See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/300525737

A Market Survey of Offshore Underwater Robotic Inspection Technologies for

the Oil and Gas Industry

Conference Paper · April 2015

DOI: 10.2118/177989-MS

CITATIONS READS
13 3,419

7 authors, including:

Fernando Diaz Ledezma Ayman Amer

Technische Universität München Saudi Aramco
9 PUBLICATIONS   104 CITATIONS    11 PUBLICATIONS   44 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ali Outa Roba Binyahib

SECTOR MICROWAVE INDUSTRIES 13 PUBLICATIONS   48 CITATIONS   
3 PUBLICATIONS   34 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Underwater Inspection Robot View project

Body schema learning based on machine learning and first-order principles View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ayman Amer on 27 March 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 A Market Survey of Offshore Underwater Robotic
Inspection Technologies for the Oil and Gas Industry
Fernando Diaz Ledezma, Ayman Amer, Fadl Abdellatif, Ali Outa, Hassane Trigui, Sahejad Patel,
Roba Binyahib

Research & Development Center, Intelligent Systems Team, Saudi Aramco, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

Abstract- This paper is aimed at providing an insight in
some of the most up-to-date technologies for offshore
pipeline inspection. The first part reviews the basics of
the main underwater pipeline inspection technologies
that are commonly used to detect signs of corrosion,
fractures and other flaws. The second part surveys the
existing robotic technologies for deep and shallow
waters that are dedicated to underwater monitoring
and inspection of pipeline integrity.
1. INTRODUCTION
Offshore oil and gas assets range from very shallow
waters with a depth of only a few meters to ultra-deep
water installations (more than 1,500 m). [1] Consequently,
subsea applications vary depending on these different
depths. Oil & Gas companies operate thousands of
kilometers of subsea pipelines and other assets that need to
be inspected, maintained and/or repaired to prevent
operational and environmental hazards and loss of
production. Underwater inspection tasks in this industry
include but are not limited to:
 Visual inspection
 Wall thickness inspection; for example, using
Ultrasonic Testing (UT)
 Crack location using magnetic techniques, such as
Eddy-Current Testing, Magnetic Particle Inspection
(MPI), etc.
 Cathodic Protection (CP) measurements
 Cleaning and removal of marine life
 Maintenance and repair
With the growing demand for underwater operations,
the use of divers is becoming more prominent in the Oil &
Gas industry. However, executing the above mentioned
tasks by a human diver is usually dangerous, inefficient
and expensive. Semi-automating these operations provides
safer and more effective solutions.
In order to address these needs, Unmanned Underwater
Vehicles (UUV) operations are increasing and their
applications are expanding. The range of applications for
UUVs covers marine life conservation and exploration,
hydrographic surveying, oil and gas extraction assistance,
ships cleaning and maintenance, military and first response
rescue operations, etc. [2][3]
This paper is outlined as follows: section 2 provides a
brief recap on some of the most commonly used
underwater inspection techniques targeted to pipelines.
Section 3 presents some of the existing applications for
UUVs, in particular Remotely Operated Vehicles1 (ROV),
in the Oil and Gas industry. Finally, section 4 surveys
some of the currently available underwater technologies
that have a potential application in oil and gas pipelines
inspection.
2. UNDERWATER PIPELINE INSPECTION
TECHNOLOGIES
Inspection activities in offshore facilities, such as
pipelines, risers, etc., consist primarily of the use of
specialized tools to assess the integrity of the inspected
elements and detect potential damage. For instance, visual
inspection methods are used to identify possible wear,
corrosion and/or fractures on surfaces.
Other types of approaches use different Non-
Destructive Testing (NDT) techniques to inspect and
evaluate the pipeline integrity. There are several NDT
methods; the most common of them include:
a) Ultrasonic Testing (UT). It is one of the most used
external inspection methods. A UT system is usually
composed of a probe that generally requires a couplant
and a pulser/receiver device to send the ultrasonic
waves and evaluate the pipeline’s wall thickness. A
transducer is used to send an ultrasound wave that
propagates into the pipe and, when reflected, provides
information on flaws, inhomogeneity or discontinuities
inside the material based on the time intervals of the
arrival of the direct and reflected waves at different
areas of the pipe’s surface. [12] A disadvantage of this
technique is that the inspected surface needs to be
1
A Remotely Operated Vehicle, commonly referred to as an
ROV, is a tethered underwater vehicle.

Page 1 of 7
 exposed and that it can only be performed at a single
point at a time.
b) Magnetic Particle Inspection (MPI). MPI is used to
detect surface and just below surface discontinuities
such as cracks in ferromagnetic materials. When the
surface of the pipe is magnetized, either by an
electromagnet or by passing an electric current through
it, the magnetic field is continuous unless there is a
crack on the surface. If the crack is located in between
the poles of the magnetic field, the magnetic flux leaks
out of the material. This effect will collect
ferromagnetic particles spread on the surface (for
inspection purposes) with an orientation condition —
north and south poles— formed at the edges of the
crack allowing visual approximation of the size and
shape of the flaw. [8][9]
c) Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL). The MFL technology
consists of permanent magnets used to temporarily
induce a magnetic field in the body of a pipe. Then,
the magnetic leakage field (i.e. changes in the
magnetic field) is measured and recorded along the
pipe’s surface. The magnetic flux should be uniform in
the pipeline except in regions where internal or
external flaws are present causing distortions in the
magnetic field. These distortions can be associated to
small defects caused by cracks, corrosion and pitting.
[1][6]
d) Eddy-Current Testing. When using an eddy current
inspection tool, the probe sends an electrical signal
which magnetizes the pipe’s steel. After the probe
stops the magnetizing signal, the steel demagnetizes
generating an eddy current. This eddy current is
registered by a receiver and analyzed providing the
wall thickness for corrosion inspection. [10][11]
e) Guided Wave Pipeline Inspection (GWPI). Guided
Wave UT techniques transmit a sonic wave along the
pipe via transducers designed to appropriately transmit
sound waves in the transversal section of the pipe.
Reflections caused, among other things, by changes in
the cross sectional areas (e.g. changes in thickness,
welds, pipe features, etc.) can be detected and linked
with problems such as cracks or corrosion. This
technique allows screening long lengths of pipe for
approximate size and location of flaws from a remote
location. [13][16]
f) Cathodic Protection (CP) Measurement. CP is an
electrochemical technique aimed at preventing and
controlling the corrosion of metallic surfaces by
forcing the structure under protection to act as the
cathode of an electrochemical cell. CP can be achieved
by (a) using a galvanic anode, where the current is a
result of the potential difference between the two
metals, or (b) it may be an impressed current anode,
Page 2 of 7
where the current is impressed from an external DC
power source. The condition of the CP is assessed by
taking readings of the driving voltage between a probe
and an external anode that is connected to the metallic
surface. [14]
It is worth mentioning that, apart from standalone NDT
inspection technologies dedicated to external inspection,
much of the robotics research in Oil & Gas has been
oriented to pipeline internal inspection focusing
particularly on the development of In-Line Inspection (ILI
tools). [15] These tools travel through the pipelines and
measure and record anomalies that may be associated with
cracks, corrosion, or other defects. This technology can
include MFL, eddy current, UT sensors among other
inspection tools. ILI tools are inserted into the pipeline at
certain locations with special configurations that allow the
tool to be loaded into the system. The pipeline flow then
moves the tool through the line. When the tool is retrieved,
the recorded data is used for analysis. [17][18]
3. ROBOTICS IN DEEP WATER: THE REIGN OF
THE UUVs
The UUVs represent the easiest and safest way to
interact with the offshore subsea environment. They are
used mainly in applications where their endurance and
safety overcome that of human divers.
One of the UUV classes, the Remotely Operated
Vehicle, is by far the most famous robotic application for
the offshore industry. ROVs are instrumental in the
development of subsea fields from drilling, through
construction support, inspection and tooling, and even in
the decommissioning phase. Underwater offshore oil and
gas facilities are mostly actuated, inspected and maintained
by ROVs. These vehicles are physically connected to the
surface via a tether cable (known also as umbilical cord)
for the transmission of electric power and data. [3] This
hard-wired link allows the real-time image feed that is
very useful for pipeline inspection and for operations that
involve manipulation. [19]
3.1 Inspection-oriented ROVs examples
Several companies have developed their own fleet of
underwater vehicles with inspection capabilities. For
instance, Saab Seaeye has developed a suite of ROVs for
many applications including underwater oil and gas
facilities inspection and maintenance. As an example, their
Tiger ROV—Figure 1— is designed to operate at depths
of up to 1000 m. The system is equipped with cameras,
manipulators, sonars and CP probes and is suitable for
observation, inspection, search and survey tasks. [28]
SMD Ltd. designed the Holland I (Figure 2), an ROV
system for underwater operations of up to 3000m. The
ROV can fit a wide variety of equipment and sensors using
its I/O ports. The Holland I robot includes conductivity, Figure 2—The Holland I ROV designed by SMD Ltd. [24]
temperature, and depth instruments, multi-beam sonar
systems and is also equipped with a high definition
underwater camera to record high definition footage for a
variety of uses. Moreover, the ROV can be fitted with two
manipulators that allow the performance of various tasks.
[24]
Fugro Subsea Services Ltd. manufactures the work
class ROV FCV 2000D, shown in Figure 3, that provides
real-time visual feed of the subsea working environment at
depths of up to 2000 m. Additionally, it is capable of
conducting quantitative measurements for CP surveys and
acoustic inspection. Among other applications this ROV
can be used for pipeline structures inspection (up to 25 km Figure 3—Fugro's FCV 2000D [25]
per day) as well as marine growth removal. [25]
Video Ray offshore ROVs, see Figure 4, are designed
to perform visual pipeline inspections in shallow water and
to inspect up to a maximum of 10 km of pipelines per
survey. These ROVs can be equipped with an Ultrasonic
Metal Thickness Gauge to carry out thickness and
corrosion measurements in areas of interest with the added
advantage of performing the measurements without
removal of the pipe’s protective coating. [26]
Oceaneering International Ltd. designed the Neptune
ultrasonic imaging tool to detect indications of corrosion,
cracks or imperfections. The system is used in conjunction
with their ROVs and provides high resolution thickness
Figure 4—VideoRay Pro 4 [26]
mapping. [26]
3.2 Autonomous Underwater Vehicles
Apart from ROVs, other types of UUVs are used in the
Oil & Gas industry. Autonomous Underwater Vehicles
(AUV) are unmanned vehicles that, unlike ROVs, carry
their own power source and communication is performed
wirelessly via acoustics. Moreover, they have very little
interaction with human operators as they are programmed
to perform automatically. AUVs are mostly used for
survey tasks, it is estimated that AUVs are 30% less costly
than other towed vehicles. [3]
These types of vehicles are mostly used in the
following tasks [2]:
Figure 1—Seaeye Jaguar [28]  Identifying geohazards/clearance surveys
 Rig site surveys
 Acoustic inspection of pipelines and other underwater
installations
 Pipeline route surveys
 Construction site surveys
However, their usage for other operations is limited as they
lack manipulation capabilities given that autonomous
manipulation is still a topic of research.
An example of this technology is the Lockheed Martin
Marlin AUV (Figure 5) [30]. With a depth rating of 300m,
it is equipped with a pipeline detection, tracking and

Page 3 of 7
inspection system. This AUV is designed to automatically
perform the required maneuvering to track pipelines using
sensor-based detection. [29] Its sensor suite includes a 3D
imaging sonar, HD camera, forward looking sonar and
multibeam echo sounders.
Figure 5—Lockheed Martin's Martin AUV [30]
3.3 ROV-assisted offshore inspection technologies
Apart from ROV inspection there are other tools that
can be used in conjunction with underwater vehicles. As
an example, Innospection Ltd. MEC-FIT Flexible Riser
Inspection system (Figure 6) uses a special eddy current
system that can control the field strength for the inspection
of the surface of conventional and flexible risers.
Deployed by an ROV, MEC-FIT is attached to the outer
surface of risers and can detect localized flaws such as
corrosion, cracks, general wall loss and, potentially,
fatigue. Sensor data is transferred in real time to a
supporting vessel via an umbilical cord. [31]
Similarly, Oceaneering International Ltd. provides a
Splash-Zone Riser Inspection Tool (Figure 7) [32] that is
composed of a telescopic arm with a tool head that
includes lights and a camera with a tilting capability
targeted for General Visual Inspection (GVI).
Additionally, other inspection probes for UT or Pulsed
Eddy Current (PEC) can be fitted to the tool head.
Figure 6—Innospection’s MEC-FIT system [31]
Page 4 of 7
Figure 7—Oceaneering’s riser inspection tool [32]
4. OTHER UNDERWATER ROBOTIC SYSTEMS
UUVs are not limited to perform in deep water
conditions. Shallow and very shallow water applications
are under development with the objective of inspecting
places that are difficult to access or that could put a
conventional survey operation at risk. [3]
Operations in depths of less than 150 m are considered
to be in shallow waters. When performing operations in
this environment a number of factors have to be taken into
consideration. For instance, the water depth in extremely
shallow areas (i.e. only a few meters) limits the possibility
of using boats of certain dimensions to deploy some types
of medium-size ROVs. Another limiting element is the
surrounding conditions, including sand, marine growth and
the presence of inflammable products in the case of oil and
gas applications. Considering these conditions, and taking
advantage of the low depth, many companies have started
to work towards designing robotic crawlers/vehicles to
perform different operations in shallow waters.
Visual inspection is an important feature in most
applications. Most of the developed technologies either
have visual inspection only or offer it in conjunction with
other inspection capabilities. For example, the Japanese
company HiBot developed an untethered snake-like robot
for operations under severe conditions, see Figure 8. The
robot is water and dust proofed and can move either on the
ground or in underwater environments. A frontal camera
provides imaging that can be used for inspection purposes.
The modularity of the design allows flexibility in the
control of the robot’s length. Each module is equipped
with passive wheels that can be attached or detached to
allow the robot to move on surface. [20] These features
make this robot a potential solution for shallow water
inspection. Moreover, the robot can be customized by
adding other upon-request sensing capabilities. However,
the geometry of the robot makes it hard to add other
functionalities such as grippers or robotic arms that are
otherwise needed to perform other inspection activities.
SeaBotix developed a mini-ROV system that can be
coupled with a crawler skid to attach it to surfaces when
performing visual inspection (Figure 9) with a 270° field
view camera. Moreover, the crawler can be fitted with an
ultrasonic thickness sensor that does not need to touch the
metal directly to perform measurements. [21] In addition
to its wide range-of-view camera and UT measurement
capabilities, this ROV/Crawler system can provide
hydrocarbon detection and laser 3D measurements. The
main limitation of this system is the need to remain firmly
attached to the seabed or working surface while
performing inspection and cleaning tasks. Likewise, the
crawler mode has the constraint of performing only in
nearly flat solid surfaces, such as ship hulls. Finally, as Figure 9—SeaBotix's LBV ROV with ultrasonic thickness
with other ROVs, the applicability of this system is limited sensor [21]
by the length of its tether cable.
The ship hull cleaning robot HullBUG, designed by
SeaRobotics, is a UUV crawler targeted to perform
proactive grooming or large vessels hulls and other
underwater surfaces, see Figure 10. It is capable of
attaching to several types of surfaces using a negative
pressure alternative device. Likewise, the onboard sensors
and embedded controllers provide obstacle avoidance, path
planning and navigation capabilities. [22] For inspection
purposes, HullBUG provides plate and coating thickness
detection, supported with surface imaging and localization
algorithms.
The C-TALON submersible crawling robot, developed
Figure 10—SeaRobotics' HullBUG [22]
by QinetiQ, is designed to operate in rivers, surf zones,
and limited access harbor areas (Figure 11). The robot is
equipped with a sensor suite (e.g. pressure sensor,
odometer, GPS, compass, fiber-optic link, imaging sonar,
hydrophone, night-vision cameras, among others) for
navigation and communication. Unlike conventional flyer
ROVs, this crawler robot has a good resistance to strong
currents and can remain idle for long periods of time
without the need of a docking station. Unfortunately, this
robot lacks NDT inspection tools and its usage is limited to
military operations only. [23]

Figure 11—QinetiQ's C-TALON submersible crawling robot

[23]

5. CONCLUSION
Underwater offshore assets need frequent inspection
and intervention to maintain production rates and product
quality. The challenges in offshore inspection tasks are
being addressed by several companies whose solutions are
mainly targeted to deep water operations. Underwater
inspection systems based on ROVs face challenges in deep
waters given the high pressures and underwater dynamics,
Figure 8—HiBot's Amphibious snake-like robot [20]
such as drag, buoyancy and turbulence. In addition, depth
itself constrains the systems’ power and communication
capabilities. Even though several companies have worked
to addressed these challenges; two main problems with
Page 5 of 7
these products remain: first, the high cost that is associated
to the complexity of the system; i.e. customizing the
system by, for instance, adding more sensors and tools to
enhance the inspection capabilities, makes it larger and
more expensive. The second problem is that no single
solution covers all the needs of a particular Oil & Gas
company. Products in the current market mainly focus on
deep and shallow water inspection applications while
extremely shallow water applications are not as mature and
are still under development. One of the reasons for this
could be due to the fact that support vessels for medium
size ROVs cannot operate in these waters. Performing
inspection in these extremely shallow areas usually
requires customized solutions for the particular conditions
that are being faced. Current research on extremely
shallow water applications aims at tackling mobility,
power and communication challenges.
6. REFERENCES
[1] Total. (2014). Overcoming the Harsh Conditions of the
Ocean Deeps. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/1p0MXeW
[2] Bingham, D., Drake, T. (2002). The Application of
Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) Technology
in Oil Industry – Vision and Experiences. Federation
Internationale des Geometres XXII International
Congress. Washington D.C., USA.
[3] Griffiths, E. (Ed.). (2002). Technology and
Applications of Autonomous Underwater Vehicles.
CRC Press 2002.
[4] Siciliano, B., Khatib, O. (Eds.). (2008). Springer
Handbook of Robotics. Springer 2008.
[5] Tehranchi, M. M., Hamidi, S. M., Eftekhari, H.,
Karbachi, M., Ranjbaran, M. (2011). The inspection of
magnetic flux leakage from metal surface cracks by
magneto-optical sensors. Journal of Sensors and
Actuators, 172(2), 365-68.
[6] Pure Technologies. (2014). Magnetic Flux Leakage.
Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/1qc1ozr
[7] Lynch A, J. (2009). Magnetic Flux Leakage Robotic
Pipe Inspection: Internal and External Methods.
Unpublished master's thesis for master's degree, Rice
University, Houston, United States of America.
[8] Worman, J. (2011). Magnetic Particle Examination.
National Board BULLETIN, Summer 2011, 8-13.
[9] International Atomic Energy Agency. (2000). Liquid
Penetrant and Magnetic Particle Testing at Level 2.
Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1zErnRY
[10] Oceaneering International. (2014). Pulsed Eddy
Current (PEC). Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/1jtCeJv
[11] Innospection Ltd. (2014). Eddy Current Theory.
Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/1p13wVq
Page 6 of 7
[12] NTD Education Resource Center. (2014). Basic
Principles of Ultrasonic Testing. Retrieved from
http://bit.ly/1rdh2dm
[13] Marques, F. C. R., Demma, A. (2008, October).
Ultrasonic Guided Waves Evaluation of Trials for
Pipeline Inspection. Paper presented at the 17th
World Conference on Nondestructive Testing,
Shanghai, China.
[14] Piping and Corrosion Specialties Inc. (2014). How
Cathodic Protection Works. Retrieved from:
http://bit.ly/1mHY1t2
[15] Karki, H., Shula, A. (2013, August). A Review of
Robotics in Onshore Oil-Gas Industry. Proceedings of
the 2013 IEEE International Conference on
Mechatronics and Automation, Takamatsu, Japan.
[16] Envirocoustics. (2014). Long Range Ultrasonic
Solutions. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/1r0NjCP
[17] Bickerstaff, R., Vaughn, M., Stoker, G., Hassard, M.,
Garret, Mark. Review of Sensor Technologies for In-
line Inspection of Natural Gas Pipelines. Retrieved
from: http://1.usa.gov/1nrypj8
[18] U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA). (2011). Fact Sheet: In-Line Inspections
(Smart Pig). Retrieved from: http://1.usa.gov/1nrypj8
[19] Chin, C.S. (2011). Systematic Modeling and Mode-
Based Simulation of a Remotely Operated Vehicle
Using Matlab and Simulink. International Journal of
Modeling Simulation and Scientific Computing
Sensors and Actuators, 2(4), 481-11.
[20] HiBot Co. (2012). ACM-R5H. Retrieved from:
http://bit.ly/1qCKdTB
[21] SeaBotix Inc. (2012). LVB300-5. Retrieved from:
http://bit.ly/1qc5t6KE
[22] Naval-technology.com. (2013). US Navy to test
SeaRobotics’ HullBUG autonomous cleaning system.
Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/1mdqfdT
[23] QinetiQ’s North America. (2014). C-TALON
Submersible Crawling Robot. Retrieved from:
http://bit.ly/1oDvLrM
[24] Marine Institute. (2014). Holland I Deepwater ROV -
Remotely Operated Vehicle. Retrieved from:
http://bit.ly/1tM4yeN
[25] Fugro Subsea Services Ltd. (2014). FCV 2000 – Next
Generation Work Class ROV. Retrieved from:
http://bit.ly/1oIQfim
[26] VideoRay LLC. (2014). VideoRay Pro 4 Rugged
BASE ROV System. Retrieved from:
http://bit.ly/1lU9OEz
[27] Ocenaeering (2013). NeptuneROV Based. Retrieved
from: http://bit.ly/Vleegd
[28] Saab Seaeye. (2014). Saab Seaeye Products.
Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/1r0V6AH
[29] Ocean News & Technology. (2014). Advances in
AUV Pipeline Inspection. Retrieved from:
http://bit.ly/1p8WW1D
[30] Lockheed Martin Corporation. (2013). Marlin AUV:
Better, Faster, Safer and More Economical Subsea
Inspections. Retrieved from: http://lmt.co/1owjWJn
[31] Innospection Ltd. (2014). Flexible Riser Inspection.
Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/1oDBI86
[32] Oceaneering. (2013). Splashzone Riser Inspection
Tool. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/UaGH8h
[33] CAN Group. (2014). Riser Inspection. Retrieved
from: http://bit.ly/1tM8psl

Page 7 of 7

View publication stats