QUALITY BULLETIN 1/2008

FAILURE OF FABRICATED TEST BLIND FLANGE FOR HYDROSTATIC TESTING During the hydrostatic testing of a 40 HP Fuel Gas line, a 40diameter, 4 thickness blind flange failed at approximately 1500 psig pressure before reaching test pressure of 1753 psig. Failure attributed to: Failure by Contractor to meet specified quality requirements Failure by Saudi Aramco Inspection personnel to verify requirements

The test blind flange was fabricated from plate material by the construction subcontractor (Inspector was informed this was the first time the test blind had been used.)

Following the incident, the prime contractor was instructed by SAPMT to perform an investigation into the root cause of the failure. At the same time, Inspection instructed corrective actions to be implemented to prevent a similar occurrence. These instructions were again restated to the Prime and construction sub-contractor and SAPMT during the weekly quality meeting. A preliminary report was required to be submitted to SAPMT by close of business day. This report was still being prepared by Contractor and the subcontractor.

An independent review by Inspection Department consisting of visual inspection of the failed blind flange, review of the hydrostatic test package as well as several meetings 2

with Contractor Quality Assurance Manager and Construction QC Manager was able to determine the following: Blind Flange The test flange fabricated by CCC contained no markings as to material, type and grade. Pressure rating of 600 was written on the flange in ink marker. Further, neither

Contractor nor Construction subcontractor could provide any information regarding welding procedures applied and welder(s) qualification. The blind flange was fitted with two welded nipples intended for filling and venting. Weld defects were observed on visual inspection as shown above. The flange was fabricated during an extreme cold period the week before. The following factors may have contributed to the failure: The lack of pre-heat maintaining interpass temperature control PWHT unsuitable welding procedures welder qualifications welding consumables inadequate quality control i.e. visual and NDE inspections Hardness tests of the weld, heat affected zone (HAZ) and base metal were requested from Contractor. Results of hardness tests are still outstanding. It appears that failure originated in the HAZ of the 1 nipple welded in the center of the blind flange and propagated across the entire face of the plate to opposite bolt holes (laminar tearing type defect.)

The failure crack depth is approximately 3 deep. Both ASME pressure vessel and piping codes and SAES-A-004 allow for the use of fabricated flanges from plate material based on appropriate calculations. SAIC-A-2009 requires fabricated flanges to be supported with appropriate engineering calculations. Since the construction sub-contractor fabricated the blind flange in their weld shop, calculations should have been available along with the welding procedures and detail of the connections approved by prime contractor engineering. The calculations were requested from both Contractor and sub-contractor but could not be produced. Based on actual thickness of the flange (100mm), its estimated to be at least 35% under thickness. Hydrostatic Test Package A hydrostatic test package is prepared for each hydrostatic test. The make-up and review of each test package is an ongoing process involving all parties, contractor, subcontractor and Inspection. the hydrostatic test package was initiated by Contractor Engineering a Pressure Testing Punchlist (Pre-Test) was prepared by subcontractor and reviewed by contractor and PID inspector completion of A items (work to be completed prior to hydro test) was signed off by Contractor, subcontractor and the Saudi Aramco inspectors Isometric/Spool control sheet was reviewed by PID inspector for completeness Pre-Test Check List was completed by subcontractor but does not indicate review and approval by Contractor Item number 30 of the Contractor/Sub-contractor Pre-Test Check List (Confirm test spades/blinds installed (as per limits)) was signed off by Sub-contractor QC There is no provision on the Pre-Test Check List for review and sign-off by the Saudi Aramco inspector

Test Pack Release Record (for hydro test) was initiated by subcontractor and reviewed by prime contractor covering: Test Pack Review Contents Punch List Clearance (A items completed) Isometric Control Sheet sign off Pretest Check List Test Pack Release Record was not signed off by the Saudi Aramco inspector The Pre-test Check List clearly shows the sign off by the subcontractor QC inspector to confirm that the test blind was properly installed per the test limits (item 30 on the check list.) The Contractor/Sub-contractor hydrostatic test procedure also confirms that the requirements of SAES-A-004 will be met. Due to the absence of calculations, this suggests that the sign-off of item 30 was done by sub-contractor QC without actually verifying the existence of the required calculations to verify the appropriateness of the test flange. Saudi Aramco Inspection Monitoring PID inspector was present at time of hydro The PID inspector relied on the Sub-contractor QC to verify the test flange was of the proper rating. Saudi Aramco Checklist SAIC-A-2009 (Verification of Test Preparation and Test Equipment for Pressure Testing), items B1 and B2 clearly state: Test piping, fittings and hoses are designed or have pressure rating that match or exceed the system test pressure (G.I. 2.102, Section 4) Paddle blinds or spectacle blinds used to isolate the test sections are of the same class rating of the system or may be fabricated based on appropriate calculations (SAES-A-004, Para. 7.3) PID inspector did not verify that the installed test blind was suitable for the test PID inspector did not utilize SAICs during reviewing and monitoring pre-test activities Had SA Checklists been utilized to verify test preparation and readiness then this would have clearly identified the need to verify blind flange was supported by engineering approved calculations. SAIC are only used as the basis of focused assessments. At the time of this test, no focused assessment had been done for verification of preparation of hydrostatic testing. Corrective Actions Project Inspection instructed Contractor/Sub-contractor to implement the following: verify all fabricated flanges have appropriate calculation approved by Prime Contractor engineering all hydrostatic test equipment must be suitably identified (preferably with color coding) to indicate the safe pressure rating 5

include hydrostatic test equipment list with pressure ratings and include in hydrostatic test package QC to verify correct test equipment is installed prior to start of test At the time of my visit, sub-contractor was in progress of segregating and color coding test flanges per their pressure rating/thickness. It is estimated that as many as 1000 flanges must be identified and color coded. Many test flanges were observed in the hydrostatic test yard without any form of identification. Color coding has started on test

flanges without weld connections. Once these are complete, sub-contractor will inspect and identify pressure ratings of flanges that have welded connections. Note this may require the removal and re-welding of connections/attachments. PID inspection will review that appropriate calculations have been prepared and approved by prime contractor engineering and that welding has been performed in accordance with suitably approved WPS and welders are qualified and will perform a random inspection of flanges (thickness check) and color coding applied. Recommendations This project is in the early stages of hydrostatic testing, with over 6500 hydrostatic tests remaining to be completed. This construction contractor as well as most others construction contractor working on Saudi Aramco projects frequently use fabricated test flanges for hydrostatic testing which are fabricated in their own weld shops. All projects need to ensure to review the capability of the hydrostatic test facility prior to start of hydrostatic testing to include all testing equipment, including test manifolds, blind flanges, bolts, gaskets to ensure that all test equipment is properly identified and suitable for testing All project inspection sections need to implement the Saudi Aramco ID SATIPs and SAICs (Using SAIC makes the inspector more aware of SA requirements.) ID management needs to mandate the use of the SAIC by inspectors Revise SAES-A-004, paragraph 7.3 to include review and approval of calculations and fabrication of test flanges by engineering/SAPMT?