Taking composite repairs overseas

The use of nonmetallic composite materials to repair corrosion defects and mechanically damaged pipe has increased significantly in recent years in the United States as well as in the international market. This has been attributed to several factors including the broadening of awareness of the benefits of composite repairs, extensive testing programs conducted by manufacturers and third party laboratories, and the publication of standards by both the ASME and ISO that directly relate to composite repairs.
Although acceptance and use of this technology has increased, composite repairs are still a relatively new tool available for the maintenance and repair of pipelines and piping systems. While this is true for the U.S. market, it is even more so for most international markets. The large majority of composite repair products were established and tested, and are today manufactured in the U.S. Because of this, U.S.-based pipeline companies and refineries are more experienced with composite repairs than are international markets.
Due to the relative newness of the composite repair alternative (versus other repair methods) in the international market, U.S.-based manufacturers are faced with the task of expanding into a market that is a little more difficult to reach. Several factors can work against a U.S.-based composite manufacturer during the initial expansion into the international marketplace. Of course, these are the same obstacles that face any company looking to expand its reach to global customers (i.e., expensive up-front costs, logistical difficulties, whether to open a satellite office or whether to work with local companies, etc.). But, for our purposes here, the focus will be on specific issues relating to nonmetallic composite repairs for pipelines and piping systems.
Local testing needs
The first step in developing an international market is the introduction of the composite to the market and subsequently to individual companies. While this may sound easy, several factors can play a major role in how this is accomplished. When working with international companies, the country’s culture, language, and mannerisms must be taken into account and the appropriate direction should then be developed. What is important to North American customers is not always what is important to South American or Asian customers. This difference in cultures and work environments can then lead to a different set of expectations that is placed on the manufacturer.  
The ASME PCC-2 (Articles 4.1-4.3) and ISO/TS 24817 documents outline testing requirements that are set forth as qualification testing that manufacturers must complete in order to maintain compliance to these codes. However, they have been designed to be general qualifications and may not address specific needs for each end user of a composite. For this reason, many composite manufacturers receive requests for the testing of a very specific need that an end user would like to consider, but the end user must gain confidence through a first-hand testing experience. While it may seem to be a minor issue, the costs involved in actually performing many
of these tests can become quite substantial depending upon the scope of the requested test program and specific location in the world. This is arguably the largest difference between the U.S. market and other international markets for a U.S.-based composite manufacturer.
As a prime example, a refinery in Singapore recently requested that Citadel Technologies perform a specialized test relating directly to a current, possible composite repair application within the refinery. The possible composite repair application being reviewed was for reinforcement of defective weld seams in a 24-in. carbon steel pipe. The concern was that the welds would crack and cause a failure of the pipe, resulting in loss of production and environmental issues. This facility had experienced no failures of this magnitude to date, but the idea was to test to a worst-case scenario. Because there is not a specific test for this exact application in the standard, the end user requested that a quick test be completed in their facility to insure that the repair system could handle their needs.  
The test was designed by the faculty of the refinery and carried out by members of Citadel Technologies (USA) and Citadel Technologies Asia Pacific. A 16-in. pipe was used that had been cut in half, then tack-welded together in only four locations with a four-millimeter gap left between the two pipe pieces that the composite must hold (Figure 1). The carbon fiber and epoxy composite repair system, Diamond Wrap, was used to repair the test pipe (Figure 2). The test pipe was then filled with water to perform the hydro pressure test to the desired design pressure rating set forth by the refinery. The Diamond Wrap composite repair more than doubled the required design pressure, and was subsequently qualified to be used for these repairs within the refinery. While this test was relatively simple and inexpensive to perform, other test programs can become quite expensive when all costs are taken into consideration.  
Case use example
In another instance, PEMEX (Mexico’s state-owned petroleum company) had been using Diamond Wrap for certain temporary repairs and obtaining waivers to leave them in place, but requested that Citadel perform testing with IMP (The Mexican Petroleum Institute), which it commissioned to carry out the testing program. By performing this test program, PEMEX would then be able to qualify the Diamond Wrap composite repairs as more of a long-term repair system and eliminate the need to obtain waivers to use it on their pipelines.
The requirements of the test program were to design the composite repair system to strengthen the pipe to the point that the pipe fails outside of the defect and wrapped area.  This meant that the defective area of the pipe would have been returned to greater than its original design strength in the wrapped area over the defects. The idea for PEMEX was to determine the maximum pressure capabilities of the composite to insure that repairs can be designed to return the defective pipes back to their original strengths and pressure capabilities.
Three 20-in. diameter test pipes were fabricated and various wall-loss defects of different shapes and dimensions were installed on the first two to represent external corrosion defects. The requirement of the composite repairs installed on the first two test pipes was to repair the pipe to greater than its original burst pressure, which should cause the rupture to occur outside of the repair system. For the third test pipe, a dent was installed to represent mechanical damage that could occur from third-party damage or a constrained dent from a rock or other object. The objective was not to fail outside of the repair on this test pipe, but to pressurize the pipe to the original MAOP of 1,650 psi (approx. 72% SMYS) and hold that pressure without the dent re-rounding to the point of being detrimental to the pipe or composite repair.
Citadel designed the repairs as requested and IMP completed the specified testing on all test pipes. The Diamond Wrap repair system performed above expectations and all testing went as required. Upon completion of the test program, Diamond Wrap was proven and qualified to be used on all pipelines and pipe systems for PEMEX.
In stark contrast to the test program for the weld seams mentioned earlier, the scope of this test was much larger due to the diameter and number of the test pipes, the lengths of the required repairs, and the amount of material needed. By the time this test program was completed, the total costs (including travel, pipe materials, fabrication, etc.) exceeded hundreds of thousands of dollars.  While this may seem to be extreme for one qualification testing program, the product was subsequently approved for use in every PEMEX facility and pipeline in all of Mexico. Also, all parties involved shared the accumulated costs, so the burden was not borne by one company alone.
Ongoing concerns
The main concern in continuing to perform specific testing for new customers for each new international market is that the costs involved prohibit the ability to maintain the level of testing without partial funding from customers. However,
as composite repair usage continues to become increasingly accepted as a viable and effective repair method, requests for specific testing may begin to reduce.  Since the publishing of the two standards by the ASME and ISO organizations in 2006, awareness and acceptance has increased and special requests have begun to decline.  
One method of combating this cost obstacle is to find viable and trustworthy local companies to work with that can be onsite easily and quickly. Although there remains an upfront cost investment, the pay off comes quickly when customers see that you are dedicated and willing to work with local companies to meet their needs as quickly and efficiently as possible. In some countries, however, this is a legal requirement imposed by the government in an effort to boost the local economy and assist local companies’ development. In any case, it is important that face-to-face meetings occur at regular intervals and both companies are comfortable with the working relationship, since trust is always at a premium in any long-distance business relationship.
While there are definitely numerous and varying obstacles that a U.S.-based composite repair manufacturer must overcome in order to expand into an international marketplace, there is no argument that global usage of composite repairs is on the rise. As we continue to see various codes and standards developed specifically for composite repairs by leading organizations, awareness of the benefits of using composite repairs will broaden and become a more comfortable repair option for pipeline and pipe system operators. Currently an organization located in the United Kingdom, with the acronym ACORES (Association of Com-posite Repair Suppliers), performs audits based on the ISO and ASME standards and will certify those manufacturers who are in compliance with these standards. At the present time, there are serious discussions of a similar organization being developed in the United States to certify compliance of manufacturers to these codes, and to help further general knowledge of composite repairs as well.  n

The author
Matt Green is a Project Engineer, Citadel Technologies, Inc., Tulsa, Oklahoma. He can be reached at mgreen@cittech.com.