API RP 581 - 3rd Ed.2016 - Add.2-2020 - Risk-Based Inspection Methodology
2-132 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 58119.9 FiguresHIGH SUSCEPTIBILITYExtending from the initialcurve and upwardsRepresentativeNelson CurveMEDIUM SUSCEPTIBILITYExtending from 50° belowthe curve up to the curve-50°FretuerapTem-100°FLOW SUSCEPTIBILITYNO SUSCEPTIBILITYExtending from 100°Fbelow the curve up to theprevious susceptibility areaExtending from 100° belowthe curve and farther belowthe initial curveHydrogen Partial PressureFigure 19.1—Example of HTHA Susceptibility Rankings for Cr-Mo Low Alloy Steels
RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY, PART 2—PROBABILITY OF FAILURE METHODOLOGY 2-133STEP 1: Determine the material ofconstruction, exposure temperature Tand the exposure hydrogen partialpressure P H2 .No, replaced withupgraded materialSTEP 2: Has HTHA damagebeen observed in thecomponent?YesIs thecomponentReplaced inKind?Yes, replacedin kindHighSusceptibilityNoNo, notreplacedDamageObservedSTEP 3 1): Is the componentcarbon or C-½ Mo steel?YesSTEP 3 1): Is thecomponentoperating > 177C (350F)and H2pp > 0.345 MPa (50psia)?YesHighSusceptibilityNoNoSTEP 3 2): Assign Susceptibility based onoperating condition and Figure 19.1NoSusceptibilitySTEP 4: Determine the damage factor forHTHA, using Table 19.2.20 Brittle Fracture DF20.1 ScopeFigure 19.2—Determination of the HTHA DFThe DF calculation for ferritic components subject to brittle fracture due to low-temperature operation iscovered in this section. Low alloy steels subject to embrittlement at relatively high temperature are not part ofthe scope in this section and are covered in Section 21.20.2 Description of DamageBrittle fracture due to low temperature operation or relatively low toughness is the sudden failure of astructural component, usually initiated at a crack or defect. This is an unusual occurrence because designstresses are normally low enough to prevent such an occurrence. However, some older equipment with thickwalls, equipment that might see low temperatures due to an upset, or equipment that has been modifiedcould be susceptible to varying degrees.
- Page 127 and 128: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 129 and 130: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 131 and 132: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 133 and 134: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 135 and 136: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 137 and 138: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 139 and 140: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 141 and 142: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 143 and 144: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 145 and 146: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 147 and 148: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 149 and 150: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 151 and 152: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 153 and 154: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 155 and 156: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 157 and 158: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 159 and 160: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 161 and 162: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 163 and 164: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 165 and 166: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 167 and 168: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 169 and 170: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 171 and 172: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 173 and 174: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 175 and 176: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 177: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 181 and 182: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 183 and 184: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 185 and 186: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 187 and 188: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 189 and 190: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 191 and 192: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 193 and 194: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 195 and 196: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 197 and 198: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 199 and 200: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 201 and 202: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 203 and 204: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 205 and 206: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 207 and 208: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 209 and 210: RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY,
- Page 211 and 212: CONTENTSTABLE 2.A.1—LEADERSHIP AN
- Page 213 and 214: 2.A-2 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 581T
- Page 215 and 216: 2.A-4 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 581T
- Page 217 and 218: 2.A-6 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 581T
- Page 219 and 220: 2.A-8 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 581T
- Page 221 and 222: 2.A-10 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 581
- Page 223 and 224: 2.A-12 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 581
- Page 225 and 226: 2.A-14 API RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 581
- Page 227 and 228: PART 2, ANNEX 2.BDETERMINATION OF C
RISK-BASED INSPECTION METHODOLOGY, PART 2—PROBABILITY OF FAILURE METHODOLOGY 2-133
STEP 1: Determine the material of
construction, exposure temperature T
and the exposure hydrogen partial
pressure P H2 .
No, replaced with
upgraded material
STEP 2: Has HTHA damage
been observed in the
component?
Yes
Is the
component
Replaced in
Kind?
Yes, replaced
in kind
High
Susceptibility
No
No, not
replaced
Damage
Observed
STEP 3 1): Is the component
carbon or C-½ Mo steel?
Yes
STEP 3 1): Is the
component
operating > 177C (350F)
and H2pp > 0.345 MPa (50
psia)?
Yes
High
Susceptibility
No
No
STEP 3 2): Assign Susceptibility based on
operating condition and Figure 19.1
No
Susceptibility
STEP 4: Determine the damage factor for
HTHA, using Table 19.2.
20 Brittle Fracture DF
20.1 Scope
Figure 19.2—Determination of the HTHA DF
The DF calculation for ferritic components subject to brittle fracture due to low-temperature operation is
covered in this section. Low alloy steels subject to embrittlement at relatively high temperature are not part of
the scope in this section and are covered in Section 21.
20.2 Description of Damage
Brittle fracture due to low temperature operation or relatively low toughness is the sudden failure of a
structural component, usually initiated at a crack or defect. This is an unusual occurrence because design
stresses are normally low enough to prevent such an occurrence. However, some older equipment with thick
walls, equipment that might see low temperatures due to an upset, or equipment that has been modified
could be susceptible to varying degrees.