2010-0678 RevB JIP Pre-Comm FLOODING-CLEANING-GAUGING

DET NORSKE VERITAS
Energy Report
JIP Pre-Commissioning of Pipelines
Water Filling (Flooding), Cleaning,

and Gauging
Report No. / DNV Reg No.: 2010-0678 / 1289M3S-212

Rev B, 2010-09-24
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
JIP Pre-Commissioning of Pipelines –
Water Filling, (Flooding), Cleaning, and Gauging MANAGING RISK
JIP Pre-Commissioning of Pipelines – Water Filling

(Flooding), Cleaning, and Gauging DET NORSKE VERITAS AS
For: Veritasveien 1
1322 Høvik, Norway
JIP Participants Tel: +47 67 57 99 00
Fax: +47 67 57 99 11
http://www.dnv.com
Org. No: NO 945 748 931 MVA
Account Ref.:
Date of First Issue: 2010-04-29 Project No. EP001510

Report No.: 2010-0678 Organisation Unit: PPS
Revision No.: B Subject Group: JIP
Summary:
This report provides details of the current methodologies used for Filling (Flooding), Cleaning, and Gauging
during the pre-commissioning phase of operations on pipeline installation.
The pre-commissioning of pipelines (Joint Industry Project) joins interested operators, contractors, engineering
companies, authorities and other groups and individuals in order to evaluate and agree on practical guidelines
for planning, design and execution of all normal pre-commissioning activities for offshore pipelines.
This current report covers work performed for CTR’s 5.0, 6.0 & 7.0 - Water Filling (Flooding), Cleaning, and
Gauging
Prepared by: Anthony N Lowe Signature

Project Manager, Halliburton
Verified by: Richard SJ Porecki Signature
Engineering Coordinator, Halliburton
Approved by: Signature
No distribution without permission from the client or responsible

 organisational unit (however, free distribution for internal use within Indexing Terms
DNV after 3 years)
No distribution without permission from the client or responsible Key Water Filling, Cleaning, Gauging
organisational unit Words
Service
Strictly confidential Area Pre-commissioning
Market Pipelines
Unrestricted distribution Segment
Rev. No. / Date: Reason for Issue: Prepared by: Approved by: Verified by
B / 2010-09-24 Reissued with comments ANL / Halliburton RSJP / Halliburton
A / 2010-04-29 Draft issued for PF / Halliburton RSJP / Halliburton
comments
© 2008 Det Norske Veritas AS
All rights reserved. This publication or parts thereof may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any
means, including photocopying or recording, without the prior written consent of Det Norske Veritas AS.
DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

Revision No.: B Page 2 of 54
Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
Table of Contents
1.0 GENERAL ..........................................................................................................................5
1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................5
1.2 Objective .....................................................................................................................6
1.3 Definitions...................................................................................................................6
1.4 Symbols.......................................................................................................................6
1.5 Units ............................................................................................................................6
1.6 Abbreviations ..............................................................................................................7
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................8

2.1 Detailed work description ...........................................................................................8
2.2 Schedule ....................................................................................................................10
3.0 STATE OF THE ART REVIEW ....................................................................................11

3.1 CTR 5.0 – Water Filling ...........................................................................................13
3.1.1 Identify the need for pipeline water filling prior to any pigging ........................13
3.1.2 Establish the requirements for pipeline water filling (e.g. filling direction,
filling flow rate, etc.) ..........................................................................................14
3.1.3 How to fill the pipeline with water (to avoid air and damage to pigs etc.) ........18
3.1.4 Requirements to filtering and suspended matters in test water ..........................20
3.1.5 Air content of test water (define maximum allowable air content) ....................22
3.1.6 Requirements vs. use of chemicals (when to use and requirements if used).
The CTR should address various requirements to use of chemicals (not
considered to be an in-depth study) ....................................................................22
3.1.7 Use of separation pigs (types, numbers, requirements, seal material, multiple
ID-systems, etc.) .................................................................................................26
3.1.8 Requirements for preservation of specific fluids in pipelines ............................28
3.1.9 Identify any requirements for water filling of subsea flowline using skids .......28
3.1.10 Identify any alternative method to water filling aimed to control the pig
back-pressure ......................................................................................................29
3.2 CTR 6.0 – Cleaning ..................................................................................................30
3.2.1 Discuss and define acceptable cleaning methods (address as a minimum:
mechanical pig cleaning, gel cleaning, air cleaning)..........................................30
3.2.2 Define minimum requirements for cleaning train composition .........................33
3.2.3 Discuss and define methods for measurement of cleanliness, i.e. what is
“clean” with respect to different pipelines for different use? Include also
definition of debris .............................................................................................34
3.2.4 Define standard acceptance criteria for cleaning ...............................................37

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
3.2.5
Discuss and define types of pigs to be used for pre-commissioning cleaning
(coated/uncoated lines, CS/CRA, new- and re-commissioned lines) and
recommended min/max pig speed ......................................................................39
3.2.6 Environmental considerations ............................................................................41
3.3 CTR 7.0 – Gauging ...................................................................................................42
3.3.1 Discuss and define acceptable gauging methods (gauge plate, instrumented
gauge plates, calliper and other geometrical pigs, etc.)......................................42
3.3.2 Gauge plate requirements (diameter, sensitivity, multiple ID systems etc.) ......43
3.3.3 Acceptance criteria (edge defects, plate bending, ovalisation, etc.) for
different gauging methods ..................................................................................46
3.3.4 Requirements for gauging of pipelines with variable ID, bends, etc. ................46
3.3.5 Discuss and define recommended min/max pig/calliper speed..........................46
3.3.6 Discuss and define when to perform gauging ....................................................47
4.0 EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .........................................................48

4.1 General Recommendations .......................................................................................48
4.1.1 Water Filling.......................................................................................................48
4.1.2 Cleaning (Pigging) .............................................................................................49
4.1.3 Gauging ..............................................................................................................51
5.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................53

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
1.0 GENERAL
1.1 Introduction
Pre-commissioning is an important and essential part of any pipeline project, normally consisting of
the following activities:
• Water filling
• Cleaning
• Gauging
• System pressure testing
• Dewatering
• Drying
• Inerting
Almost all pipeline codes have some requirements to pigging and pressure testing, however no
codes, standards or recommended practice are currently covering pre-commissioning operations
specifically as a whole, e.g. taking into consideration overall design, system arrangements,
management and planning, functional requirements and execution principles for pre-commissioning
operations of a pipeline project.
As the pre-commissioning normally is on a critical line, any delays will be very costly and there is
therefore a need to establish a best practice for pre-commissioning in order to highlight the
importance of this in design and also to avoid timely discussions during the pre-commissioning.
The pre-commissioning of pipelines JIP (Joint Industry Project) joins interested Operators,
contractors, engineering companies, servicing/pre-commissioning companies, authorities and other
groups or individuals in order to evaluate and agree on a practical Guideline for planning, design and
execution of all normal pre-commissioning activities for offshore pipelines.
The JIP has been split up into the following work tasks:
CTR 1.0 Project Management & QA

CTR 2.0 Meetings, workshops and assistance from external experts
CTR 3.0 Preparation of documentation
CTR 4.0 General requirements for pre-commissioning of pipelines
CTR 5.0 Water filling
CTR 6.0 Cleaning
CTR 7.0 Gauging
CTR 8.0 System Pressure Test
CTR 9.1 Dewatering
CTR 9.2 Drying and Purging
CTR 10 .0 Requirements to test equipment and instruments

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
CTR 11.0 Contingency

This report covers the work performed for CTR’s 5.0, 6.0 & 7.0 and constitutes the work in kind
contribution from Halliburton.
1.2 Objective
The objective of this report is to review current best practices for pipeline water filling, cleaning and
gauging operations during pre-commissioning operations, identify requirements and propose
recommendations for performing such operations.
1.3 Definitions
Pre-commissioning is the series of steps taken to prepare a pipeline for the introduction of a product
and usually consist of all or a number of the following activities:
• Water filling In order to aid with cleaning, gauging and hydrotesting operations
• Cleaning Removal of debris resulting from installation
operations
• Gauging Confirmation of a minimum pipeline bore
• Pressure Testing Verification of the pipelines allowable operating
pressure
• Dewatering Bulk removal of water following cleaning and hydrostatic pressure
testing operations
• Inerting Replacement of water with fluids to aid commissioning
(MEG / Diesel/ Nitrogen)
• Drying Removal of residual water to achieve an agreed dewpoint
1.4 Symbols
None
1.5 Units
SI units have been applied

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
1.6 Abbreviations
bar Bar (incremental or differential value)

bar A Bar Absolute
bar G Bar Gauge
CS Carbon Steel
CTR Cost, Time, Resource
CRA Corrosion Resistant Alloy
DNV Det Norske Veritas AS
HPPS Halliburton Pipeline and Process Services
HSE Health, Safety & Environment
ID Inside Diameter
JIP Joint Industry Project
km Kilometre
l Litre
m Metre
m³ Cubic Metre
MEG Mono-Ethylene Glycol
MeOH Methanol
m/s Metres per second
NAS National Aerospace Standard
OD Outside Diameter
ppmv/v Parts Per Million by Volume
PLEM Pipeline End Manifold
PREn Pitting Resistance Equivalent Number
RAI Radioactive Isotope
SoW Scope of Work
WIK Work in Kind

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
2.0 SCOPE OF WORK

2.1 Detailed work description
The objective of the CTR’s is to establish requirements and guidelines for these operations with
respect to pipeline pre-commissioning activities. Therefore, the requirements for these operations
will to a large extent be overlapping and as such the requirements and recommendations for these
operations will be covered in one common report.
Each CTR covers the following activities:
CTR 5.0 – Water Filling (Flooding):
• Identify the need for pipeline water filling prior to any pigging
• Establish the requirements for pipeline water filling (e.g. filling direction, filling flow rate,
etc.)
• How to fill the pipeline with water (to avoid air and damage to pigs, etc.)
• Requirements to filtering suspended matters in fill water
• Air content of test water (define maximum allowable air content)
• Requirements vs. use of chemicals (when to use and requirements if used). The CTR should
address various requirements to use of chemicals (not considered to be an in-depth study)
• Use of separation pigs (types, numbers, requirements, seal material, multiple ID-systems,
etc.)
• Requirements for preservation of specific fluids in pipelines
• Identify any requirements for water filling of subsea flowline using skids
• Identify alternative methods to water filling aimed to control pig back-pressure.
CTR 6.0 – Cleaning:
• Discuss and define acceptable cleaning methods (address as a minimum: mechanical pig
cleaning, gel cleaning, air cleaning)
• Define minimum requirements for cleaning train composition
• Discuss and define methods for measurement of cleanliness, i.e. what is “clean” with respect
to different pipelines for different use? Include also definition of debris
• Define standard acceptance criteria for cleaning
• Discuss and define types of pigs to be used for pre-commissioning cleaning (coated/uncoated
lines, CS/CRA, new- and re-commissioned lines) and recommended min/max pig speed
• Environmental considerations
CTR 7.0 – Gauging:
• Discuss and define acceptable gauging methods (gauge plate, instrumented gauge plates,
calliper and other geometrical pigs, etc.)
• Gauge plate requirements (diameter, sensitivity, multiple ID systems etc.)
• Acceptance criteria (edge defects, plate bending, ovalities, etc.) for different gauging
methods
• Requirements for gauging of pipeline with variable ID, bends, etc.
• Discuss and define recommended min/max pig/calliper speed
• Discuss and define when to perform gauging

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
Limited to the WIK budget, Halliburton has endeavoured to document the methods and best
practices and identify requirements and recommendations for water filling (flooding), cleaning and
gauging. The report will be based upon in-house knowledge and partly upon the latest projects and
internal manuals.
Furthermore it is deemed important that all Parties offer their support and guidance by means of
providing any information, such as their ‘best practices, standards and specifications that they may
have pertaining to CTR’s 5.0, 6.0 and 7.0.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
2.2 Schedule
The following schedule was agreed during the project Kick-off meeting 15.09.2009 (Ref. MOM No.
DNV-1289M3S-39):
• 23-10-2009: WIK issue of detailed SoW/Work Procedure
• 05-11-2009: 1st Steering Committee meeting, at DNV Høvik
• 21-04-2010: CTR 5.0, 6.0 & 7.0 JIP workshop (cancelled due to travel disruptions)
• 01-05-2010: Draft WIK Technical Report for participants review
• 01-06-2010: Implementations of comments to Draft reports
• June 2010: 2nd Steering Committee meeting
• 01-10-2010: Draft Guideline for review of all participants
• 01-11-2010: Comments to Draft Guideline
• 01-12-2010: Final guideline
The planned progress for CTR’s 5.0, 6.0 & 7.0 is given in Figure 2.2-1. It is assumed that the
milestones identified during Kick-Off are applicable. The main work is planned to be performed
during January – May 2010 in order to meet the deadline for the Draft technical report (for
participants review).

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
JIP Pre-Commissioning of Pipelines - Progress CTR 5.0, 6.0 & 7.0
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
Planned progress CTR 5.0, 6.0 & 7.0
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Figure 2.2-1; planned progress for CTR’s 5.0, 6.0 & 7.0
3.0 STATE OF THE ART REVIEW
Overview
Most pipeline projects are unique with different pipeline characteristics and constraints. The concept
for pipeline pre-commissioning therefore needs to be carefully developed and optimised with respect
to both schedule and cost. As a consequence of this, pipeline water filling, cleaning and gauging are
therefore normally combined to some degree in an attempt to shorten the overall duration of the pre-
commissioning operations and subsequently prepare the pipeline for tie-in and hydrotesting.
The following aspects require to be evaluated as part of the concept development:
• Pipeline length
• Pipeline diameter(s)
• Pipeline profile (possibilities for pig run-away, accumulated heads etc.)
• Method and location of tie-ins (connectors, hyperbaric welding or above water)
• Pipeline material
• Pipeline design with respect to pigging
• Review pipeline as built data

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
• Pipeline internal surface (coatings, rough/uncoated surface)
• Water quality
• Water availability
• Need for use of freshwater
• Direction of water filling i.e. deep to shallow or shallow to deep
• Is free flooding with or without use of pigs an option to be used
• Overall duration of pipeline exposure to water
• Environmental considerations, e.g. possible discharge location(s) and disposal
• Contractual interfaces
• Schedule interfaces
• Operational interfaces
• HSE interface
• Equipment capacity and capabilities
• Need for use of support vessels
• Area(s) available for temporary spreads
• Location of possible ‘golden’ weld tie-ins (more relevant for hydrotest and later operations)
In order to define an optimum concept for pipeline water filling (flooding), cleaning and gauging the
project requirements and characteristics need to be evaluated. The effect of the pre-commissioning
operations on the overall project schedule and cost might be more important than the cost of the pre-
commissioning operations. It is therefore necessary to carefully review alternative concepts, e.g.
how operations can be combined, spread capacities, pigging directions etc.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
3.1 CTR 5.0 – Water Filling

3.1.1 Identify the need for pipeline water filling prior to any pigging
It is common practice for newly installed pipelines to be laid dry and as such these pipelines will be
presented for pre-commissioning operations with air retained within the pipeline system at
atmospheric pressure.
It is common practice to inject a slug of water ahead of the first pig. This provides lubrication for the
pig discs and provides a cleaning flush ahead of the leading pig. The water volume injected ahead of
this first pig is dependent upon:
• Pipeline diameter
• Pipeline length
• Pipeline topography
• Pipeline internal surface condition (coated/uncoated)
• Expected debris
In some cases there may be a requirement to pump water in front of the filling pig train to reduce
high acceleration pig velocities. Water pumped in front of the pig train can have a ‘dampening’
effect on pig train velocity.
To establish a volume for water pumped in front of the filling pig train the British Gas BGC/PS/PC1
formulae V = 0.7DL may be used, where V is volume in litres, D is internal diameter in metres and L
is the length of pipeline in metres. However, the volume calculated is only adequate for pipelines ≤
6", but for larger diameters the calculated volumes are not sufficient.
Equivalent volumes based on the following minimum distances should be considered as proposed
guidelines for pipelines > 6":
• Pipelines ≤ 2km – 50m
• Pipelines ≥ 150km – 400m
A sliding scale between separation distances can be used to fit the exact length of the pipeline with
the spacing required for that length of pipeline adjusted between two separation bands.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
3.1.2 Establish the requirements for pipeline water filling (e.g. filling direction, filling flow rate, etc.)
Water assists in the performance of one of the main requisites of pre-commissioning, namely
hydrostatic pressure testing. Water is utilised for the testing operations primarily due to its
incompressibility and inert properties when compared with other products.
However, in order to save on both costs and schedule, it is standard practice to combine water filling
with cleaning and gauging operations.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
The use of water for pre-commissioning operations allows the following to be carried out:
• Minimise the air within the pipeline
• Assist in the removal of debris
• Assist in leak detection (with the aid of dye)
In general, filtered chemically treated seawater is commonly used as the flooding medium since the
usual fill volumes required and location of the pipelines prohibit the use of fresh/potable water,
except in land pipelines where local water courses can be used. However, where more exotic
pipeline materials/alloys are used within the pipeline system, the use of fresh or potable water may
be a requirement.
Where practicable, the pipeline should be filled from the deep to shallow. Where this is not possible
and shallow to deep flooding is required (especially subsea pipeline), there may be a requirement to
‘back-pressure’ the pipeline with compressed air prior to filling operations commencing. This is to
ensure that pig “run away” and air entrapment within the pipeline is minimised.
In order to ensure that any water entering the pipeline is not detrimental to its integrity, the water
must be compatible with the chemical composition of the pipeline and filtered to ensure no
additional debris is deposited and, where applicable, the water chemically treated. It is common
practise that all water entering a pipeline is filtered to ≤ 50 micron.
It is standard practice to perform water filling (flooding), when combined with cleaning and gauging
operation, at a velocity of between 0.5m/s and 1.0m/s. Therefore the flooding spread should be sized
to be within this range.
Filling speeds of 0.2m/s are sometimes necessary when filling larger diameter pipelines (> 36") and a
compromise is necessary between achievable water filling speed and availability of the water source
and location / space for equipment.
The practice of free flooding pipelines with untreated seawater, whilst occasionally performed, is
becoming more prevalent. Free flooding with untreated seawater may be deemed necessary prior to
the main water filling operation for the following reasons:
• Due to the water depth of the subsea pipeline, operational restrictions are so severe that
filling the pipeline whilst in a ‘dry’ state are unfeasible
• There may be a requirement to ‘trench’ the pipeline subsea prior to gauging operations
commencing. This is usually in the case of smaller diameter pipelines (≤ 6")
• The maximum period that the pipeline can retain untreated seawater is long enough for the
untreated seawater to be replaced with chemically treated or potable water
During free flooding, the water supply is usually taken a few metres from the seabed and through a
coarse strainer. This generates a high risk of the ingress of an unknown quantity of solids such as
sand and organic materials into the pipeline. The risk of crevice and under-deposit corrosion
therefore increases, particularly if removal of this initial fill of untreated seawater should be delayed.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
Where free flooding must be undertaken, the use of a suitably fitted strainer is required. This strainer
can be connected to the pig launcher with a stab connection and removed later to facilitate further
operations. The design of the strainer should consider the following:
• The distance between the seabed and strainer should be maximised
• The connection of the strainer to the pig launcher should be as simple as possible especially
when the strainer has to be deployed and secured to the pig launcher and then removed for
other operations
• Calculate the number and size of the inlet holes required for the strainer. This will control the
velocity of water entering the pipeline and the size of the debris entering the pipeline
Also, in some cases, a pig is launched during free flooding operations to ensure the interface between
the fill water and the empty pipeline is maintained. This is usually carried out when the topography
of the pipeline is ‘undulating’.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
3.1.3 How to fill the pipeline with water (to avoid air and damage to pigs etc.)
Where practicable, the use of a pig as an interface between the fill water and empty pipeline is the
preferred method for filling a pipeline. This interface, when propelled in a steady and controlled
manner will remove the residual air and assist with removal of any construction debris present.
Generally the function of the flooding spread is designed to take water from an initial supply then
filter, chemically treat (if required) and fill the pipeline with treated water in a steady and controlled
manner whilst measuring volumes injected and pressure at regular intervals. This activity will propel
the specifically designed pig train through the pipeline whilst the air within the pipeline is vented off.
To ensure successful water filling of a pipeline the following measures should be considered:
• The pig launchers and receivers are required to be designed to accommodate the requisite
number of pigs and accommodate the flowrates required in order to launch/receive each pig
• Pig design
• Suitably sized filling equipment
• Suitably sized filling hoses that can deliver the required flowrate. In the case of subsea
pipelines, the differential pressure between the internal pressure in the subsea pipeline and
the pressure within the filling hose must be carefully controlled during water filling
operations, particularly in relation to the collapsible pressure rating of the filling hose. A
suitable control valve and armoured hose may be used to mitigate hose collapse
• A continuous supply from the water source
• Maintain a steady flowrate behind the pig train
• Ensure that the pig train does not ‘run’ away when going downhill
• As previously discussed in section 3.1.2, free flooding may be required to be carried out
prior to the main filling operation
In small diameter (< 6") pipelines, it is advisable that filling be carried out without the use of pigs
although solid cast pigs have been used in small diameter pipeline. A minimum of three pipeline
volumes should be pumped at a flowrate which ensures full turbulent flow. A minimum velocity of
3m/s is commonly used but is dependent upon:
• Pipeline length
• Pipeline internal roughness
• Pipelines design/operating pressure

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
For larger diameter pipelines (≥ 6") flooding, cleaning and gauging pig trains should be used. These
can range from a very basic two pig, through to sophisticated train of four or more when combined
with cleaning and gauging operations.
Adequate distance between pigs is important. If this distance between pigs is too short, the rear pig
may catch up and collide with the preceding pig resulting either in pig damage that may affect the
filling operation and ultimately the hydrotest or possible blockage in the pipeline.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
No specific rules exist for calculating the distance between pigs during filling operations. However
in order to calculate this separation distance the following parameters need to be considered:
• Pipeline length
• Pig bypass as advised by the pig manufacturer
Based on past industry separation spaces for water, the following minimum distances between pigs
should be considered as proposed guidelines:
A sliding scale between separation distances can be used to fit the exact length of the pipeline with
the spacing required for that length of pipeline adjusted between two separation bands.
Water treatment chemicals are generally not added to the separation water.
When using gas it is proposed that the pig separation distances should be twice the above at
calculated maximum pigging pressure.
3.1.4 Requirements to filtering and suspended matters in test water
During flooding operations, water entering the pipeline system should be filtered in order to ensure
that no debris enters the pipeline as a result of pre-commissioning operations. The industry
standards recommend filtration that removes suspended particles > 50 micron and should have an
average content of suspended matters not exceeding 20g/m³.
Whilst individual clients may specify alternate filtration values, custom and practice is that 50
micron tends to be the norm with the exception of water injection pipelines where filtration as low as
2 micron is sometimes required.
The type of filtration required depends largely upon the water source conditions and the volumes
required. For relatively small volumes from a clean source (e.g. < 2m3/min), basket filters may be
suitable. Where the water supply is less clean, self cleaning filters may be required in order to meet

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
the required cleanliness whilst maintaining the required pumping rates of larger diameter pipelines
(e.g. ≥ 2m3/min).

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
3.1.5 Air content of test water (define maximum allowable air content)
It is important to remove as much air as possible in order that the potential compressed air energy
stored within the pipeline during hydrotesting operations is minimised (greater energy release
possible from a failure in an air filled as opposed to a fully water filled line). Pigs provide the
optimum means of removing air within the pipeline.
The flooding operations play a critical role with regard to forthcoming hydrostatic testing operations.
It is therefore crucial that the pipeline is correctly filled and any remaining air minimised.
The recommended air content for pressure testing operations on a piggable pipeline is ≤ 0.2% whilst
the larger allowance of ≤ 0.5% is generally accepted for an un-piggable pipeline.
It is also commonly accepted that it is possible for a hydrotest to be conducted with air content over
these limits providing that the test duration is extended accordingly and additional safety constraints
are imposed.
A piggable pipeline with an air content above 0.2% is rare. Whilst allowances can be made,
consideration should be given to re-pigging/filling the particular pipeline when the air content
approaches 0.5%.
An un-piggable pipeline with an air content above 0.5% is not as rare. If this occurs, venting off
operations at low pressures can be carried out in order to vent off trapped air to achieve the 0.5%
maximum allowable air content.
Flexible pipelines when filled with pigs have a specified air content of ≤ 0.5% for smooth bore
pipelines and ≤ 1.0% for rough bore pipelines.
3.1.6 Requirements vs. use of chemicals (when to use and requirements if used). The CTR should
address various requirements to use of chemicals (not considered to be an in-depth study)
The reasons for chemically treating pipeline fill water are as follows:
• To ensure that the fill water is noncorrosive
• To prevent the formation and build up of solid bacterial debris, iron oxides and iron
sulphides on the internal pipeline surfaces
• To assist in leak detection (with the use of dyes)
The main reasons for corrosion and damage to the pipeline material are as follows:
• Bacteria present in the fill water: Bacteria can directly cause corrosion, can produce by-
products that can cause corrosion or create an environment suitable for the growth of
bacteria
• Oxygen dissolved in the fill water: This can induce oxidisation of the iron in the steel,
producing a range of corrosive ferrous and ferric oxides

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
• Electrolytic corrosion: The dissolve salts and minerals in the fill water can make the water a
good electrolyte that causes corrosion
In most cases the filling water used is taken directly from the sea and therefore contains high
volumes of chloride and solids. Chemicals are added to neutralise the effect of chlorides and the
bacteria that is within the saltwater.
The use of potable/freshwater would be a preferred method as it is low in chlorides and solids
content and would not require the use of chemicals normally. However the large water volumes
required, economics and fill locations usually dictates that pipelines are to be filled with seawater.
It is generally accepted that if the filling water is to be promptly removed following hydrotesting
operations, the risks associated with corrosion are negligible. In cases where the filling water is only
resident for a short period of time, consideration should be given not to use treatment chemicals.
However, the length of this ‘short’ period is open to conjecture and is dependent on pipe material
and varies through-out the industry.
To prevent using chemicals regardless, samples of water should be taken of the water that is to be
used for filling operations. This may determine if chemicals are to be used or may indicate minimum
chemical concentrations required.
Chemicals are generally not used in the separation slugs during filling, cleaning and gauging
operations.
During seawater filling operations it is common practice to chemically inhibit the water entering a
pipeline system since the length of period that seawater is within the pipeline is indeterminate. In
some cases the pipeline may be required to be ‘mothballed’ prior to its operation, therefore chemical
treatment of the seawater will be a requirement.
The use of chemicals in pre-commissioning operations depends on the following:
• Government requirements
• Company/Operator requirements
• Pipeline location i.e. North Sea, Mediterranean, etc.
• Leak detection
• Filling water temperature
• Filling water quality
• Pipeline material
• Pipewall surface (coated/uncoated)
• Chemical retention period required

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
• Disposal of chemically treated water
Corrosion also becomes a more significant issue in situations where the water remains static. Static
conditions allows debris and bacteria present in the water to settle. This may permit bacteriological
influenced corrosion and/or under deposit corrosion to occur.
Recommendations of chemical dosage will be given by the chemical manufacturers based on some
of the items mentioned above. Injection of several chemicals simultaneously and location of each
chemical injected must be considered as one chemical may neutralise another.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
Chemical cocktails purpose mixed for pre-commissioning (and hydrotesting) operations are utilised
whenever possible as this reduces the number of chemical injection pumps required. All or some of
the following chemical types are typically used:
• Oxygen scavenger to deoxygenate the water

• Biocide to prevent bacteria formation
• Dye to assist in leak detection
It is usual for the Operator to specify chemical type and dosage as this is required to be specified for
local specific consents with relation to use and discharge. If the chemicals have not been specified
this can lead to delay. Operators are encouraged to decide and standardise upon the required
chemical treatment regime well ahead of pre-commissioning operations in order that the required
permits and consents may be attained. If the type and concentration of chemicals are not specified,
chemical suppliers should suggest the type and concentration of chemicals to use.
Due to the environmental impact of chemical discharge, consideration should always be given to the
use of more environmentally friendly chemicals.
Additionally, the use of non chemical treatments is becoming increasingly popular. Use of an ultra
violet light sterilisation process is now available. This reduces biocide rates by 90% in fluids during
the flooding (and hydrostatic testing) stages of a project. This method does not kill bacteria but
sterilises them so they cannot reproduce. The sterilisation process being used either discretely or in
conjunction with reduced concentrations of traditional chemical treatments.
Stainless steels and other more exotic alloys may be further susceptible to corrosion and other
induced scenarios such as hydrogen embrittlement. As such particular care must be taken where
these alloys are present. Specific requirements for differing metallurgies also need to be considered
in certain grades that are classified as CRA (Corrosion Resistant Alloys). The specific requirements
will often be decided by the Operator, but general recommendations for the three material types
mentioned below are as follows:
• 13Cr High martensitic strength: “13Cr Grade” Alloys. These alloys are the most
susceptible to pitting and hydrogen cracking corrosion mechanisms. This material has a
PREn in the region of 15. In many cases Operators attempt to minimise corrosion potential
by ensuring seawater is not used in these materials
• 316L Austenitic Stainless steel: This material has a PREn of 29 and is used extensively.
Particular attention is paid to the material if it is used in clad pipe. 316L can show pitting in
stagnant seawater and freshwater. When the pipe is used as cladding or lining material for
production life corrosion resistance, the Operator will often specify freshwater with
extremely low chloride concentration to minimise corrosion potential. When 316L is used
as an anti-collapse, but not pressure retaining liner in flexible pipe it is unusual for any
particular filling media to be specified (use of treated seawater is normal)

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
• Alloy 825 Super Austenitic: (e.g. Incoloy®) has a PREn of 33 and is not renowned for any
particular corrosion potential. However the material can have severe issues due to
sensitisation if proper weld procedures are not followed
Flexible pipelines are filled with potable water, unless otherwise specified, filtered to 100 micron
and with a chloride content of ≤ 50ppm. Chemical treatment may be required to protect the internal
carcass of the pipeline and dye added for leak detection purposes.
3.1.7 Use of separation pigs (types, numbers, requirements, seal material, multiple ID-systems, etc.)
It is generally not recommended to use separation pigs in pipelines which have a diameter of less
than 6" in diameter. It is advisable that these smaller bore pipelines should be filled without the aid
of pigs. See section 3.1.3. However, if a pig is to be used a solid cast type should be considered.
All separation pigs used in filling, cleaning and gauging operations should be bidirectional, since the
filling pig train is the first time a pig has been propelled through the pipeline and there may be a
requirement to push the pigs back to their original positions if a pig becomes stuck for any reason.
The use of separation pigs during filling operations is to provide the following:
• To create an interface between the filling water and air within the pipeline. This will assist in
pressure testing operations
• To ensure that any air bypassing the initial filling pig is ‘captured’ in the slugs of water
between the following pigs in the pig train
• To remove debris from the pipeline and to keep loose debris in suspension so that it can be
discharged on pig receipt
Bidirectional separation pigs are typically made up from a metal body with flexible sealing discs and
generally, all pre-commissioning operations are carried out using bidirectional separation pigs. This
is because they are capable of moving in both directions in a pipeline.
Unidirectional separation pigs are typically made up from a metal body with flexible driving cups
and are often used for product separation, batching, displacement, swabbing and pipeline clearance
duties in routine pipeline maintenance. These types of pigs are designed to travel in one direction
only.
The sealing discs of both types of pig are typically made from types of polyurethane of a varying
‘Shore A’ hardness, depending on the requirements of durability, support and flexibility
requirements of a particular pig.
Foam pigs can be used as separation pigs, but are not recommended in the filling, cleaning and
gauging pre-commissioning stages as they are less effective compared to ‘metal bodied’ pigs.
The type and number of separation pigs to be used is dependent upon the following parameters:
• Pipeline length

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
• Location of tees and wye connections on the pipeline

• Types of valves
• Bend radii
• Different internal diameters on the pipeline
• Special features

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
For optimum separation pig design and choice, pig trials should be carried out on a custom built pipe
test loop that represents the unique pipeline system characteristics and any special features e.g. ID
changes, valves, tees, etc. In this way the pig sealing length, number of sealing discs, sizes,
disc/guide configuration and material can be optimised for a particular pipeline.
3.1.8 Requirements for preservation of specific fluids in pipelines
Many materials may be used as part of a cleaning train, apart from water. The materials that require
to be investigated specifically are those which will remain resident within the pipeline for an
extended period. These are likely to be, but not limited to the following:
• Diesel: Use of a diesel specific biocide and if required a corrosion inhibitor dispersible in
diesel may be considered. Chemicals such as dye and oxygen scavenger may be omitted
(due to dye already being present in fuel oil and industrial diesel, and very low oxygen
solubility)
• Gels: Aqueous gel mixes can be treated in the same manner as water. Due to bacterial feed
stock being present the addition of high concentrations of biocide is advised
• MEG: MEG and MEG water mixes (usually with freshwater); the MEG will inhibit growth
of bacteria and has low corrosion potential. If used for extended periods consideration
should be given to MEG/biocide mix
• MeOH: Methanol and Methanol water mixes are treated as MEG (above)
3.1.9 Identify any requirements for water filling of subsea flowline using skids
These types of unit operate by utilising the differential pressure between the hydrostatic head and the
pipeline internal residual pressure to fill / pig the line.
The development of a subsea pigging unit was driven by the need to fill pipelines with chemically
treated seawater laid in ever deeper water. Because of the water depth the use of suitable downline
hoses to provide the correct flowrates was restrictive.
The early subsea pigging units filled a considerable proportion of the pipeline, depending upon the
hydrostatic head, but could not completely fill the pipeline due to equalisation of the hydrostatic
head. Smaller high pressure downlines then completed the filling operation.
Further developments of these units now include pumps that can fully complete the filling operation.
As the head pressure begins to equalise across the pig train the pig speed will slow down and will
eventually come to a standstill. A power source, usually an ROV, is attached to the pump on the unit
to maintain the correct pig speed prior to this eventuality. Because of these further developments,
these units are now used in shallow waters.
A subsea pigging unit provides the following benefits:
• Vessel flexibility: The subsea pigging unit operates independently of a support vessel. This
enables the vessel to continue with other operations therefore maximising vessel utilisation

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
• Minimal deck space: The compact size of the unit maximises the deck space for other
operations
• Minimal personnel: Offshore personnel required for filling operations is minimised, making
room for personnel required for other operations
• Safety: The pipeline can be filled at the required flowrates without the need to deploy
downlines which was a hazardous operation to personnel and the vessel
3.1.10 Identify any alternative method to water filling aimed to control the pig back-pressure
In pipelines with extreme topography, excessive pig speeds resulting from the steep inclination of
various sections can occur. In general gradients greater than 1:20 in conjunction with elevation
changes in the order of tens of metres are likely to result in excessive pig speeds.
In order to control pig speeds without pumping water in front of the pig train or free flooding the
following methods should be considered:
• Air packing the pipeline to an appropriate pressure prior to pigging

• Fill against a closed discharge to allow pressure to build up in front of the lead pig
• Use a pig train consisting of multiple pigs interspersed with liquid and gas batches to create
artificial accumulated head within the pig train
• Use of high friction or active braking system pigs

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
3.2 CTR 6.0 – Cleaning

3.2.1 Discuss and define acceptable cleaning methods (address as a minimum: mechanical pig
cleaning, gel cleaning, air cleaning)
Prior to pipeline installation the cleaning procedure should start in the fabrication yard. Internal rust
and mill scale should be removed using brush pigs to the recommended Swedish visual standard St.3
(Ref. 2, Section 1.3.2) prior to shipment. This operation ‘mirrors’ the same operation that will be
carried out after pipeline installation and therefore it can give an indication of expected debris
volumes.
This ‘pre-cleaning’ costs less, achieves better cleanliness and can be measured. Also another form of
‘pre-cleaning’ should be carried out during construction activities. A brush pig should be pulled
through each pipe before welding takes place to ensure all loose debris is removed.
Cleaning is usually conducted in order to ensure that any dirt, rust or mill scale displaced from the
pipewall is removed together with any foreign objects which may have inadvertently been deposited
into the pipeline during construction activities.
It should be noted that coated pipelines must be treated with caution as should pipelines of exotic
alloys. Metal bodied pigs or pigs of a dissimilar material to that of the pipeline may not be suitable.
Brush pigs may require nylon brushes as opposed to steel.
As commonly accepted throughout the industry all water used in filling, cleaning and gauging
operations should be filtered to ≤ 50 micron prior to entering the pipeline.
In small diameter (< 6") pipelines cleaning, where pigs are not used, should be carried out by high
velocity water flushing. There is no industry accepted velocity however a minimum velocity of 3m/s
is commonly used. This velocity is generally regarded as sufficient to suspend small particles.
However high flushing velocity is dependent upon:
• Pipeline length
• Pipelines design/operating pressure
On larger diameter (≥ 6") pipelines the most common cleaning technique used during pre-
commissioning operations is that of a bidirectional brush pig.
In most cases these pigs also have magnets attached to pick up material that the brush pig cannot i.e.
welding rods, pig brush bristles, etc. The brush pig usually has a twofold purpose, firstly to act as an
interface with the filling medium (water filling) and secondly as a cleaning mechanism.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
The more brush pigs that are passed through a pipeline the better the cleaning of the pipeline. When
brush pigs are run in water they have the advantage that debris is held in suspension and the water
helps as a lubricant thus reducing pig wear. However the brushes can become ‘clogged’ with debris
that may affect their cleaning qualities. The advantage of running brush pigs in air is that the brushes
do not become ‘clogged’ however the debris is not held in suspension and there is more excessive
wear on the pig discs.
In general metal brushes and pigs should not be used with CRA’s to avoid tramp iron inclusions that
will lead to unsightly staining or initiate pitting corrosion. Brushes and pigs should be made from a
suitably compatible chrome nickel alloy or from non metallic materials. In many cases aggressive
mechanical brush cleaning of CRA’s is not advised as this will disrupt the “passive” layer on the
material. As this material is particularly susceptible to contamination by carbon steel the use of
magnetic pigs for removal of ferrous materials is advised.
As a general rule, articulated cleaning pigs are not used unless special components on the pipeline
dictate the use of this type of pig.
Metallic brushes should not be used in flexible pipelines without an inline metal carcass. If metal
brushes are to be used they must be compatible with the metallic carcass. If the flexible pipeline does
not have an inline carcass, they should be cleaned using foam pigs.
Articulated pigs should only be used in flexible pipelines where the natural weight of the pipeline or
the installed imposed bend radius is sufficiently long enough to accommodate the length of the
articulated pig.
High velocity air flushing is generally carried out on short, small diameter pipelines and is not very
effective. Oil free compressed air is run through the pipeline and debris blown out at one end into a
‘knock out’ drum. There is a safety issue with this type of cleaning due to the high energy gas
expansion of the air used.
Gel cleaning is used where a significant amount of debris is present and there is a high risk that the
brush pig may block the pipeline due to a high build up of debris. This method of cleaning combines
the cleaning action of the brush pig and the debris pick-up capabilities of gel.
Gel enhances the efficiency of the brush pigs as they:
• Seal the brush pig
• Prevent build up of debris in front of the pig by keeping the debris in suspension
• Further lubricates the pig which reduces wear
• Enhances the cleaning ability of the brush pig
A ‘pick-up’ gel is used to keep debris in suspension and away from the brush pigs. A ‘sealing gel’ at
either end of the gel pig train protects the ‘pick-up’ gel from the propelling medium which may be
fluid, product, air or nitrogen.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
Chemical cleaning of pipelines is where chemicals are used to remove rust and construction debris
from within the pipeline. Slugs of acid and alkali solutions are separated by pigs that are then
propelled by freshwater through the pipeline. This method is not generally used in subsea pipelines
due to the nature of the chemicals that will be discharged. However, it is used in water injection
pipelines. Several pig runs may be required before an acceptable cleanliness criterion is reached.
3.2.2 Define minimum requirements for cleaning train composition
To define a minimum requirement for a cleaning train composition there requires an understanding
why a particular pipeline has to be cleaned. The minimum requirement for a clean pipeline is based
on the following criteria:
• To ensure the product in the pipeline is not contaminated
• To allow the effective use of product corrosion inhibitors during operations. If the internal
pipe surface is corroded these product inhibitors cannot come into contact with the surface
they are intended to protect
• The product flow efficiency is improved by keeping the pipeline clean. This applies to
longer pipelines where the effect is more noticeable
• To reduce operating costs
Also a clean pipeline will also reduce the amount of time spent on any further pre-commissioning
operations i.e. drying.
All pigs used in the cleaning pig train should be bidirectional. The minimum requirements of a
cleaning pig train composition should be based upon:
• Pipeline length
• Propelling medium
• Pig speed
• Estimate of debris to be removed
• Level of cleanliness required
• Pipe storage duration and climate i.e. saline environment
Typically a three pig train may be used for a combined flooding, cleaning and gauging operation.
This pig train will consist of one swab pig, one magnetic/brush cleaning pig followed by one
gauge/magnetic pig.
For longer pipelines it is common practice to have a four pig train. Typically this pig train will
consist of one swab pig, two brush/magnetic pigs and finally one gauge/magnetic pig.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
In both cases above, brushes could also be attached to the swab pig (1st pig in the train) by the
introduction of water ahead of the pig train and depending on the topography of the pipeline i.e.
filling from deep to shallow.
It is not common to use foam pigs with bristles as part of the main cleaning operation as they are not
as effective as brush pigs. However, they can act as a final burnishing tool.
If the filling, cleaning and gauging pig train includes gel then the number of pigs in the train can rise
to six or more depending on the number of gel slugs required. A pickup gel will hold the debris in
suspension and prevent debris accumulation. The gel enhances the overall “seal” of the pig train and
reduces fluid bypass in addition to debris suspension. Typically this train will consist of swabbing,
brush, brush/magnetic and gauging pigs.
If a pipeline is expected to have extremely heavy debris, bypass ports are sometimes included in the
cleaning pigs to create increased turbulence in front of the pigs and suspend the debris where
possible. This practice prevents debris from building up in front of the pigs and possibly blocking
the pipeline or the pig riding over the debris.
Bypass ports should however be used with extreme caution if multiple pigs are used in the cleaning
train as these will have to be sized appropriately throughout the train to ensure pig separation is
maintained. Starting small at the front and increasing in size to the rear of the train in general
(allowances will also have to be made for individual pig differential pressure).
In internally coated pipelines, brushes should not be used. These should be replaced with magnets.
It is also good practice to install tracking units (electronic or RAI) in the first and last pigs of a
cleaning pig train. These tracking units are required to locate the pig train in the event that they
become stuck within the pipeline during the flooding, cleaning and gauging operation. Once located,
further investigations can be carried out to ascertain the reasons for the pig train becoming stuck.
The use of tracking units also confirms the launch and arrival of the pig train which can save time on
other activities.
3.2.3 Discuss and define methods for measurement of cleanliness, i.e. what is “clean” with respect to
different pipelines for different use? Include also definition of debris
There are two methods of determining a measurement of cleanliness, these are:
• Pipe internal surface condition
• Analysis of water discharged from the pipeline after cleaning pig receipt
There are several methods of measuring cleanliness, these are:
• Accurate measurements of flow parameters such as pressure and fluid velocity for water
being flushed through a pipeline can be used to determine the cleanliness level of a pipeline.
The friction factor for a particular pipeline can be calculated and will give a good indication

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
of the ‘roughness’ of the internal pipewall. This method is only indicative if a sufficient
flowrate can be achieved, especially on long pipelines
• A sample of water is taken as water is discharged. Particle counters such as the Coulter
Counter can be used to monitor the particulate matter in the discharged pipeline water.
However, it cannot differentiate between the different types of debris discharged
• By using a centrifuge, debris from a discharged water sample of known volume can be
ascertained in order to calculate the amount of debris in the pipeline. This method however
cannot differentiate between the particle size and debris composition
• Carry out a concerted cleaning plan in which the inlet and outlet water can be analysed and
compared for debris as water is continually pumped through the pipeline
• A pipeline section can be inspected and compared to a sample of pipe that was cleaned to a
specified level
Upon pipeline commissioning, each type of pipeline has an operating cleanliness level which define
the size of ‘debris’ that can be sustained during operation of the pipeline and in this respect if the
pipeline is cleaned during pre-commissioning to below these levels it is deemed to be ‘clean’.
The following is typical for a particular pipeline to be deemed ‘clean’ after commissioning, but still
retain certain levels of ‘debris’:
• Infield multiphase 50 – 250 micron Nominal
• Infield Gas 50 – 250 micron Nominal
• Infield Oil 50 – 250 micron Nominal
• Water Injection 2 – 5 micron Absolute
• PWRI 2 – 5 micron Absolute
• Tool Flow Lines HOLD
• MEG Service lines ≤ 1mm or in some cases NAS 8
• Methanol Service lines ≤ 1mm or in some cases NAS 8
• Export Quality Oil 50 – 250 micron Nominal
• Export Quality Gas 50 – 250 micron Nominal
A definition of debris in the context of pipeline pre-commissioning cleaning operations is of

materials consisting of the following:
• Rust
• Mill scale

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
• Metals i.e. weld spatter
• Construction objects
• Sand
• Rubble
• Litter

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
3.2.4 Define standard acceptance criteria for cleaning

Degrees of cleanliness are difficult to define and one standard cannot be applicable to all pipelines
without the criteria becoming over stringent, uneconomical and in some cases virtually unachievable,
especially in long pipelines.
In the context of pre-commissioning cleaning, the standard acceptance criteria is to reduce the
‘debris’ in a pipeline to a level that will not affect pipeline performance, receiving facilities and its
components during operation. This level of cleanliness is normally dictated by the pipeline Operator.
Certain considerations have to be made to achieve an acceptable cleanliness standard, these are:
• The contamination sensitivity of the pipeline components
• The receiving facilities
• The required pipeline system reliability and life expectancy
One standard for clean pipe that is generally accepted is that the internal pipewall must be free from
rust, mill scale and any other deposits. The absence of rust in the discharge water is a good indication
of the pipe condition as rust forms directly on the surface. If all rust is removed, all other materials
on the metal may be considered removed. Although it must be accepted that tightly bound mill scale
could be present for many years unless the surface is grit blasted and coated.
A standard across the board acceptable cleaning level for all types of pipelines is not practicable
since the level of cleanliness varies with the product that is going to be pumped down the pipeline
i.e. the level of cleanliness for a gas pipeline is different from an oil pipeline.
However, each pipeline is required to be cleaned to a certain level before commissioning.
A way to standardise an acceptance criteria for cleaning would be to categorise the pipelines by
product or pipe material. Under each product or pipe material banner, the following could be
specified:
• Type of fill water to be used
• Type of pigs to be used
• Minimum number of pig runs of each pig type
• Minimum pig speed
• Types of treatment chemicals (if any) and dosage rates
The above may also be used as a template to band pipelines in A, B, C, etc, categories in order to
establish a standard acceptance criteria for all pipelines.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
3.2.5 Discuss and define types of pigs to be used for pre-commissioning cleaning (coated/uncoated
lines, CS/CRA, new- and re-commissioned lines) and recommended min/max pig speed
Bidirectional Swab/Batching pig
The bidirectional swab/batching pig is used as the first pig in the filling, cleaning and gauging pre-
commissioning pig train. Its function is to carry out an initial sweeping cleaning run by breaking
down debris and removing air from the pipeline in readiness for the hydrotest.
This pig is also used as the last pig in the pig train completing a final sweep of the cleaning pig train.
In some cases this last pig will be fitted with a gauge plate.
This pig is steel bodied and normally has a minimum of four sealing discs and two wearing discs.
Usually the sealing discs are slightly oversized by 2-4% of the maximum internal diameter of the
pipeline, but this will be specified by the pig manufacturer. It is common practice to fit a tracking
device to this pig as it is usually the first pig to transit the pipeline.
It is also common practise to pump water in front of this pig to act as a lubricant for the pig discs. It
will then be propelled with water as part of the filling, cleaning and gauging pre-commissioning pig
train. This pig should be run at a velocity of between 0.5 – 1.0m/s.
This pig can be used in many types of pipeline material both in uncoated and coated, new and re-
commissioned CS/CRA pipelines although the configuration of the discs will change.
Bidirectional Brush pig
The bidirectional brush pig follows the swab/batching pig and usually is run with water in front and
behind. Its function is to remove rust and mill scale from the internal surface of the pipeline.
This pig is steel bodied and normally has a minimum of two sealing discs and two wearing discs.
pipeline, but this will be specified by the pig manufacturer. The brushes can be fitted in disc form or
attached to the body as spring mounted brushes, depending on the expected debris within the
pipeline. In some cases, magnets can also be fitted to the brush pig, but this is usually when it is the
second brush pig in the train.
The brush design must be robust so that bristles are not lost in the pipeline and bristles must be
compatible with the pipeline material. Pig speed should be maintained between 0.5 – 1.0m/s.
Brush pigs should only be used in uncoated CS pipelines. They should never pass through permanent
valve systems as either the debris they generate or broken bristles can impinge on the successful use
of valves and may cause blockages to smaller pipe branches. Usually brush pigs are used before a
pipeline is connected to permanent facilities and therefore may not be suitable for re-commissioned
pipelines unless the permanent facilities are isolated.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
Bidirectional Magnetic pig
The bidirectional magnetic pig follows the brush pigs and usually is run with water in front and
behind. Its function is to remove rust and mill scale from the internal surface of the pipeline.
This pig is steel bodied and normally has a minimum of two sealing discs and two wearing discs.
pipeline, but this will be specified by the pig manufacturer. The magnets are attached to the body by
metal clamps.
The magnets should be strong enough to pick up all types of metallic debris including welding rods
and brush bristles. Pig speed should be maintained between 0.5 – 1.0m/s.
Magnetic pigs can be used in uncoated and coated CS pipelines. They can also pass through
permanent valve systems and are therefore suitable for re-commissioned pipelines.
Gel slug /pig
It is unusual for a gel slug/pig to be used as part of the filling, cleaning, gauging pre-commissioning
phase for new pipelines. However, they are used in cleaning operations when re-commissioning
existing pipelines. Their main attributes are that they lubricate pig seals and carry debris in
suspension and are able to negotiate different internal diameters.
There are several gel types and gel additives can give the gel characteristics to suit the product
previously used in a pipeline to enhance the cleaning process.
A gel pig train can be propelled in different mediums at a pig speed between 0.5 – 1.0m/s.
The gel pig can be used in many types of pipeline material both in uncoated and coated, new and re-
commissioned CS/CRA pipelines although the ‘mix’ of gel will be appropriate for that particular
pipeline.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
3.2.6 Environmental considerations

The environmental issues that need to be addressed during operations are as follows:
• Noise: From machinery utilised during the pre-commissioning operation or gas venting from
the pipeline
• Operational duration: Extended operations may cause disruption to the local environment
• Disposal of debris: Metallic debris discharged may be toxic and will be required to be
treated before disposal
• Disposal of chemically treated fill water: Chemicals may have to be added to the discharged
water to neutralise chemicals injected into the fill water. In most cases chemically treated
seawater is discharged subsea and the discharge depth and location require to be considered
with regard to vessel water makers
• Discharged water: The rate of discharge may cause erosion and should be regulated to allow
for greater dispersion and dilution. In some cases the discharged water may be required to be
re-oxygenated. Acids/Alkaline solutions may have to be added to the discharged water to
raise/lower the pH value of the discharged water
• Seasonal and tidal factors: These factors should be investigated before discharging
operations
• Location of equipment: Oil/Diesel/Chemical spillages from equipment

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
3.3 CTR 7.0 – Gauging

3.3.1 Discuss and define acceptable gauging methods (gauge plate, instrumented gauge plates,
calliper and other geometrical pigs, etc.)
The use of gauge pigs is to confirm the internal diameter of a pipeline at various stages of
construction. In the manufacturing industry gauging is used to indicate tolerance, through a process
called “Limit Gauging” the principle is that a set of ‘Go-No Go gauges’ are manufactured to a
predetermined size both smaller and bigger than the actual size required. These items are then
offered up to the manufactured components and will prove the item to be within tolerance, however
the limitation of the measurement system is that if the item is out with tolerance the system of
measurement cannot identify the position of the out of tolerance defect. In order to do this a direct
measurement method would be required.
The above system of gauging is analogous to gauge pigging a pipeline; the gauges are sized
depending upon the desired result from the gauging run. Some systems of sizing require the gauge
plate to pass without contacting any part of the pipewall; these systems would take all pipeline
tolerances into consideration. Other systems of sizing would expect contact with the pipewall and the
gauge to be worn away when contact is made with the pipewall, these systems would be sized on a
percentage of nominal internal bore.
Gauging is usually performed by a bidirectional pig to permit it to be reversed out if it becomes

stuck. When the gauge pig hits an object, the aluminium plate deforms and leaves an imprint of the
contact. If after analysis of the gauge plate the pipeline is found to be out of tolerance then an
electronic gauging pig or intelligent pig (direct measurement) can be run and will give an output
showing the size, orientation and position of any defects.
On short lines, a spike on the pressure chart during filling may help to estimate the position of the
damage zone when correlated to the volume of fluid pumped. To a lesser extent the shape of the
imprint on the gauge plate may offer ‘clues’ to its origin.
The gauge plate should be sized as specified in the working specification:
Mechanical Rigid Gauge Plates
Pipeline gauging is successful if the gauge plate is still within the required tolerance, proving the
minimum bore, after traversing the line.
Mechanical Rigid Gauge Plates, in conjunction with signalling device
These are sized on the “Go” principle, if any damage is incurred an alert signal will be activated that
can usually be detected externally to the pipe. This is to allow condition to be verified prior to
removal of the gauging pig.
Synthetic Gauge Plates

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
These gauge plates are able to deflect and recover in a manner similar to a calliper type but maintain
bi-directional function of the pig. The deflection location is also recorded.
Calliper/Geometry Pig
These can be mechanical lever callipers, or high standoff ultrasonic measuring devices. Depending
upon design they will give minimum and maximum ID based on points on the clock face around the
pipe. The more advanced electronic devices, in conjunction with an odometer will give a bore map
of the entire pipe. Measurement is usually direct at 20 to 30 degree intervals within the pipe. With
electronic devices the sampling rate can lead to discontinuity in the data so short defects can
sometimes be missed.
3.3.2 Gauge plate requirements (diameter, sensitivity, multiple ID systems etc.)

Gauge plates are used to prove the internal integrity of a pipeline system and to confirm passage of a
certain diameter through the pipeline for future pigging operations.
Usually the gauge plate is fitted at the back of the last bidirectional pig of the pig train to prevent
damage to the gauge plate by debris and to prevent damage from the pig discs during operations. In
some cases gauge plates are fitted to the last two pigs depending on the number of pigs in the pig
train.
Normally the plates are manufactured from metal but it is advisable to use aluminium rather than
steel. Generally a pipeline is gauged by using a circular aluminium plate that is machined from 3mm
to 10mm thick plate with the leading edge of the outer diameter having been chamfered at 45° to half
the thickness of the plate.
In some cases the circular gauge plate can be slotted at each 30° or 45° segments to allow the gauge
plate to ‘break-loose’ if the pig becomes stuck because the gauge plate has encountered a blockage.
This type of plate is normally used in pipelines < 18".
In some opinions the use of a non slotted gauge plate is preferable as a better interpretation of the
damage to the plate can be better assessed.
Some specifications stipulate that the gauge plate should be sized to a diameter of 95% of the
minimum internal diameter of the pipeline system with no other considerations. In other
specifications, the gauge plate size stipulates 97% of the minimum internal diameter when taking
into account the manufacturing tolerances of the pipeline system, which include:
• Pipeline internal multi diameters
• Pipeline component tolerances i.e. inline tees, wyes, bends, valves, pipe spools, risers
• Weld penetration
• Wall thickness tolerance
• Pipe diameter tolerance

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
• Out of roundness tolerance
The gauge plate size is governed by the specifications of the pipeline Operator or by the adoption of
the Operator to guidelines issued by an independent third party.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
The requirement for gauging a flexible pipeline is the same as the above with tolerance allowances
as indicated in section 10.3.4 API 17B and section 5.3.2 API 17K. In unbonded flexible pipe the
gauge plate is 95% of the nominal internal diameter or 10mm smaller than the internal diameter for
pipes with an internal diameter less than 200mm. The acceptance criteria of the gauge plate are the
same as for rigid pipelines. See section 9.2 API 17J
Gauge plates give only basic information. If the gauge plate is damaged during operations it gives no
indication of the following:
• Location damage occurred
• Number of damaged areas
• Type of obstruction that caused the damage i.e. pipe dent, debris, bends and valves
A damaged gauge plate is indicative of a reduction in pipeline bore either by debris, damage to the
pipeline or closed valve.
To conduct an investigation the following considerations are required:
• Occurrence of high pressure spikes on the pressure chart
• A calculation of pig position at high pressure spikes
• Likely areas of concern on pipeline i.e. component location, changes in pipe diameter
• Levels of debris discharged
• Past history of pipeline installation
After investigations into the causes of a damaged gauge plate it is common practise to run a second
gauge pig. If similar damage occurs then the next option should be to run a calliper pig.
Gauge plates are not that effective on multi-diameter pipelines as they are a fixed size based on the
smallest pipe internal diameter and therefore the larger diameter cannot be checked.
The use of semi-intelligent gauge pigs are becoming increasingly popular as these enable a damaged
/ non-damaged plate to be detected via an acoustic signalling device prior to removal of the gauge
pig from the pipeline.
However, these pigs have to be set to a specific gauge size as specified by the Operator’s
specification, but on recovery the data received can be reviewed for different pipe internal diameters.
This technique is only used in small changes in pipe internal diameters.
There are no gauge plate requirements for pipelines < 6" as it’s not recommended that gauge pigs are
used on these smaller pipelines. However, there may be a requirement to prove the integrity of these
pipelines. By high pressure flushing, an obstruction can be detected by comparing calculated
pressure drop to actual pressure drop.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
3.3.3 Acceptance criteria (edge defects, plate bending, ovalisation, etc.) for different gauging
methods
Current acceptance criteria is specified and accepted by the pipeline Operator. This initially equates
to requiring a gauge plate to pass through the system without sustaining any damage. If the gauge
plate is undamaged then the pipeline is within the requisite specification.
A gauge plate is generally acceptable if no deflection of the plate is observed even though the gauge
plate shows minor abrasions and ‘nicks’ on the plate edges.
In some cases, especially in re-commissioning pipelines when not all information is available of the
internal integrity, the gauge plate size may be reduced to below the specified size. This reduced
diameter gauge plate and the specified gauge plate can then be run together on the same pig to
establish a ‘passage’ minimum internal diameter for future maintenance operations.
3.3.4 Requirements for gauging of pipelines with variable ID, bends, etc.
Whereas the most common form of pipeline gauging is by use of a gauge plate, this is constrained by
the fact that once sized, variations in pipe bore cannot be accommodated.
It is possible that the diameter for which the plate has been derived is not the diameter of the
majority of the pipeline and may in fact be just that of the pipeline end spools, bends or a valve in the
system. Where possible, gauging operations should be conducted prior to tie-in of such items,
however, in reality this is not always practicable as it is often that a PLEM now forms part of the
pipeline installation. Pipe work and valves in the PLEM can be of smaller bore than the pipeline and
as such would determine gauge plate size as opposed to the pipeline.
In the above case the gauge plate proves the integrity of the pipeline at a given internal diameter and
also that ‘passage’ of a gauge plate is assured for future calliper pig surveys as required.
Where variable diameters are known, the use of a calliper type pig should be carried out, however
these pigs are not suitable in the context of filling, cleaning and gauging pre-commissioning
operations as they are not bidirectional.
The gauge pig itself will be designed to travel through a particular bend without damaging the pipe
gauge plate i.e. 5D, 3D, 1.5D. For the confirmation of bend internal diameters a ‘bend’ gauge plate
can be fitted to the same pig that measures the pipe internal diameter. The ‘bend’ gauge plate is fitted
to the middle of the gauge pig and gauges the inside radii of the bend. This particular gauge plate is
not normally used in pre-commissioning operations however the pipeline Operators may require
confirmation of a bend radius to carry out maintenance pigging operations.
3.3.5 Discuss and define recommended min/max pig/calliper speed
Calliper pigs can be run in several types of medium e.g. fluid, product, air, nitrogen. To achieve good
results, pig velocity needs to be controlled as uncontrolled accelerations can cause damage to the pig
and erroneous results. When running with compressed air it is advisable to ‘back pressure’ the
pipeline before launching the calliper pig. The discharge pressure is then used to control the pig.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
In order to minimise against by-pass and ensure a smooth transition through the pipeline a pig speed
of between 0.5 m/s and 1.5 m/s is recommended. Slower speeds can be achieved but battery life of
the unit should be a consideration.
It should be noted however, that in the case of electronic calliper pigs, the pig speed may require to
be specified as a function of the sampling rate in order to ensure complete coverage.
3.3.6 Discuss and define when to perform gauging
Gauging of each pipe should be carried out by the pipe-lay contractor as part of the quality control
process before the pipe is accepted from the pipe manufacturer.
Gauging of the pipeline starts at the construction stage of operations, especially in the laying of
subsea pipelines. An internal gauge is pulled through each pipe as it is welded onto the new pipeline
and before the pipe is deployed subsea. Also prior to this, each pipe should be visually checked for
ovalities. If ovality is suspected then that particular pipe should be gauged manually.
Pre-commissioning gauging operations should only be undertaken upon completion of pipeline

installation and of all operations likely to induce impact on the pipeline e.g. backfilling, pipeline
lifting and lowering.
In re-commissioned pipelines, gauging should only be carried out after a ‘passage’ has been cleared
in the pipeline by the use of other pigs.
In land pipelines its common practise to run a swab pig with compressed air through the whole
pipeline section before carrying out the gauging run. However, this is not feasible in subsea
pipelines.
After commissioning, pipeline gauging is also carried out during routine maintenance of pipelines to
ensure that the pipeline is clear. This is required to ensure that ‘passage’ is confirmed prior to using
intelligent calliper pigs that may be required to be run for internal pipeline inspections.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
4.0 EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 General Recommendations
As a result of flooding, cleaning and gauging operations commonly being conducted as one activity,
the following general recommendations are proposed for consideration in determining recommended
guidelines to a pipeline with known features and installation aids:
4.1.1 Water Filling
a) For pipelines ≤ 6" in diameter the volume pumped in front of the filling pig train should be
based upon V = 0.7DL where V is volume in litres, D is diameter in metres and L is the length
of pipeline in metres.
b) For pipeline > 6" in diameter the volume pumped in front of the filling pig train should be based
upon equivalent volumes based on the following minimum distances:
A sliding scale between separation distances can be used to fit the exact length of the pipeline
with the spacing required for that length of pipeline adjusted between two separation bands.
c) All water entering the pipeline system should be filtered to 50 micron as a minimum to remove
suspended particles.
d) Pipelines with a diameter ≥ 6" to ≤ 36" should be filled using pigs at a speed ranging 0.5 –
1.0m/s.
e) Pipelines with a diameter > 36" should be filled using pigs at a speed ranging 0.2 – 0.5m/s.
f) Pig tracking should be carried out of the first and last pigs of the pig train.
g) When free flooding is carried out adequate sized strainers should be used to control pig speed
and limit the ingress of debris.
h) It is not recommended to fill pipelines < 6" diameter with metal bodied pigs.
i) It is recommenced to fill pipelines of < 6" diameter using high velocity flushing at a minimum
speed of 3m/s for three pipeline volumes.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
j) The following minimum separation distances between pigs during filling operations should be
considered as proposed guidelines:
k) When running pigs with gas the separation distance should be twice as described in item j)
above at calculated maximum pigging pressure.
l) Fill water should be sampled to verify if chemicals are required or to deduce the appropriate
chemical treatment strength.
m) Chemicals should not generally be used in the separation slugs during filling, cleaning and
gauging operations
n) All CRA pipelines should be filled with potable water.
o) Consideration should be given to limiting the use of chemicals by other methods of water
treatment e.g. ultra violet process to sterilise pre-commissioning fluid.
p) Pig trials should be carried out on a custom built pipe test loop to optimise pig design suitability
and to give the Operator confidence to run the pigs in the pipeline.
4.1.2 Cleaning (Pigging)

a) A concerted plan/operation in pipe pre-cleaning should be carried out.
b) Bidirectional pigs are the preferred choice when addressing the anticipated level of construction
debris being present.
c) Metal bodied pigs should not be used in diameter pipelines less than < 6". The high speed
flushing fill is deemed sufficient for cleaning purposes.
d) Pipelines with a diameter ≥ 6" to ≤ 36" should be cleaned using pigs at a speed ranging 0.5 –
1.0m/s.
e) Pipelines with a diameter > 36" should be cleaned using pigs at a speed ranging 0.2 – 0.5m/s.
f) Pig composition (pig body and ancillary items) must be compatible with pipeline material /
components.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
g) Pig tracking should be carried out of the first and last pigs of the pig train.
h) When filling, 20% of the pipeline volume should be over pumped to ensure arrival of all pigs.
i) The following minimum separation distances between pigs during cleaning operations should be
j) When running pigs with gas the separation distance should be twice as described in item 4.1.2 i)
at calculated maximum pigging pressure.
k) Pig trials should be carried out on a custom built pipe test loop to optimise pig design suitability
l) Debris from the pipeline may block or contaminate small pipework/instrument branches.
Consideration should be given to blanking/removing these branches/items.
m) Design of the pig receiver and pig receiver discharge pipework should be considered to prevent
blockages.
n) Large pipeline branch off-takes from the main pipeline should be barred to allow passage of
pigs through the main pipeline.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
4.1.3 Gauging
a) Gauging of the pipeline should be a main consideration during the pipeline system design stage
to give a common bore.
b) 6" Pipelines and above should be gauged at 95% of nominal internal diameter. Smaller
pipelines should be confirmed clear by friction loss calculation. Note: if deemed necessary, the
plate may be sized at 97% of minimum internal diameter after taking into account the following:
• Pipeline internal multi diameters
• Pipeline component tolerances i.e. inline tees, wyes, bends, valves, pipe spools and risers
• Weld penetration
• Wall thickness tolerance
• Pipe diameter tolerance
• Out of roundness tolerance
c) The following minimum separation distances between pigs during gauging operations should be
d) When running pigs with gas the separation distance should be twice as described in item c)
above at calculated maximum pigging pressure.
e) Where multi-diameter pipelines are involved, initially the pipeline should be gauged to 95% of
the smallest internal diameter with a gauge plate to confirm ‘passage’ followed later by an
intelligent /calliper type pig.
f) Gauge plates should be of aluminium construction, between 3mm and 10mm thick. Chamfered
45° x half plate thickness on leading edge. Size to be stamped on face of plate and visible when
installed on pig.

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
g) Use two gauge plates of the same diameter on two separate pigs in the same pig train.
h) Consideration should be given to utilising two gauge plates of different sizes on the same pig
within the pig train when the integrity of the internal diameter of the pipeline is in doubt.
i) Gauge pig loading into the pig launcher or subsea laydown head should be front loaded
whenever possible.
j) Pig trials should be carried out on a custom built pipe test loop to optimise pig design suitability

Date : 2011-10-25
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Report for
5.0 REFERENCES
In compiling this document, the following documents have been reviewed:
DNV-OS-F101 - Offshore Standard – Submarine Pipeline Systems, 2007

BS8010 Part 2 - Code of Practice for Pipelines
NEN 3650 - Requirements for Pipeline Systems
Halliburton Manual -
No 70.35393 (June 1995) Pipeline Pre-Commissioning Manual
API Recommended Practice 17B,
3rd Ed, March 2002 - Recommended Practice for Flexible Pipe
API Specification 17J, -
nd
2 Ed, November 1999 Specification for Unbonded Flexible Pipe

Date : 2011-10-25
DNV Energy
DNV Energy is a leading professional service provider in safeguarding and improving business
performance, assisting energy companies along the entire value chain from concept selection through
exploration, production, transportation, refining and distribution. Our broad expertise covers Asset Risk &
Operations Management, Enterprise Risk Management; IT Risk Management; Offshore Classification;
Safety, Health and Environmental Risk Management; Technology Qualification; and Verification.
DNV Energy Regional Offices:

North America South America and West Africa
Det Norske Veritas (USA) Inc Det Norske Veritas Ltda
16340 Park Ten Place Rua Sete de Setembro
Suite 100 111/12 Floor
Houston, TX 77084 20050006 Rio de Janeiro
United States Brazil
Phone: +1 281 721 6600 Phone: +55 21 2517 7232
Asia and Middle East Europe and North Africa

Det Norske Veritas Sdn Bhd Det Norske Veritas Ltd
24th Floor, Menara Weld Palace House
Jalan Raja Chulan 3 Cathedral Street
50200 Kuala Lumpur London SE1 9DE
Phone: +603 2050 2888 United Kingdom
Phone: +44 20 7357 6080
Nordic and Eurasia Offshore Class and Inspection

Det Norske Veritas AS Det Norske Veritas AS
Veritasveien 1 Veritasveien 1
N-1322 Hovik N-1322 Hovik
Norway Norway
Phone: +47 67 57 99 00 Phone: +47 67 57 99 00
Cleaner Energy & Utilities

Det Norske Veritas AS
Veritasveien 1
N-1322 Hovik
Norway
Phone: +47 67 57 99 00
- o0o -

2010-0678 RevB JIP Pre-Comm FLOODING-CLEANING-GAUGING

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2010-0678 RevB JIP Pre-Comm FLOODING-CLEANING-GAUGING

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DET NORSKE VERITAS

Water Filling (Flooding), Cleaning,

Report No. / DNV Reg No.: 2010-0678 / 1289M3S-212

JIP Pre-Commissioning of Pipelines – Water Filling

Date of First Issue: 2010-04-29 Project No. EP001510

Prepared by: Anthony N Lowe Signature

No distribution without permission from the client or responsible

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

2.0 SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................8

3.0 STATE OF THE ART REVIEW ....................................................................................11

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

4.0 EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .........................................................48

5.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................53

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

CTR 1.0 Project Management & QA

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

CTR 11.0 Contingency

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

bar Bar (incremental or differential value)

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

2.0 SCOPE OF WORK

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

• 23-10-2009: WIK issue of detailed SoW/Work Procedure

• 05-11-2009: 1st Steering Committee meeting, at DNV Høvik

• 01-05-2010: Draft WIK Technical Report for participants review

• 01-06-2010: Implementations of comments to Draft reports

• June 2010: 2nd Steering Committee meeting

• 01-10-2010: Draft Guideline for review of all participants

• 01-11-2010: Comments to Draft Guideline

• 01-12-2010: Final guideline

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

JIP Pre-Commissioning of Pipelines - Progress CTR 5.0, 6.0 & 7.0

• Pipeline profile (possibilities for pig run-away, accumulated heads etc.)

• Method and location of tie-ins (connectors, hyperbaric welding or above water)

• Pipeline design with respect to pigging

• Review pipeline as built data

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

• Pipeline internal surface (coatings, rough/uncoated surface)

• Need for use of freshwater

• Direction of water filling i.e. deep to shallow or shallow to deep

• Is free flooding with or without use of pigs an option to be used

• Overall duration of pipeline exposure to water

• Environmental considerations, e.g. possible discharge location(s) and disposal

• Equipment capacity and capabilities

• Need for use of support vessels

• Area(s) available for temporary spreads

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

3.1 CTR 5.0 – Water Filling

• Pipeline internal surface condition (coated/uncoated)

• Pipelines ≤ 2km – 50m

• Pipelines ≤ 5km – 75m

• Pipelines ≤ 10km – 100m

• Pipelines ≤ 20km – 200m

• Pipelines ≤ 50km – 250m

• Pipelines ≥ 150km – 400m

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

• Minimise the air within the pipeline

• Assist in the removal of debris

• Assist in leak detection (with the aid of dye)

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212

DNV Reg. No.: 1289M3S-212