Due to growing regulation and industry integrity management requirements, pipeline operators are redoubling their efforts to mitigate cracks. As a result, demand has increased for inline inspection (ILI) crack tool technology that can detect and size defects such as environmentally assisted cracking (EAC) and crack or crack-like anomalies in the long seam.

Electromagnetic acoustic transducer (EMAT) technology has become an increasingly popular crack inspection tool for gas and liquid operators. EMAT overcomes limitations of alternatives such as hydrostatic testing, which can miss defects below a critical length and depth; and ultrasonic crack detection (UTCD), which requires a liquid couplant to properly inspect the pipeline.

Following multiple long seam failures, a liquid operator in the United States required a comprehensive seam assessment for cracks and crack-like features on a 16-inch (406.4 mm), Low-frequency electric resistance welded (LF-ERW) pipeline. The operator validated the efficacy of EMAT technology run in conjunction with a multiple dataset platform. By utilizing both EMAT and multiple dataset technologies in combination, defects were better characterized. This allowed the operator to improve the prioritization of repairs and better manage the future integrity for this pipeline.

This white paper analyzes EMAT tool performance when combined with a multiple dataset platform, investigates the operator’s dig results from EMAT, and compares multiple ILI technologies used for a comprehensive seam assessment.

Subject
Nondestructive testing, Seams, Piping, Correlation, Pipelines, Tools, Inspection, Liquids, Defects, Anomalies, Cracking, Cracks, Stress corrosion cracking
Keywords:
EMAT, MDS, ILI, inline inspection, crack tool technology, crack detection, seam assessment
© 2017 Association for Materials Protection and Performance (AMPP). All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise) without the prior written permission of AMPP. Positions and opinions advanced in this work are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of AMPP. Responsibility for the content of the work lies solely with the author(s).
2017
Association for Materials Protection and Performance (AMPP)
You do not currently have access to this content.