Importance Of Inspection, Maintenance And Testing Of Onshore - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Importance Of Inspection, Maintenance And Testing Of Onshore Blowout Preventer’s (BOP’s) John Hoefler, Lloyd’s Register John.Hoefler@lr.org

Agenda

Introduction Case Studies Maintenance Maturity Drive Conclusion

Independent 3rd Party Review & Support Training and Qualification of Personnel Integration into a Prevention Maintenance Program Following OEM Recommendations Conforming to Standards Maintenance Maturity Drive Awareness of Standards / Need for System No Maintenance System / Awareness

Increased Reliability Reduced Downtime Safety & Environmental Priority Elimination of Infant Failures Elimination of Well Control Incidents

Resulting In

Maintenance Maturity Drive Overview

Maintenance System/ Awareness Maintenance System/ Awareness

Safety Reputation Environment

With standards, we can reduce impacts to:

Benefits of Maintenance & Testing

Maintenance Performed Incorrectly

Case Study One

Problem Rams were replaced, but mismatched resulting in failure Solution Standards and controls for testing, training, and maintenance

This well control situation could have been avoided if:

Case Study One: Maintenance Performed Incorrectly

The BOP was pressure tested after maintenance

§250.737(d) (8) Pressure test affected BOP components following the disconnection or repair of any well- pressure containment seal in the wellhead or BOP stack assembly

Source: 30 CFR 250

The crew performing the maintenance was competent and well trained

2.4.3 Qualified Personnel as defined by Section 5 – Qualified Personnel must supervise or perform all repairs;

Source: CAODC RP6.0

Maintenance procedures and OEM rig manuals were followed

6.5.9.1.4 Manufacturer operating and maintenance documents, equipment owner PM programs, and

• perating experiences shall be incorporated into

the site-specific procedures.

Source: API Standard 53

Spare parts were stored properly as an assembly with part and serial numbers and followed by proper traceability protocol

6.5.10.3.1 Rig manuals, including equipment drawings, specifications, and bills of material, shall be at the rig site to identify the equipment and assist with procuring correct replacement parts.

Source: API Standard 53

This well control situation could have been avoided if: If there were I3P support

88 Verify that all drill pipe, work string, and tubing planned to be installed in the hole is within the specified design range of the pipe and variable bore rams installed in BOP stack.

Source: I3P Inspection Point

Problem Obstructions, cylinder and system failures, incorrect settings Solution Function testing, alternate actuating methods, I3P support

BOP activated but failure to close

Case Study Two

This well control situation could have been avoided if:

Case Study Two: BOP activated but failure to close

The BOP was function tested properly

§250.737(d) (9) Function test annular and pipe/variable bore ram BOPs every 7 days between pressure tests §250.737(d) (10) Function test shear ram(s) BOPs every 14 days

Source: 30 CFR 250

There were redundancies in place

• r alternate methods
• f actuating the BOP

119

Verify that the BOP control system has a minimum of two pump systems (primary and secondary). At least one power source must be independent from the power source for the primary accumulator- charging system. The independent power source must possess sufficient capability to close and hold closed all BOP components under MASP conditions as defined for the operation.

Source: I3P Inspection Checklist

The ram cavity and bore were inspected for obstructions

79 Check general condition of ram cavities. Visually inspect each cavity upper sealing area for or any

• scratches. Note: A poor surface finish at the top
• f the cavity reduces its effective life.

Source: I3P Inspection Checklist

The hydraulic actuator was fully pressure tested annually

6.5.3.4.3 Chamber pressure tests shall be performed and charted as follows:

a) at least once yearly, b) when equipment is repaired or remanufactured, c) in accordance with equipment owner's PM program. Source: Standard 53

Problem BOP rubbers failed to maintain pressure due to fluid incompatibility Solution Environmental Testing

(Temperature, Drilling / Completion Fluid Compatibility, Natural Fluid Compatibility)

Failure to Maintain Pressure

Case Study Three

This well control situation could have been avoided if: Temperature (low and high) were reviewed

7.6.6.11

The BOP elastomeric components that can be exposed to well fluids should be verified for compatibility with the drilling fluids to be used and for the anticipated temperatures to which it is exposed. Consideration should also be given to the temperature and fluid conditions during well testing and completion operations.

Source: Standard 53

Case Study Three: Failure to Maintain Pressure

Drilling and completion fluid compatibility review

WCV Full Well Compatibility Verification (WCV) including survey, fluid, pressure, temperature verification

Source: Full Compatibility Review From I3P

Natural fluid compatibility such as Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S), Carbon Dioxide (CO2), or High Hazardous Hydrocarbons (HHH)

4.10.2

Manufacturer/vendor shall provide material compatibility testing results to the equipment owner, to ensure correct fluid service rating and performance. This is critical if the equipment owner plans well testing back to the rig.

Source: Standard 53

Combinations of these factors and pressure

5.2.10

Elastomeric components are also subject to H2S attack. Nitrile elastomeric components that meet other requirements can be suitable for H2S service provided drilling fluids are properly treated. Service life shortens rapidly as temperature increases from 150 °F to 200 °F (65.6 °C to 93 °C). In the event flowline temperatures in excess of 200 °F (93 °C) are anticipated, the equipment manufacturer shall be consulted.

Source: Standard 53

Environmental Conditions Testing PM Program Procedures Training Leading to Incident Avoidance Highest Level

• f Safety

Environmental Protection

Conclusions

Questions?

John Hoefler

Biography

18+ years oil & gas experience Bachelor of Science, Texas A&M University Expertise in technical mgmt., R&D, API codes & standards DTE, Engineering & Compliance Manager with Lloyd’s Register