, or reference is made to, national and international standards and codes of practice.
The objective is to set the recommended standard for good technical practice to be applied by
PETRONAS' OPUs in oil and gas production facilities, refineries, gas processing plants, chemical
plants, marketing facilities or any other such facility, and thereby to achieve maximum technical
and economic benefit from standardisation.
The information set forth in these publications is provided to users for their consideration and
decision to implement. This is of particular importance where PTS may not cover every
requirement or diversity of condition at each locality. The system of PTS is expected to be
sufficiently flexible to allow individual operating units to adapt the information set forth in PTS to
their own environment and requirements.
When Contractors or Manufacturers/Suppliers use PTS they shall be solely responsible for the
quality of work and the attainment of the required design and engineering standards. In
particular, for those requirements not specifically covered, the Principal will expect them to follow
those design and engineering practices which will achieve the same level of integrity as reflected
in the PTS. If in doubt, the Contractor or Manufacturer/Supplier shall, without detracting from his
own responsibility, consult the Principal or its technical advisor.
The right to use PTS rests with three categories of users :
1)
2)
3)

PETRONAS and its affiliates.

Other parties who are authorised to use PTS subject to appropriate contractual
arrangements.
Contractors/subcontractors and Manufacturers/Suppliers under a contract with
users referred to under 1) and 2) which requires that tenders for projects,
materials supplied or - generally - work performed on behalf of the said users
comply with the relevant standards.

Subject to any particular terms and conditions as may be set forth in specific agreements with
users, PETRONAS disclaims any liability of whatsoever nature for any damage (including injury
or death) suffered by any company or person whomsoever as a result of or in connection with the
use, application or implementation of any PTS, combination of PTS or any part thereof. The
benefit of this disclaimer shall inure in all respects to PETRONAS and/or any company affiliated
to PETRONAS that may issue PTS or require the use of PTS.
Without prejudice to any specific terms in respect of confidentiality under relevant contractual
arrangements, PTS shall not, without the prior written consent of PETRONAS, be disclosed by
users to any company or person whomsoever and the PTS shall be used exclusively for the
purpose they have been provided to the user. They shall be returned after use, including any
copies which shall only be made by users with the express prior written consent of PETRONAS.
The copyright of PTS vests in PETRONAS. Users shall arrange for PTS to be held in safe
custody and PETRONAS may at any time require information satisfactory to PETRONAS in order
to ascertain how users implement this requirement.

REVISION REGISTER
Rev. No.

Date

Details of Revision

1/95

Initial issue for comments

11/95

Initial issue

CONTROLLED DISTRIBUTION LIST

Copy No

Registered Holder

Date Distributed

IDS/51

7 December, 1995

EDV/1

7 December, 1995

EDV/3

7 December, 1995

ETS/6

7 December, 1995

EDV/5

7 December, 1995

EGP/2

7 December, 1995

10

EGP/3

7 December, 1995

17

EPO/1

7 December 1995

28

ETS/4

7 December, 1995

31

OPM/4

7 December, 1995

35

OPM/1/2

7 December, 1995

36

OTS/5

7 December, 1995

38

FSD/3

7 December, 1995

55

OPM/44

7 December, 1995

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0

2.0

INTRODUCTION
1.1

PURPOSE

1.2

SCOPE

1.3

DISTRIBUTION, INTENDED USE AND REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS

1.4

DEFINITIONS

1.5

ABBREVIATIONS

1.6

CROSS-REFERENCES

CORROSION MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY

2.1

STRATEGY

2.2

DEFINITION OF RISK

2.3

MITIGATION OF RISK

2.4

DEMONSTRATION OF RISK MITIGATION

2.4.1

Design - All Above Water Facilities and Onshore

2.4.1.1 Corrosion Monitoring Location Selection
2.4.1.2 Equipment At Each Corrosion Monitoring Location
2.4.1.3 Corrosion Coupons
2.4.1.4 Electronic Probes
2.4.1.5 Inhibitors
2.4.1.6 Fluid Sampling
2.4.1.7 Key Point UT Surveys
2.4.1.7 External Corrosion Control and Monitoring

2.4.2

Design -Pipelines
2.4.2.1 Routine Pigging
2.4.2.2 Pig Sample Analysis
2.4.2.3 Intelligent Pigging
2.4.2.4 External Corrosion Control And Monitoring

2.4.3

Design - Subsea Installations

2 4.3 1 Corrosion Monitoring Location Selection
2.4.3.2 Equipment at each Corrosion Monitoring Location
2.4.3.3 Control of subsea corrosion monitoring data
2.4.3.4 Inhibitors
2.4.3.5 Fluid sampling

2.5

OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

2.6

ORGANISATION

3.0

REFERENCES

4.0

FIGURES

5.0

LIST OF APPENDICES
1

CONTENTS OF THE CORROSION MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE

STANDARD INPUTS FOR WETGAS7 AND FLOLINE7 CORROSION MODELS

INHIBITOR COST ESTIMATION

GUIDELINES FOR ROUTINE PIGGING FREQUENCY

1.0

INTRODUCTION

1.1

PURPOSE
This document describes the Corrosion Management (CM) philosophy for corrosion control on all
piping systems (including vessels and process piping systems) which shall be applied to all new
projects. The approach shall be common across the entire development, for example from
production tubing materials selection through to gas processing plant sales gas meters. The CM
approach covers definition of risks, materials selection, selection of corrosion monitoring systems
and locations, selection of corrosion inhibitors (where required) and selection of fluid sampling
locations and methods, as an integrated approach.
This PTS is not applicable retroactively.

1.2

SCOPE
The overall intent shall be to ensure that corrosion management can be demonstrated and taken
easily from the development phase to operational phase. The project team shall consider all
operational aspects and hand over to operations a fully operational corrosion monitoring and
control system. CM should be an integral part of piping and equipment design.
The results of the corrosion monitoring programmes covered in these documents are compared
and correlated with the data from the Corrosion Management System (CMS) to provide an
effective overall monitoring tool.
This is a high level philosophy document covering the general requirements; detailed
requirements are covered in the referenced specifications. There may also be a need for specific
project specifications to cover specific issues.
The scope of this Philosophy is:

To ensure that all operational aspects are considered.

To consider all risks that may apply to the development and define the major (design limiting)
risks for the development.

To select the most appropriate method of mitigating the corrosion risks, considering life-cycle
costs.

To demonstrate the mitigation of risks in design and operation.

To select adequate monitoring systems.

To define the factors to be considered for the inhibitor selection process.

To select sufficient fluid sampling points and define analysis requirements.

To assess the special CM design consideration for subsea facilities.

To assess the special CM design consideration for topsides, structures and onshore
facilities.

To assess the special CM design considerations for pipelines.

The Corrosion Management Guideline (Sweet Facilities) (ref. 7) for all facilities installed prior to
1995 (i.e. essentially all carbon steel facimies dealing with sweet crude and gas product) can be
used as a guideline for producing the documentation required. It may be possible to adopt some
sections of the existing manual for a new project, though the increasing use of corrosion resistant
alloys (CRA) and the provisions required for production of sour gas and liquids mean that
additional items have to be considered.
The position of this document within the hierarchy of Corrosion Management documents is shown
in Figure 1.
1.3

DISTRIBUTION, INTENDED USE AND REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS

Unless otherwise authorised by PETRONAS, the distribution of this PTS is confined to
companies forming part of PETRONAS group and to Contractors nominated by them.
This philosophy is intended for use in oil and gas production facilities.
If national and/or local regulations exist in which some of the requirements may be more
stringent than in this philosophy the Contractor shall determine by careful scrutiny which of the
requirements are the more stringent and which combination of requirements will be acceptable
as regards safety, environmental, economic and legal aspects. In all cases the Contractor shall
inform the COMPANY of any deviation from the requirements of this philosophy which is
considered to be necessary in order to comply with national and/or local regulations. The
COMPANY may then negotiate with the Authorities concerned with the object of obtaining
agreement to follow this philosophy as closely as possible.

1.4

DEFINITIONS
COMPANY- PETRONAS (also referred to as the Principal) or any duly appointed Party
authorised to act for, and on its behalf.

1.5

ABBREVIATIONS
AISI
American Iron And Steel Institute
CM
Corrosion Management
CMS Corrosion Management System
CP
Cathodic Protection
CRA
Corrosion Resistant Alloy(s)
ER
Electronic Resistance
IMP
Inspection Maintenance Philosophy
HSE
Health, Safety And Environment
PFD
Process Flow Diagram(s)
UT
Ultrasonic Testing

1.6

CROSS-REFERENCES
Where cross-references to other parts of this document are made, the referenced section
number is shown in brackets thus (-). Other documents referenced in this document are listed
under References (3.0).

2.0

CORROSION MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY

2.1

STRATEGY
The basic strategy for corrosion management shall cover the development from conception to
operation. There will be three major phases:

Definitions of Risks.

Mitigation of Risks.

Demonstration of Mitigation of Risk in Design and Operation.

This objective will be met by establishment of a project specific Corrosion Management

Guideline which meets the requirements of the above and remains a live document throughout
the development life in a similar manner to the Safety Management System. The first draft of the
manual shall be produced during the design phase of the project.
The manual shall be in a suitable format to fulfil the Project Document Management Requirements.
Headings to be covered in the manual are given in Appendix I
2.2

DEFINITION OF RISK
Risks shall be assessed to cover the following areas as a minimum.
Downhole, Flowline, Process and Pipeline conditions throughout field life.
Carbon dioxide levels using SIPM's latest models for corrosion rate prediction i.e
Floline7 and Wetgas7.
Hydrogen sulphide.
Hydrogen Induced Cracking.
Sand.
Bacteria.
Under deposit corrosion
Oxygen.
External corrosion.
Corrosion under Insulation.
Fatigue (particularly fatigue at branch fittings and the need for adequate pipe support).
-

Preferential Weld Corrosion.

Galvanic Corrosion.
Mercury (effect of produced mercury on materials of construction).

Note: Floline7 and Wetgas7 are complex corrosion modelling programs developed by
Shell.
Both because of their complexity (and the risk of misinterpretation by inexperienced
users) and because of the proprietary nature of the corrosion models, distribution and use in
limited to Shell group corrosion engineers.
If corrosion modelling is required, the input
data should be compiled in the format specified in appendix 2 and submitted to the COMPANY
corrosion section for the corrosion models to be run.
CM shall also identify and document potential corrosion problems in specialist package areas
(e.g. high temperature corrosion in compressors), where the problems are addressed by the
vendor.
For external corrosion and corrosion under insulation these are covered in part by materials
selection and in part by the coating and cathodic protection procedures and specifications. The
CM operations manual shall cross reference these other documents and checks shall be made
that there are no inconsistencies between these documents (e.g. alloys selected for internal
corrosion control use often do not require coatings for external corrosion control).
2.3

MITIGATION OF RISK
A consistent approach shall be taken across the whole development of a production and
transport system from wells to delivery point like SBMs and gas plant (e.g. same corrosion
allowances for the same conditions of operation). On a large project this is particularly important
at the interfaces between different parts of the project group.
Similarly across a development, mitigation of risk may be carried out in six principal ways:

Materials selection to prevent corrosion.

Selection of adequate corrosion allowance for the design life.

Use of coatings.

Use of inhibitors.

Use of cathodic protection.

Change process condition to reduce or eliminate corrosive species (e.g. dehydration,

deaeration).

The selection of one or a combination of the above shall be based on the following factors as a
minimum:

Ability to prove the route selected is working (laboratory testing, monitoring techniques, and
both required initial monitoring frequency and expected routine monitoring frequency).

Total life cycle costs.

Ease of initial installation and subsequent replacement.

Risk to personnel, environment and assets.

As a general rule materials shall be selected for the life of the facilities, taking due consideration
of the beneficial effects of inhibitors and coatings.
Note: Inhibitor costs will be calculated by the COMPANY corrosion section as part of the
corrosion modelling process (A2) for input into the total lifecycle cost calculation. If an inhibitor
cost estimate needs to be calculated prior to the corrosion modelling work, the required factors
are included in Appendix 3.
2.4

DEMONSTRATION OF RISK MITIGATION

2.4.1

Design - All Above Water Facilities and Onshore

The requirements for a standard corrosion monitoring system, as described in this section, are
based around:

intrusive corrosion coupons generally and flush corrosion coupons downstream of pig
launchers on export lines.

intrusive ER probes generally and flush ER probes downstream of pig launchers on export
lines.

corrosion inhibitor injection rate monitoring.

fluid sampling for inhibitor residuals and corrosion monitoring.

key point U.T. measurements.

chemical analyses of samples from vessels.

debris analyses from pipeline cleaning operations.

manual data collection (e.g. manual collection of ER probe data).

This selection of techniques is based on operating experiences with oil and gas facilities,
onshore and offshore, throughout the COMPANY. A variety of monitoring techniques are
required since each technique has its drawbacks. Certain fabrication configurations or parts of
the development (e.g. bends or areas of high velocity) may have specific corrosion problems that
require a modified corrosion monitoring system, which may include:

different types of corrosion coupons.

different types of corrosion probes.

novel monitoring systems.

automatic data collection systems

These requirements are project specific and are likely to include at least some of the standard
monitoring requirements given below. Requirements for subsea monitoring fall into this category
and are covered in section (2.4.3).
During the design phase of the development the following points shall be considered:
2.4.1.1 Corrosion Monitoring Location Selection
Corrosion monitoring locations are detailed elsewhere (ref. 4). In addition, the corrosion
monitoring locations:

are not generally required for piping and vessels fabricated of materials that are noncorrosive under the process conditions.

are required for each incoming or outgoing pipeline, and shall be located on the process side
of the pigging tee i.e. close as possible to the pipeline, but not in a location where pigs would
pass by the monitoring location.

shall be selected to monitor each corrosive stream.

shall be designated as a primary monitoring location which will always need to be monitored,
and secondary monitoring locations, which will only need to be monitored if a problem is
found on a primary location, to accurately determine where the problem is. The number of
primary monitoring locations should be minimised.

2.4.1.2 Equipment At Each Corrosion Monitoring Location

At each corrosion monitoring location:

for primary locations two access fittings shall be installed, so that coupons and probes can
be used side by side.

for secondary locations one access fitting shall be installed and designated for coupons.

for all primary and secondary locations coupon holders and coupons or probes (as
applicable) should be installed during the final phases of onshore construction, utilising the
Company group corrosion monitoring contractor.

additional access fittings may be required if intrusive sand monitoring probes are required as
part of CM.

it will be necessary to access all fittings at some time during the project life. The corrosion
monitoring frequency shall be reviewed and appropriate provisions for access made
(dedicated platform, use of existing platform/walkway, ladder access only, scaffolding
access only).

2.4.1.3 Corrosion Coupons

The corrosion coupon material shall be selected to match the system being monitored.
2.4.1.4 Electronic Probes
Electronic probes shall be:

ER probes for general monitoring.

Galvanic probes for areas of possible oxygen contamination.

Provided with a portable datalogger for probe measurement (one datalogger per platform
facility).

Where the required probe monitoring frequency is not in line with the platform manning
levels, automatic monitoring systems with control room readouts shall be installed.

Manufactured of a material selected to match the system being monitored.

2.4.1.5 Inhibitors
Selection and use of inhibitors is covered in detail elsewhere (ref. 5,6). In general the following
factors should be considered:

Subject to a test programme which examines all relevant factors.

Review of their effects on the entire process stream from injection to point of sale or
disposal.

Provide initial filming and long term injection rates under various flow rates.

Control and monitoring of usage.

Long term supply.

Selection of suitable injection points (plus spares) and the ability to inject other inhibitors if
process conditions change.

Review of system performance if inhibitor supply fails, including persistency, time for
corrosion to start, corrosion rates expected if not inhibited and any areas of high risk.

Effects of major operational changes (new reservoirs, compression, increased flow

rates/water cut, etc.) on inhibitor performance.

Quality control at inhibitor supply (both Chemical company in house tests and 3rd party tests
product quality is maintained throughout use).

Reliability of inhibitor injection system.

Methods of inhibitor injection.

Review of how the inhibitor will partition between the various fluids, and checking that the
concentration of inhibitor is consistent with allowable discharge levels (both current and
expected future levels) or sales specifications (e.g. acceptable level in the condensate), as
applicable.

service requirements from inhibitor supplier.

2.4.1.6 Fluid Sampling

The following factors should be considered:

selection of sampling locations (plus spares).

sampling installations required to obtain representative sample.

sampling installation required to obtain an easily transportable sample where required e.g.
permanent installation of sample pots at liquid sampling points to allow collection of an
atmospheric pressure liquid sample.

analysis location (on site, onshore terminal, contractors lab) and required turn around time.

methods of analysis.

variables to be measured, including typically iron counts, inhibitor residuals, chlorides, pH,
methanol/glycol.

analysis equipment availability/purchase.

how the data is fedback from the analysing chemist, to the people responsible for inhibitor
injection rates and corrosion monitoring. This could include a procedure for (manual) data
analysis and transmittal or set up software systems so that the chemist can feed the data
directly back into the platform control room display screens.

2.4.1.7 Key Point UT Surveys

Selection of key point locations are covered elsewhere (ref. 1).
Key point UT surveys shall take the following form:

Key point location shall be selected by the project team, in accordance with COMPANY
guidelines (ref.1).

Baseline key point survey shall be selected by the project team in the final phases of
construction/load out and prior to commissioning.

Data shall be provided to the COMPANY Corrosion Section in an "MS EXCEL" format for
uploading into the CMS system (see Appendix 4).

First onstream inspection shall be carried out within 12 to 36 months of system start up.

Timing of inspections after the first on-stream inspection shall be based upon the condition of
the system (i.e. determined by the corrosion rates recorded and any known changes to the
system) or upon any fixed time legislative requirements, whichever is the shorter.

2.4.1.7 External Corrosion Control and Monitoring

2.4.2

All carbon steel piping and vessels require an external corrosion resistant coating.

Some Corrosion Resistant Alloys (CRA) require an external corrosion resistant coating. This
usually depends upon their temperature of service (ref. 11).

Coating systems required on piping and vessels are covered in the relevant specifications
(ref. 9,10).

Coating in service inspection is covered in the relevant IMP (ref. 3). Depending upon the
condition of the coating, the level of coating degradation will be assessed as acceptable, or
maintenance priority will be assigned ("spot and sweep" type repairs, or full repainting).

Design-Pipelines
For corrosion monitoring of pipelines all the general requirements of 2.4.1 apply, except for
2.4.1.8. Additional requirements are:

2.4.2.1 Routine Pigging

Routine pigging is carried out for a variety of reasons:

inventory control.

distribution of corrosion inhibitor

removal of scales and corrosion products

removal of wax

for corrosion monitoring (if no debris is collectable after pigging this can indicate no corrosion
if there is debris, chemical analysis can be used to give information about the corrosion
mechanism).

The design team shall select the pigging type and frequency applicable to that pipeline and make
adequate provisions for the pigging requirements (see Appendix 5 for Guidelines).
2.4.2.2 Pig Sample Analysis
Pig sample analysis is covered in detail elsewhere (ref.4). It should follow these general
guidelines:

Whenever solid samples are removed during routine pigging operations these should be
analysed, and the tote! volume of solid debris removed by the pig estimated.

Where the pigging frequency is high and the composition of the solids vary very little, the
Company Corrrosion Section may decide to only analyse some of the pig samples (e.g a line
may be pigged twice per week, with analysis carried out once a month).

Pig sample analysis will generally be carried out by COMPANY laboratories.

Data will be reviewed by the COMPANY corrosion section, to determine the type of scale,
wax or corrosion in the line.

Data will be fed back to Operations so that the pigging frequency and pig type can be
adjusted as required.

2.4.2.3 Intelligent Pigging

Intelligent pigging is covered in the referenced document (ref.8)

2.4.2.4 External Corrosion Control And Monitoring

2.4.3

External corrosion control on pipelines is covered in detail by the referenced specification

(ref. 12).

External corrosion control is achieved by a combination of coatings and CP. "Conventional"

systems can be used up to a pipeline temperature of 70C. Above that, specific testing of
coatings and CP performance is required.

External corrosion monitoring is covered in detail in the referenced philosophy (ref. 13).
Generally this will rely upon a mixture of riser "dip check" CP surveys, ROV (Remote
Operated Vehicle) based continuous CP surveys and diver based intermittent CP surveys.

Design - Subsea Installations

Corrosion monitoring systems for subsea installation require special design considerations.
Subsea monitoring is expensive with long equipment development/fabrication lead times; this
has to be balanced against the large costs of assets being protected (e.g. pipelines) and the
impact on the development if a corrosion problem occurs. Reliability of the monitoring system
selected is a critical issue.

2.4.3.1 Corrosion Monitoring Location Selection

Generally all the requirements of (2.4.1.1) apply. In addition:

monitoring location selection is likely to be a compromise between selecting the expected

locations of worst corrosion and locations that are accessible. Flow modelling may be
required to select the location of worst corrosion in a pipeline system.

where possible the monitoring location should be sited close to or within the bounds of the
subsea template, or close to the riser elbow, to minimise cabling lengths and so that the
locations are easy to find in the future.

If CRA are used an alternative monitoring scheme may be acceptable, because of the large cost
of subsea monitoring systems. The requirements are:

review of published data or carry out full laboratory testing of the material to determine the
operating envelope of the CRA.

full corrosion modelling of the pipeline from the subsea installation.

subsea monitoring of wellhead and pipeline inlet pressures and temperatures.

monitoring at the platform at the outlet end of the pipeline for the chemical composition of
the produced fluids.

As long as the process and chemical conditions stay within the limits determined by the literature
review and/or by the laboratory testing, no permanent subsea corrosion monitoring is required.
At each scheduled inspection survey of the subsea facilities wall thickness readings should be
taken on the piping on the subsea template. If the process and chemical conditions stray out of
the approved operating envelope, additional ad-hoc surveys will be required. If these provisions
are adopted, section 2.4.3.2 will not apply.
2.4.3.2 Equipment at each Corrosion Monitoring Location
At each subsea corrosion monitoring location:

A corrosion monitoring system should be selected which ideally has a proven track record
subsea. Other systems which have not been used subsea, can be considered, but will
require an adequate degree of laboratory testing and trials.

the system should be designed for the field life, or if this is not possible for at least five years
operation without intervention.

preferably the system should be non-intrusive (no pipe penetration required); alternatively
flush type monitoring systems may be used (these require a pipe penetration, but cause no
impediment to pigging activities).

the selected system should incorporate sufficient redundancy to account for the risk of
failure of any part of the system.

2.4.3.3 Control of subsea corrosion monitoring data

corrosion data produced should be integrated into the platform control display.

acceptance criteria guidelines should be produced so that operations can carry out all day to
day monitoring.

systems should be set up to allow anomaly reports and routine regular data reports to be
handled by the relevant corrosion engineer.

2.4.3.4 Inhibitors
All the requirements of (2.4.1.5) apply.
2.4.3.5 Fluid sampling
The first fluid sampling point on the platform or onshore should be dedicated as the sampling
point for the incoming pipeline.
2.5

OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
The following points should be considered during the design phase:

Historical tracking of corrosion monitoring data from start-up, so that significant events can
be identified.

Compare all sources of corrosion monitoring data i.e. coupons, probes, iron counts, UT
surveys.

Utilise the corrosion monitoring system to provide default corrosion rates to the UT
inspection system.

The degree of monitoring and sampling is consistent with the proposed manning constraints
of each facility. If it is not, automated systems may have to be considered.

Establishment of pre-set alarm points on all variables to be measured.

Accuracy of measurement

Existing contract arrangements with inhibitor supplier, manufacturer of corrosion monitoring

equipment, retrieval contractor and analysis contractor.

The monitoring and analysis issues can be covered by CMS. To achieve this finalised design
data needs to be provided to the COMPANY corrosion section e.g. piping size and class,
monitoring locations and equipment installed, vessel design details, process flow diagrams etc.
2.6

ORGANISATION
Because of the long term importance of establishing an effective corrosion monitoring
programme, a team shall be established from Project personnel, consultants as required, and the
COMPANY corrosion section to review the long term effectiveness of the proposed programmes
and ensure operating experience is incorporated.
As the CM Guideline is a critical document for facilities start up and the certifying authority, and
covers all aspects of the project, overall responsibility for coordination of the production of the
CM Guideline should be assigned to one group within the project.

3.0

REFERENCES
In this philosophy, reference is made to the following publications:
1.
Procedure EDP.XW.1001 Baseline Data Acquisition for New Vessels and Piping
Systems.
2.
Engineering procedures for data analysis within the SSB/SSPC Corrosion Management
System (CMS).
3.
SSB Inspection Manual IMP: No: 6 - Process Piping; No:7 - Internal Corrosion
Monitoring; Now- Pressure Vessels.
4.
SES 48.1 - Monitoring Of Internal Corrosion In Oil And Gas Process Vessels And
Pipework.
5.
PTS 20.210 - Corrosion Inhibition of Downhole Production Tubing, Process Piping and
Pipelines.
6.
Guideline ECG.XX.4401 - Selection of Corrosion Inhibitor Systems for Downhole
Production Tubing, Process Piping and Pipelines.
7.
Guideline EDG.XW.1003 Corrosion Management Guideline (Sweet Facilities)

4.0

8.

(Draft) - Intelligent Pigging Philosophy ETS/6, OPM/4

9.

SES 47.1 - Paint Coating Offshore

10.

SES 47.2 - Paint Coating Onshore

11.

PTS 31.38.01.10 - Piping Classes - Basis of Design

12.
13.

PTS 31.40.00.10 - Pipeline Engineering

SEP 52.2 - External Inspection of Subsea Pipelines.

FIGURES
FIGURE 1 - Hierarchy of Corrosion Management Documents

5.0

LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1

- Corrosion Management Guideline Contents

APPENDIX 2

- Standard Inputs for Wetgas7 and Floline7 Corrosion Models

APPENDIX 3

- Inhibitor Cost Estimation

APPENDIX 4

- Guidelines for Routine Pigging Frequency

FIGURE 1 : HIERARCHY OF CORROSION MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTS

NOTE 1: Future Document. The MLNG-Dua project is a sour development and is producing a project specific CM Guidelines; this
may later be generalized to a CM Guidelines for sour facilities.
NOTE 2: Future deliverable for new projects that do not fall exactly under any existing CM Guidelines.
Key documents are shown in bold; supporting documents are in normal font.

APPENDIX 1 : CORROSION MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A1.

CONTENTS OF THE CORROSION MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE

REVISION REGISTER
Rev. No.

Date

Details of Revision

1/95

Initial issue for Comments

11/95

Initial Issue. Registered Distribution same as main document.

A1

CONTENTS OF THE CORROSION MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES

The Corrosion Management Guidelines shall contain the following sections:
1.

ITEMS FOR OPERATIONAL AWARENESS AND INSPECTION NEEDS

Cover any items from the project that operations need to be closely aware of (e.g. unusual operating
limits for certain materials used) or items that need special inspection work (e.g. known construction
problems).

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

INTRODUCTION
2.1

General

2.2

Purpose

2.3

Scope

2.4

Abbreviations and Definitions

2.5

Use of the Manual

CORROSION ASSESSMENT
3.1

Identification of Critical Items

3.2

Hazards of Loss of Containment

3.3

Corrosion/Erosion Mechanisms

3.4

Conditions over Field Life

3.5

Particular Operating Conditions

MATERIALS AND DESIGN

4.1

Design Considerations

4.2

Materials Selection

4.3

Inhibitor Selection

4.4

Inhibitor Injection Systems

4.5

Provisions for Particular Operating Conditions

MONITORING
5.1

Monitoring Equipment and Methods

5.2

Monitoring Locations

5.3

Monitoring Frequency

5.4

Probes and Coupons

5.5

Water Sampling, Scale Sampling

5.6

Surveys (Wall Thickness, etc.)

REPORTING
6.1

Probes and Coupons

6.2

Water Analysis

6.3

Surveys

6.4

Revisions to CRM Programme

REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
7.1

Codes and Standards

7.2

Design Documents and Drawings

73

Associated Documentation

APPENDIX 2 : STANDARD INPUTS FOR FLOLINE7 AND WETGAS7 CORROSION MODELS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
A.2.1

GENERAL

A.2.2

FLOLINE7

A.2.3

WETGAS7

REVISION REGISTER
Rev. No.

Date

1/95

Details of Revision
Initial Issue. Registered Distribution same as main document

A.2.1

A.2.2.

GENERAL
A.2.1.1

The corrosion models are confidential, and the result of a number of years of extensive
research by Shell opcos.

A.2.1.2

There are a large number of variables involved in the corrosion model. Many of these are
background "default" factors, but the person running the software needs to be aware of these
factors to ensure that the select values are used. Because of this complexity, the wetgas7
and floline7 programs are only released to the Shell group corrosion engineers.

A.2.1.3

Materials selection is a complex process. Design contractors typically have no data feedback
from the operations phase of the projects on materials performance in service. Consequently
they often have to make conservative materials selection decisions. COMPANY needs to
employ the best data available if the most cost effective solution is to be made. With these
necessary restrictions, the design contractor shall compile the necessary process input data
for the COMPANY corrosion section to carry out the corrosion analysis.

A.2.1.4

Default values. Within the models there are some default values which can be used if no data
is yet available. If data is lacking for a particular item, the use of a default value should be
reviewed with the COMPANY corrosion section.

FLOLINE7
A.2.2.1
General information required is

A.2.2.2

A.2.2.3

Process Flow Diagrams

basis for pipe sizing (API "C" factors used, velocity constraints, noise
constraints etc.)

For each section of pipe being considered supply:

Item

Units

temperature

pressure

bara

CO2 content (dry basis)

mol %

pH (if known)

internal pipe diameter

gas flow rate

MMSCMD

crude flow rate

m3/d

water flow rate

m3/d

glycol concentration in the water phase (if applicable)

%w

methanol concentration in the water phase (if applicable)

%w

inclination of pipe

deg

steel type (quenched and tempered or normalised)

N/Q

C-content of steel

%w

Cr-content of steel

%w

H2S content (dry basis)

mol %

Data Format
Data shall be provided as a Microsoft "Excel" spreadsheet with one column of data for each
pipe section being considered. Order of rows shall be the same as given in A.2.2.2. A
formatted Excel spreadsheet can be provided on request from the COMPANY corrosion
section.

A.2.3

WETGAS7
A.2.3.1.

Wetgas7 includes the "TWOPHASE" program for modelling the hydraulics on the
line. The wetgas7 version is a simplified TWOPHASE program, only addressing the
factors required for corrosion modelling. A full TWOPHASE analysis still needs to be
run (by COMPANY pipeline group) to obtain all the hydraulic and sizing- data. It is
important that the input parameters are standardized between the pipeline and the
corrosion groups. This is the easiest to achieve by carrying out the TWOPHASE
analysis first, and providing this data as the input data for wetgas7. For wetgas7 the
data shall be provided in metric units (there is a choice of inputs/outputs in the full
TWOPHASE program).

A.2.3.2

The inputs required for wetgas7 are given in tables 1 to 4, which include a statement
on the usual source of the data. In addition the design life shall be stated.

A.2.3.3

Cases Required
For pipelines the operating conditions often change markedly over the life of the field.
One approach is to design solely on start up conditions, but this would lead to a very
conservative corrosion allowance calculation. For a more accurate analysis, data
shall be provided for each year of operation over the life of the field, so that account
can be taken for the changing pressures, temperatures, chemical composition etc.

A.2.3.4

Data Format
Data shall be provided as a Microsoft "Excel" spreadsheet, with one column of data
for each pipeline case being considered. Order of rows shall be the same as given in
table 5. Items not included in table 5 tend not to vary with each case considered and
can be provided in a separate written report. Contractor shall stick strictly to the row
and column format given in table 5, i.e. pressure in shall be entered in row 19. Case
number (row 1) shall be sequential. Case titles shall be descriptive to understand
what the case is. The distance array is from the second to 50th pipe node. The first
pipe node distance is defined as 0.0m. The distances entered shall be distances
along the pipeline, not displacement as used in TWOPHASE. For example, if the riser
is 140.9m high and the riser top is defined as 0.0, 0.0 (distance, elevation),
TWOPHASE would define the riser base as 0.0, -140.9 (0.0m displaced from the
start point, -140.9m below the start point) and wetgas7 would define the riser base as
140.9, -140.9 (140.9m along the pipeline, -140.9m below the start point).
The distances also need to be adjusted to suit wetgas7. The elevation array is from
the second to 50th pipe node. The first pipe node elevation is defined as 0.0m; as the
first node is usually the riser top and defined relative to Mean Sea Level, the
elevations have to be adjusted so that the first one is 0.0m. For the elevation/distance
array, if there are no entries, zeros must be entered - the fields cannot be left blank. A
formatted excel spreadsheet can be provided on request from the COMPANY
corrosion section.

TABLE 1 : OPERATING CONDITIONS

TABLE 2 : INJECTIONS

TABLE 3 : MISCELLANEOUS INPUT BLOCK

TABLE 4 : SPECIAL INPUT OPTIONS

TABLE 5 : page 1

TABLE 5 : page 2

TABLE 5 : page 3

APPENDIX 3 : INHIBITOR COST ESTIMATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS
A.3.1

BUDGET COSTING BASIS

A.3.2

ITEMS NOT INCLUDED

REVISION REGISTER
Rev. No.

Date

11/95

Details of Revision
Initial Issue. Registered Distribution same as main document

A.3.1

BUDGET COSTING BASIS

Oil lines rate of inhibition: 100 ppm based on total liquids
Gas lines rate of inhibition: 0.15 US Gal/MMSCF
Where liquid rates in gas lines exceed 100 cum./MMSCM (17.8 Bbl/MMSCF), inhibition rates are then
based on the liquid rate, not the gas rate.
Gas line rate of inhibition for high liquid loading: 200 ppm based on total liquids.
These are standard vendor recommendations for inhibitor initial dosage rates; field optimization is
likely to change rates.
Inhibitor Cost: 1400 RM/55 US Gal Drum
(based on cost of current inhibition used - though all inhibitors are approximately the same cost.
Check with COMPANY Corrosion Engineer for latest costs).
Oil lines: 0.107 RM/Bbl total liquids
So for example, to treat 70000 Bbl/day rate
would cost: RM7490/day
= RM2.7 Million/year
Gas Lines :3.818 RM/MMSCF
So for example, to treat 50 MMSCF/day rate
would cost: RM190/day
= RM69700/year
Gas Lines (high liquid loading) 0.214 RM/Bbl total liquids.

A.3.2

ITEMS NOT INCLUDED

These costs do not include costs for equipment set up (pumps, tanks, injection lines), logistics (i.e.
getting the chemicals there)) or for monitoring (inhibitor returns, corrosion monitoring equipment,
analysis of data, inhibitor quality control).

APPENDIX 4 : GUIDELINES FOR ROUTINE PIGGING FREQUENCY

TABLE OF CONTENTS
A.4.1

GENERAL

A.4.2

PlGGING FREQUENCY

A.4.3

IMPACT ON DESIGN

REVISION REGISTER
Rev. No.

Date

11/95

Details of Revision
Initial Issue. Registered Distribution same as main document

A4.1

GENERAL
Routine pigging can be carried out for a variety of reasons:
1.

removal of liquids from the line, to control slugging potential (inventory control)

2.

removal of wax, to prevent line blockage

3.

removal of scale attached to the pipe walls, to prevent line blockage

4.

removal of loose debris from the line (e.g. debris that enters the pipeline, or non attached
scales and corrosion products

5.

for the purposes of obtaining liquid and solid samples for routine corrosion monitoring

6.

inhibitor distribution

7.

removing attached scales so that chemical treatment of the line can be carried out

8.

batch treating with chemicals

9.

product separation

Pigging runs can be designed to carry out a single task or a variety of tasks. Different type of pigs
may be required for different tasks.
Initial frequencies shall be selected by the project team. The project team shall document the
reasons the particularly line needs to be pigged, so that the appropriate pigs can be selected. Initial
frequencies for corrosion related issues are given in A4.2; frequencies for pigging required for other
tasks shall be assessed on a case by case basis on consultation with company pipeline engineering
and operations groups. Once the line is in operation, routine pigging frequencies will be selected by
the responsible operations group (OPM/41), based on a conditional approach. The condition based
approach allows the frequency to be increased or reduced, based on an appraisal of the pigging
results, the condition of the line and the type of fluids in the line. Selection of the pig types to be used
will be carried out by operations.
A4.2

PIGGING FREQUENCY
The frequencies given in this section are based on acceptable operating practice for similar
pipelines.
The minimum initial pigging frequency for tasks 4 and 5 in A4.1.
All carbon steel gas lines

once every 3 months

All carbon steel and multiphase lines

once every month

All CRA pipelines

no pigging required.

Pigging frequency for CRA pipelines assumes that the CRA has been properly selected for all
operating conditions. The minimum initial pigging frequency for task 6 in A4.1 is:
Inhibited pipelines, where the inhibitor needs pigging
to distribute it over the whole pipe circumference

once every week

Note, the need for inhibitor redistribution will depend upon:

flow regime in the pipeline

type of inhibitor used

This shall be assessed by the project team

If pigging is required to accomplish any other task in A4.1, the pigging frequency shall be carefully
reviewed with operations.

A4.3

IMPACT ON DESIGN
Possible impact of pigging on the design is:

need for permanent pigging facilities

impact on life cycle costs

impact on operating costs

impact on manning levels of facility

For the last item, if the facilities are designed to be not normally manned and frequent pigging is
required, this may force the selection of automatic pig launching equipment.