DATA TEMPLATE - 8

Item REVIEW QUESTIONS to help identify potential Damage Mechanisms

[The purpose of these Questions is to ensure capture of all the Damage Causing/ Contributing/ Susceptibility parameters including Past Changes]
ITEM ID#

Consideration of Ext. environmental damage and effects on damage mechanisms or rates.

Any damage to Insulation or fireproofing?
Applicable to insulated equipment operating at minus 5 oC to 30 oC (23 0F to 86 0F) and equipment not in service e.g. wording: - Insulation cladding damage, wetting and dis-colouration observed
1 Inspection
or in intermittent service. This can cause CUI DM due to atmospheric condition (see also Template 8A specific on bottom head and outlet nozzle N2.
for CUI).
Any exposure to other chemical environment including steam leakage from other items/piping? (For e.g. e.g. wording: - External wetting observed on top head to due to process fluid spill
2 leakage, spillage or emission from nearby items/piping or heat tracing fluids) from Line No: XXXXX. Ops.
Applicable for any insulated equipment. This can cause CUI DM due to induced wetting. The insulation Wetting on column top due to cooling tower drift.

Consideration of other applied loads induced damage and effects on damage mechanisms or rates.
Any material changes or revalidation of original design to different design conditions including any design
e.g. wording: - This equipment was replaced in 2014 due to significant internal
modification?
3 corrosion. The Material was changed from Carbon Steel to SS 304L. Projects
Material change or revalidation of original design can result in new DMs, discounting existing DMs, change in
Nozzle N3 size reduced from 6” NB to 4” NB.
Damage rates after the new design.

Any changes to the applied loads (temperature, pressure, cyclic loads, etc), since first commissioning?
Changes to the applied loads can result in new DMs or change in damage rates e.g. increase in temperature
4 outside the normal operating range. Give details and specify the year of change. Process / Ops.
Cyclic Loads: - Increase in Pressure OR Temperature cycle Frequency or change in Pressure Range (∆P) OR
Temperature Range (∆T) of the cycles

Any unexpectedly high piping loads, beyond piping design specification (See also Q: -03 due to design
modification)?
5 None Projects
Overloading can cause, deformation or cracking of connected Items under Start-up/Emergency SD & other fault
conditions.
Any significant vibration or fluctuating loads on the equipment or internal components (e.g. trays, packed bed
support, distributors, agitators)?
6 Vibration of components can lead to failure by Fatigue Cracking or failure by Fretting Damage (e.g. packed bed None Inspection
support welds cracking, fretting on distributor pipe at support clamp location or fretting damage of tubes at
tube to baffle junction, etc.)

Any high fluid velocity / flow rates or low velocity / flow rates?
This is applicable only when the flow rates/ Velocity is above/below the design range specified by the Process
Licensor. e.g. wording: - The shell side inlet (N1) flow rate increased by 15% and tube side
7 Process
a) Higher flow rate/velocity can ini ate Erosion or Erosion Corrosion & can increase the damage rates. inlet (N3) flow rate is reduced by 20%. Operating under this condition since 2009
b) Lower flow rate/velocity (Liquids) can in some cases ini ate under deposit corrosion. At these loca ons,
generally the damage rates are greater than other areas

DATA TEMPLATE - 8 (Rev. 02 - 20/08/20220) PP SIMTECH - CONFIDENTIAL Page 1 of 5

 Item REVIEW QUESTIONS to help identify potential Damage Mechanisms

[The purpose of these Questions is to ensure capture of all the Damage Causing/ Contributing/ Susceptibility parameters including Past Changes]
ITEM ID#

e.g. wording: -
Any flashing of liquids? Any liquid carry-over/flashing in gas/vapour streams? a) Inlet liquid through inlet Nozzle N1 can cause Liquid Flashing due to pressure
Any acidic gases or corrosive vapour condensing (dew point)? drop.
a) Flashing can cause erosion corrosion. b) Caustic carry over via Nozzle N3 (overhead piping) to downstream Fin Fan
8 cooler E-1202. Process
b) Liquid carryover can cause localized wastage or cracking.
c) Corrosive Gases/Vapors, when they condense (at their Dew Point Temperature) can cause highly localized c) VDU Column top temp. 90 0C to 100 0C during the last 3 years. Potential for HCL
corrosion (Thinning) compared to other locations. gas condensing in the column top section and overhead piping as the Dew Point
Temperature for this corrosive gas is around 80 0C - 90 0C.

Any presence of solid contents or the formation of deposits or fouling?

a) Presence of solid par cles or dust (e.g. catalyst dust or Refractory par cles) can cause localized Erosion.
9 None Process
b) Deposits can cause Corrosion Under Deposit or localized overhea ng resul ng in increased corrosion.
c) Fouling can result in Increase in flow rate/velocity can increase damage rates.

1) Any other applied loads (e.g. Over pressurising during Hydrotest, Over pressurisa on due to PRV Failure),
1)For each event specify when it has happened and the root cause. Process / Insp. / Ops
10 which can cause material damage or initiate a damage mechanism?
2)Describe the nature and extent of coa ng /lining damage and possible cause. / FM
2) Any failure of internal protec ve coa ng/linings?

Consideration of Process Fluids effects on damage mechanisms and rates.

Any effects of process stream cross contamination (e.g. heat exchangers, coils in vessels)?
11 Cross contamination can result in new DCCs or increase in existing DCCs composition which can lead to new None Process / Ops.
DMs or increase in damage rates or other damage causing scenarios.
Any different conditions possible during start up / shutdown (e.g. aqueous phase formation, low temperature
conditions under pressure, shock loads, vibration, DCC fluid carryover, etc)?
12 These can have an adverse influence on applicable DMs, Damage Susceptibility and/or Damage Rates, None Process / Ops.
particularly if the number of start-ups/shutdowns or frequencies of excursions have increased, for example,
over the last 10 years or so, compared to previous history.
Any process fluid streams reaction which can have significant effects on damage mechanisms or rates?
13 e.g. Formation DCC and/or Moisture locally at the reaction area can cause increased damage rates or even a None Process / Ops.
new DM.
Any significant changes in concentrations of DCCs OR temperature across the item outside the normal operating
range?
14 None Process / Ops.
The distribution of DCCs concentration and/or temperature in an Equipment can have related variations of
damage rates.

Any feedstock variability effects and/or injection point effects in process streams outside the normal operating
range?
15 None Process / Ops.
Variations in Feed compositions of DCCs OR concentration of DCCs OR changes in Feed Temperature OR changes
in quantity/frequency of neutralising chemical injection, etc can affect damage rates and/or initiate a new DM.

Any specific cleaning / preparation procedures or chemical fluids used?

This is applicable for equipment subjected to Chemical Cleaning (cleaning agent containing DCCs – such as acids
16 None Process / Ops.
or caustic steaming out, etc). Depending on MoC any left-over traces of these chemical can result in new DM or
change in damage rates.

Any previous or planned future process trials / re-vamps, which did or may induce changes in existing damage
17 None Process / Ops.
causing parameters (e.g. composition/ concentration of DCCs, temperature, flow rates, pH, etc)?

DATA TEMPLATE - 8 (Rev. 02 - 20/08/20220) PP SIMTECH - CONFIDENTIAL Page 2 of 5

 Item REVIEW QUESTIONS to help identify potential Damage Mechanisms

[The purpose of these Questions is to ensure capture of all the Damage Causing/ Contributing/ Susceptibility parameters including Past Changes]
ITEM ID#
Any history of process excursions / upsets / fluid contamination (e.g. due to carryover, other accidental ingress
Provide details of process excursions with duration / exposure to any new DCCs
of unwanted fluids or Moisture, etc)?
or existing DCCs composition exceeding the normal operating range and change
18 These can have an adverse influence on applicable DMs, Damage Susceptibility and/or Damage Rates, Process / Ops.
in other damage causing parameters (temperature, flow rates, pH, etc). Also give
particularly if the frequencies of excursions have increased, for example, over the last 10 years or so, compared details of mitigating action taken to avoid such excursions in future.
to previous history.

Any out of service periods (or intermittent service) in item history or periods in other locations / duties?
a) Out of service (or intermi ent service) can have reduced or increased damage rates depending on what
If the item is out of service (or intermittent service) provide period and how it is
19 chemicals/moisture is present during those periods. Process / Ops.
preserved from atmospheric air/moisture ingress during out of service period.
b) Addi onally, for insulated vessels CUI DM is a possibility.
c) Other du es for assessment of DMs and Damage rates during the period on other du es.

Any changes made to the original Safe Operating Limits (for loads or process fluids) since first commissioning?
20 None Process / Ops.
These are changes made to the original design-based parameters set by the Process Licensor.

Any Damage Causing Chemicals (DCCs) which may initiate cracking, etc?
The DCCs specified should match with the operation data provided (Template 3 &
21 This information should have been made available in Template 3 & 4 (operations data and DCCs marked PFDs), Process / Ops.
4) and DCCs marked on the sample PFD.
but it is intended as a cross check to ensure supplied data has not inadvertently missed such DCCs.

Any significant uncertainty in the accuracy/applicability of operation/ inspection data over the period List any significant uncertainty in date such as Composition / Concentration of
22 Process / Ops.
considered? DCCs, temperature, flow rates, any particular NDT Inspection Effectiveness, etc

DATA TEMPLATE - 8 (Rev. 02 - 20/08/20220) PP SIMTECH - CONFIDENTIAL Page 3 of 5

 Item REVIEW QUESTIONS to help identify potential Damage Mechanisms

[The purpose of these Questions is to ensure capture of all the Damage Causing/ Contributing/ Susceptibility parameters including Past Changes]
ITEM ID#

Consideration of other useful information to assess condition / damage mechanisms and rates.
Any online monitoring in place for the item? (For e.g. process fluids DCC composition / DCC concentration /
Process fluids temperature and pressure are monitored online and DCC
23 corrosion coupons etc.) Process / Ops.
composition is sampled once in six months
The damage rates can be more precise and have influence on study confidence.
Any other identical items at site or elsewhere? (From which condition or applicable damage mechanisms or
rates can be assessed)
If no major inspection has not been done and/or scope of inspection was poor, the condition of the equipment
can be assessed based on identical upstream/downstream equipment findings. Specify the items with identical construction, same Material of Construction
24 Process / Ops.
Also, instead of inspecting all the identical equipment (e.g. Fin-Fan Coolers), few equipments can be sampled in (MoC) and Operating conditions.
each TA.
Identical Equipment: Equipment with same construction, same Material of Construction (MoC) and Operating
conditions.
Any other information (not covered above) which can affect the assessment and condition or damage
25 None Process / Ops.
mechanism rates?

Consideration of design integrity to assess effect on failure mode event and residual life.
Any excursion of pressures / temperature etc. beyond design limits in the past (during start-up / shutdown /
26 None Process / Ops.
normal operation, process upset) including duration of such upsets?
Any obvious risk of parent / weld materials having susceptibility to brittle fracture, if low temp. / embrittlement
27 conditions apply? None Inspection
This question mainly applies to equipment constructed in C/steel or Low Alloy Steel material.
Consideration of Construction Integrity to assess effect on failure mode event and residual life.
Any known significant inadequacy in initial construction NDT if damage mechanisms involving cracking are
28 None
present?

29 Are there known manufacturing defects or concessions granted that could be relevant to DM's identified? None

Any deficiency in quality of repairs or modifications carried out (either during construction or in-service) against
30 None Inspection
original construction quality?

31 Are there any obvious reasons to implement PMI? None

32 Any changes to materials or welding techniques used, since construction? None

DATA TEMPLATE - 8 (Rev. 02 - 20/08/20220) PP SIMTECH - CONFIDENTIAL Page 4 of 5

 Item REVIEW QUESTIONS to help identify potential Damage Mechanisms

[The purpose of these Questions is to ensure capture of all the Damage Causing/ Contributing/ Susceptibility parameters including Past Changes]
ITEM ID#

Equipment Review Additional Comments

a)Any addi onal explana ons to the above ques ons can be noted here.
b)Provide informa on on opera ng with catalyst channelling, demister damage, channelling, coking, fluid carryover, tray collapse or chocking resul ng in non-uniform mixing.
c)Equipment replacements full or par al or temporary repairs, including date and reasons.

DATA TEMPLATE - 8 (Rev. 02 - 20/08/20220) PP SIMTECH - CONFIDENTIAL Page 5 of 5