REAL-TIME CORROSION

MONITORING & MODELING FOR

INCREASING PLANT SAFETY,
RELIABILITY AND EFFICIENCY
Presentation by Dr. Russell D. Kane; iCorrosion LLC
Honeywell Process Solutions - Consultant
Acknowledgements
 Contributors from Honeywell involved in
preparation the paper and this presentation:
 S. Srinivasan and V. Lagad – Honeywell
Corrosion Solutions: Prediction and modeling
 D. Eden and J. Hernandez – Honeywell Corrosion
Solutions: Monitoring and process automation
applications
 Hiro Iwagaya – Honeywell Japan: Sales,
marketing and technical support
Organization
 Introduction
 Background
 Process Control
 Real-time Corrosion Information
 Corrosion Monitoring & Modeling
 Process Optimization and Corrosion Control
 Incorporation of Corrosion within Unit
Boundary Management and Risk Assessment
 Conclusions
 Introduction – Realities of Corrosion
• 90% of corrosion damage is caused in only 10%
of the time
• 70-90% of all failures due to “localized” or pitting
corrosion
• High annual cost of corrosion – 4% GDP and
failures in the refining – US$ 4 Billion annually.
• Usually requires extensive inspection to locate
and identify corrosion
Accident report: “Operating in alarm mode
• RBI programs use off-line, retrospective data, was sometimes necessary to meet the
gas order.”
and only manual periodic updating

There is an opportunity to better manage corrosion related risk,

combining real-time process & corrosion information and
advanced business solutions.
Turning Real-time Data into Actionable Knowledge
 Introduction – Critical Unit Goals

Safety Reliability Efficiency

Protect People, Assets Improve Availability Improve Productivity
and Process Reduce Downtime Reduce Cost

Predict and assess Improve control of Review best practices,

corrosion of plant process plant and ensure appropriate
assets; see effect of maximize asset life materials & chemical
process dynamics treatment usage
Risk Assessment, Inspection Plan &
Updating
Risk Assessment and Risk Based Inspection (RBI)
Manual Update:
Re-assessment and • Use of standardized risk modules (API 581)
evaluation of Risk • Approximate experience-based rules
• Need to improve model accuracy

Traditional
Preventative
Programs
R
Offline monitoring I
S
& inspection of K
equipment Risk Based Inspection
Program

Real-time Corrosion Management

INSPECTION COSTS
Risk Strategy Definition Extending The Benefits

• Manual updating of risk level,

inspection intervals usually over
period of years
• Need to automate & decrease
period for updating based on
process changes and operating
behaviors
 Background – Process Control
 Process Control
 Plant operations are controlled
based on real-time monitoring.
 This is enabled through a
distributed control system (DCS).
 DCSs are connected to sensors
and actuators that manage
process set-point conditions.
 When the measured data exceed
a set point, the controller instructs
actuation devices to open or close.
 This process keeps the data within
the desired range (e.g. unit
operating window or boundary).
 Also, Monitors every process
deviation and reports it.
 Unit Management Depends on IOW’s

Operating
Integrity
Window
Operating
Window
(IOW)

Included corrosion to verify assumed risk levels

 Examples of IOW Limits
 Standard Limits
 REAC NH4HS Concentration
 Corrosion of the air cooler and downstream piping
 Heater Tube Skin Temperature
 Metallurgical creep could lead to eventual tube rupture.
 Crude Fractionator Dew Point Temperature
 Sustained operation below dew point could cause corrosion damage to
fractionator internals or potential loss of containment.
 Critical Limits
 Boiler Feed Water Level
 Lost of boiler feed water level could quickly cause boiler tube
rupture
 Sulfuric Acid Strength in Alkylation
 Too low acid strength could cause rapid runaway reaction or excessive step
increase in corrosion rates – rapid failure
Real-Time Corrosion Information
 Real-time corrosion information is compatible with the
DCS.
 This information can be used in the same manner that
more conventional process variables are now utilized.
 Real-time corrosion information can take two forms:
 Data from corrosion monitoring probes and transmitters.
 Corrosion probes are interface with the process and provide instantaneous
corrosion rates.
 This type of corrosion data indicates the fluctuation of corrosion rate with
process variability.
 Data from corrosion prediction software.
 Software applications can utilize actual process data from the DCS to
assess these variables and predict changes in corrosion severity.
Goal of this Presentation
 Discuss the use of real-time corrosion monitoring and
corrosion modeling to provide rapid feedback on changing
plant feedstocks.
 Address how these technologies can be utilized within the
framework of the plant DCS to help achieve a more
comprehensive and accurate corrosion management
strategy.
 Three components of this new approach will be reviewed:
 Integrated real-time corrosion monitoring
 Corrosion prediction using advanced corrosion models
 Use this information as part of an automated corrosion risk
assessment and process control strategy for asset management.
 Examples are given that highlight the benefits of these
automated corrosion solutions.
Online vs. Offline Corrosion Data
 Corrosion – Not as a Process Variable
 Until recently, corrosion monitoring was performed exclusively based on
off-line inspection, corrosion coupons and probes not compatible with the
DCS and its control functions.
 Corrosion – As a Process Variable
 Imagine the new possiblities with corrosion handled as a process variable.

Old Corrosion Measurement New Corrosion Measurement

 Off-line
 Slow: Weeks - Months
 Manual
 Not connected or logged
 Viewed in isolation
 Labor intensive
 Single point
 Justified by technical
specialist
 Online
 Real-time: Seconds - Minutes
 Automated
 Connected to DCS
 Automatically viewed with
process variables
 Network of points
 Justified by value to business
operation
 Integration of Corrosion Monitoring
Coupons,
Visual and UT ER, LPR, SmartCET: Auto-
Inspection Periodic UT Enhanced ER Electrochemical

Long-term Medium-term Real-time,

(months) (hours, days, weeks) (seconds, minutes)
Offline & Quantitative Online & Qualitative Online & Quantitative
Cumulative See Long-Term Correlate corrosion
View Changes with process
Metal Loss

Corrosion Rate
Corrosion Rate


  
 


Date/Time Date/Time Date/Time
Process Focus:
Corrosion Suppliers, Chemical Corrosion Probe and • Control & Improve
Vendors, Inspection Services Transmitter Suppliers
Automated Electrochemical
Monitoring
• Multiple techniques applied in combination can identify:
• General Corrosion
• Localized (Pitting) Corrosion
• Measurements made in minutes….not days or weeks.

Super LPR technology

Electrochemical For Pitting Factor provides
Noise (ECN) assessment of localized
corrosion
Linear Polarization
Resistance (LPR)
SmartCET
Harmonic Distortion For accurate Corrosion Rate
Probe &
Transmitter
Analysis (HDA) and for general corrosion

Plant personnel immediately see the

affect of process & operational variables
Data can be used to update corrosion risk assessment
A Case for Monitoring
 An example of the capabilities of online, real-time
monitoring was shown in two nominally identical
chemical process units that were showing widely
different signs of corrosion damage.1
 Unit A showed corrosion rates in stainless steel piping of
<0.13 mm/y.
 Unit B had corrosion rates, as observed via inspection that were
in the range 1 to 2 mm /y.
 Unit B was identified as a candidate for an extensive and costly
alloy upgrade to mitigate the undesirable corrosion situation.
 Real-time corrosion monitoring was attempted as an alternative
action to understand and mitigate the situation.

1
J. Hernandez, R. Kane (Honeywell), K. Briegel, R. Clark (Rohm & Haas), “Utilizing the Chemical Plant
Control System for Real-time, Online Corrosion Monitoring & Process Optimization”, Eurocorr 2007 -
European Federation of Corrosion Conference, Paper No. 1419, Maastricht, The Netherlands, September
2007.
 Unit B Results – Mode 4
 In Mode 4, both probe locations
on Unit B showed an increase, Operating mode
Operating mode 44

but much higher in Stage 2 to ElectricalResistance

Electrical Resistanceprobe
probe

>2 mm/yr). Event 22

Event
Electrochemicalprobes
Electrochemical probes
 The data from the auto- 11 Stage
Stage
stst

electrochemical device was 22 Stage

Stage
nd
nd

quick responding (minutes) and

automatically scaled for ease
of operator view, rapid interpretation
and operator action.
 By comparison, the trend of an ER corrosion reading over
this same period showed an
increase. But, the data needed
to be processed manually to obtain an estimate of corrosion
rate.
Unit B - Cost Savings &
Increased Reliability
 Based on the DCS data, corrosion rates in Unit B were shown not to
be constant with time and could be related to conditions during
specific operational modes.
 Findings:
 When the process was left in mode 4 operation, high corrosion rates resulted.

 The operators developed and instituted a plan to use the corrosion

sensors to minimize the time spent under corrosive conditions.
 They changes the valves to mitigate leakage to reduce water contamination.
 Transmitters gave a direct indication of real-time corrosion events that allowed
operators to identify operating behaviors corresponding to high corrosion rates.

 With this success, the unit upgrade to higher alloy materials was not
required.
 RESULTS: An immediate savings to the chemical plant of US$
0.5 million.
Process Control with Corrosion
Modeling Applications - Pipelines
 Internal corrosion has been one of the significant causes
for natural gas pipeline failures.
 Pipelines also pose challenging corrosion assessment
problems: (a) varied conditions, and (b) buried
underground.
 Internal Corrosion Direct Assessment (ICDA) provides an
alternative corrosion prediction framework to help ensure
pipeline integrity.
 However, current ICDA methods only deal with determining
conditions that favor hold-up of liquid water in specific pipeline
segments.
 These segments are labeled as ‘critical’ for inspection, and
integrity analysis.
 Advanced ICDA Model
 Predict®-Pipe is a software system
capable of determining:
 The propensity for water hold-up,
and
 The corrosivity of the pipeline
environment in the presence of the
aqueous medium for identified
critical segments.
 It performs both conventional ICDA
and generates actual corrosion rate
predictions for any pipeline
segment.
 It integrates water phase behavior
determination, pH computation,
flow modeling and corrosion
prediction.
 Useful in pipeline design and
operational maintenance planning.

®
Registered trademark and product of Honeywell International, Inc.
Case 1: Study for Pipeline Modeling

 Operational and GPS data for a major US pipeline were analyzed

using Predict®-Pipe for two given pipeline conditions.
 Case 1 was configured for:
 An 300 mm dia. pipeline and a worst case CO2 concentration of 1.68
mole percent was modeled.
 The total pipeline was mapped to generate an Elevation vs. Distance
profile which was imported into the software as an MS-Excel file.
 0.227 Mm3/day of gas at 577 KPa 16 C was used to assess the effect of
any liquid carryover in the pipeline.
 This section of the pipeline ran a total of 87.2 km and the analysis of a
stretch of 2.7 km.

 For Case 1,the pipeline was shown to be free of any critical

water hold-up segments.
 Case 2: Study for Pipeline Modeling
 Case 2 was configured for a 5.03
km section of the pipeline further
downstream with 0.395 Mm3/day
of gas at 1072 KPa) and 16 C.
 The elevation data for this
section was imported.
 Three critical segments with
greater inclinations were
identified.
 From corrosion modeling, the
worst case corrosion rate was
0.47mm/y with the locations
identified.
 Isolate high risk areas for
monitoring and mitigation.
Evaluation of Hydroprocess
Unit Corrosion
 General experience and “rules of thumb” were used to limit
corrosion.
 A new software model – Predict®-SourWater, has been developed
based on extensive corrosion data and thermodynamic modeling.
 This new methodology has helped to pioneer new solutions to
improve safety, reliability and efficiency over the old methods.
 This software application has also been integrated into a Process
Modeling Tool - Unisim® Design.
 It provides refinery engineers the ability to incorporate corrosion as
a ‘process’ variable and, in doing so, minimize corrosion risk,
thruough:
 Design – materials selection
 Process Control – unit operating conditions

®
Registered trademark and product of Honeywell International, Inc.
Approach to Minimizing Corrosion Risk

 Step 1 - Corrosion Prediction & Characterization by Modeling and Services:

 Apply predictive modeling, expert knowledge and/or test data to assess corrosion vs.
operating conditions. Identify critical equipment.
 Review failure mode and repair history, damage rate, determine appropriate operational risk
level, and inspection period.
 Step 2 - Inspection Plan and Corrosion Control Strategy Development:
 Identify corrosion Key Performance Indicators (KPIs); Review business needs, operating
conditions.
 Assess control methods (inhibitors, biocides, amines, dispersants, scavengers, etc.;
 Review materials selection and existing corrosion protective measures.
 Step 3 - Corrosion Monitoring/Modeling with Feedback into Dynamic Boundary
Management, Process Optimization, Asset Management:
 Assess corrosion rate and damage mechanism “on-line”.
 Implement advanced applications for automated process control & asset integrity – including
identification of highest risk factors, event monitoring, deviation reporting, and KPIs
 Update monitoring and inspection programs based on current operating practices.
 Dynamic Boundary Management
Corrosion / Process Predictive Models &
Study Lab Simulation/Consulting

Risk Assessment

Inspection Work Plan

Plant Operations Inspection/Reliability

Real-time Corrosion Execute Inspections
Limits (IOW, Design Envelope)
Measurement

Evaluate Results
Continuous Process Monitoring Report Nonconformance

Automated Field
Deviation Reporting Inspection/Collection -
IntelaTrac Life Span

Step 1: Traditional Risk Step 2: Current Honeywell Step 3: Honeywell Asset

Legend
Based Inspection Program Corrosion Offering Management Offering
Report the Message to Management:
Convert “mm/y” to “Cost to Business Unit”
Automatic Updating for Risk
Assessment and Inspection Plan
Risk Assessment and Risk Based Inspection (RBI)
Manual Update:
Re-assessment and • Use of standardized risk modules (API 581)
evaluation of Risk • Approximate experience-based rules
• Need to improve model accuracy

Traditional
Preventative
Programs
R
Offline monitoring I
S
& inspection of K
equipment Risk Based Inspection
Program

Real-time Corrosion Management

INSPECTION COSTS
Risk Strategy Definition Extending The Benefits
Risk Strategy Definition
• Manual updating of risk level,
• Manual updating of risk level,
inspection intervals usually over
inspection intervals usually over
periodofofyears
period years
•• Need
Needto todecrease
automate & decrease
period for
period for
updating updating
based based on
on process
processand
changes changes andbehaviors
operating operating
behaviors
Conclusions
 Process corrosion is directly affected by changes in plant feedstock
 Changes in operational variables that cause dynamic corrosion events
and change (increase) assumed risk rankings.
 Conventional “off-line” corrosion assessment (e.g. coupons, off-line
probes and simple corrosion prediction methodologies) cannot address
or bring business solutions.
 These problems are often left unresolved and accepted as the “cost of
risk of doing business”.
 The methods presented illustrate new on-line, real-time methods of
corrosion measurement, predictive assessment and updating of
operational risk level.
 These methods are compatible with the automation and control systems
(i.e. DCSs) currently running refineries, pipelines and chemical plants.
 Conclusions - 2
 Implementing of dynamic corrosion assessment
provides risk assessment based on current operating
practices not last year’s practices.
 The value for plant operators is accurate risk assessment and
ability to reduce risk factors – increased safety, reliability and
efficiency.
 Case studies have shown substantial return on
investment for this approach.

Take Away Message: Increased Safety, Reliability and Efficiency