Session 3C Overheads

Collateral Damage

advantagetechnologycreatesC-FERTechnologies

Collateral Damage Model

PurposeAccount for the additional operating risk associated with a given pipeline resulting from proximity to adjacent lines

Assumptions Risk associated with failure of the primary line is carried by

owner/operator of the primary line Risk associated with un-precipitated failure of the adjacent line

(i.e., not your fault) is carried by owner/operator of adjacent line

Approach Consider potential for the escalation of failure consequences

brought about by proximity of the primary line to an adjacent line


Modeling Approach

Consider two lines

If you own or operate both

If you own or operate line 1 only

R1

R2

R = R1 + R2

R = R1

1

2

1

2

1

2


Modeling Approach

Consider two lines

If you own or operate both

If you own or operate line 1 only

R1

R2

R = R1 + R2

R = R1

1

2

Native

Native

Native

Foreign

Native pipelines- we care about probability

and consequences of failure

Foreign pipelines- we care about consequences

of failure only1

2

1

2



R1 = P1 (C1 + P2|1C2)P2|1= Pinv2|fail1 x Pign1|fail1 x Pfail2|inv2+ign1

wherePinv2|fail1 = probability of involving line 2 if line 1 fails

(available from probabilistic crater size model)

Pign1|fail1 = probability of immediate ignition of line 1 if line 1 fails(available from failure model event tree)

Pfail2|inv2+ignl1 = probability of failing line 2 if it is involved and line 1 ignites(beyond state-of-the-art user-defined with default set to 1.0)

C2 = consequences of failing line 2 assuming line 1 fails and ignites(available from existing consequence model with immediateignition probability set to 1.0)

*

*

1

2

New risk component measures


Probability of Involving Adjacent Line

Line spacing

Separation distance

Crater half-widthat depth d2

d1

D2 D1

For gas pipelines- crater size based on Gasunie/Battelle model- function of: d1, D1, soil type

For liquid pipelines (LVP/HVP)- crater radius is user-defined multiple of D1- no default values

Pinv2|fail1 = P(separation distance < crater half-width)

d2


Gas Pipeline Craters Can be Large

NPS 30 pipeline rupture near Carlsbad, New Mexico


Gas Pipeline Crater Width Model

Width depends on line diameter, depth of burial, and soil type

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0

1

2

3

4

5Hard clay

Very stiff clay

Stiff clay | Dense sand

Med/soft clay | Medium sand

Loose sand

Soil Type

Crater Half-Width (m)

NPS 12

NPS 30

0.9 m cover

1.8 m cover

Does not dependon line pressure


Gas Pipeline Crater Width Uncertainty

mean = 1.02cov = 0.41

Actual width / Predicted width

Based on analysis of reported gas pipeline incident data


Probability of Involvement Gas Line

hsep = S21 D2/2

S21

h21

d1

D2 D1

*

=

=

*

*

5.0|

|

crt

crt

crt

crt

h

sephllkinv

h

sephrptinv

hP

hP

50/50 chance leakdirected towards line

Rupture = crater width uncertainty21 ChCh hhcrt =

Large leak = leak angle factor 21hCh hcrt =

d2


Probability of Involvement Liquid Line

hsep = S21 D2/2

S21

r

d1

D2 D1

*

0.00.1

0.00.1*

|

|

=

=

rhifP

rhifP

sepllkinv

seprptinv

Rupture = crater radius multiplier for ruptureBDBr 1=Large leak = crater radius multiplier for large leakADAr 1=

d2


Consequences of Adjacent Line Failure

All n adjacent lines Fail by rupture Immediate ignition probability is 1.0

All hazard area independent consequences add directly to consequences of primary line Line repair cost Service interruption cost Cost of lost product Spill clean-up cost Spill volume | Residual volume | Equivalent volume

jrpt

n

jj CPCC

=

+=2

1|1


Consequences of Adjacent Line Failure

All hazard area dependent consequences add incrementally to consequences of primary line Cost of property damage Cost of fatality compensation Number of fatalities | Interaction length

( )*1*2

1|1 CCPCC jrptn

jj +=

=

Consequences of ignitedrupture of adjacent line j

Consequences of ignitedfailure of primary line


Hazard Area Overlap

Area affected ifprimary line fails

A1 Model assumes that you can onlyfatally injure or

destroy property once

Additional areaaffected ifadjacent line fails

Model assumes that product release rates

do not add

A2 A1



Model limitations Intended primarily for gas pipelines

Crater model applies to rupture failure Approximation required for large leaks Model does not depend on line pressure

For liquid pipelines Crater dimensions will be much smaller No recognized model currently exists for crater size Options

ignore collateral damage potential for LVP and HVP lines assume a nominal crater size to acknowledge potential impact

on lines that are extremely close together


PIRAMID Implementation

Model configuration

Turn collateraldamage off/on



Model configuration gas pipelines options



Model configuration liquid pipelines

User must specify values



Native vs. foreign lines

foreign

native

native

owned by others

owned by you



Native vs. foreign lines



Relationships between pipelines

40.0 km 70.0 150.0 180.0

262.5 km 292.5 480.2 510.2S1 = 10.5 m

S2 = 3.1 mMain line(west mainline)

Adjacent line(east mainline)

Stationing

Line spacing



Relationships between pipelines



Required inputs Native pipelines

Existing probability and consequence related line attributes Soil type and Depth of Burial (if not required by other models) Line spacing

Foreign pipelines (owned by others) Existing consequence related line attributes Soil type and Depth of Burial Line spacing


Demo 2 Part A

What effect does collateral damage potential haveon this two-pipeline system

100.0 km 115.0 km 130.0 kmNPS 12 Gas Pipeline

NPS 36 Gas Pipeline150.0 km 165.0 km 180.0 kmS = 3.0 m

Residential very low density (class 1) Residential medium density (class 3)


Demo 2 Part B

What effect does collateral damage potential have onNPS 12 Gas for this three-pipeline system

S = 3.0 m150.0 km 165.0 km 180.0 km

150.0 km

NPS 12 Gas Pipeline (native) 115.0 km

180.0 km165.0 km

NPS 36 Gas Pipeline (native)

NPS 36 Gas Pipeline (foreign)

100.0 km 130.0 km

S = 3.0 m

Residential very low density (class 1) Residential medium density (class 3)


Demo 2

Metric (SI) exampleGas pipeline X:\Program Files\C-FER\PIRAMID\2002 Training Seminar\Level 3\Demo 2


Demo 2 Part ASection Risk Results (single adjacent line)

Line Section Comb Impact Prob Fail Exp Cost Exp Fatal Exp Volume IRR($/km yr) (/km yr) ($/km yr) (/km yr) (cu m/km yr)

NPS 12 1.05E+02 6.18E-04 1.02E+02 1.53E-06 0.00E+00 1.47E-01 1a100.00000 | 115.00000w/o 1.75E+03 7.16E-04 6.85E+02 5.31E-04 0.00E+00 2.05E+00 1b115.00000 | 130.00000

1.60E+02 6.18E-04 1.47E+02 6.61E-06 0.00E+00 2.99E-01NPS 12 3a100.00000 | 115.000007.16E+03 7.16E-04 2.55E+03 2.30E-03 0.00E+00 4.18E+00with 3b115.00000 | 130.00000

1.52 1.00 1.44 4.32 2.03NPS 12 = 3a / 1aCl 1Cl 3

100.00000 | 115.00000115.00000 | 130.00000change 4.09 1.00 3.72 4.33 2.04 = 3b / 1b

2a1.69E+02 2.24E-04 1.53E+02 8.25E-06 0.00E+00 2.68E-01NPS 36 150.00000 | 165.000002bw/o 6.38E+03 2.24E-04 2.25E+03 2.06E-03 0.00E+00 2.68E+00165.00000 | 180.00000

4a1.73E+02 2.24E-04 1.57E+02 8.26E-06 0.00E+00 2.69E-01NPS 36 150.00000 | 165.000004b6.39E+03 2.24E-04 2.26E+03 2.06E-03 0.00E+00 2.69E+00with 165.00000 | 180.00000

1.02 1.00 1.03 1.00 1.00NPS 36 = 4a / 2aCl 1Cl 3

150.00000 | 165.00000165.00000 | 180.00000change 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 = 4b / 2b


Demo 2 Part ASystem Risk Results (single adjacent line)

Line Section Comb Impact Prob Fail Exp Cost Exp Fatal Exp Volume IRR($ / yr) ( / yr) ($ / yr) ( / yr) (cu m / yr)

NPS 12 2.78E+04 2.00E-02 1.18E+04 7.98E-03 0.00E+00 2.05E+00w/oNPS 36 9.82E+04 6.73E-03 3.61E+04 3.11E-02 0.00E+00 2.68E+00w/oTotal 1.26E+05 2.67E-02 4.79E+04 3.91E-02

NPS 12 1.10E+05 2.00E-02 4.05E+04 3.47E-02 0.00E+00 4.18E+00withNPS 36 9.84E+04 6.73E-03 3.62E+04 3.11E-02 0.00E+00 2.69E+00withTotal 2.08E+05 2.67E-02 7.67E+04 6.58E-02

2.04Change 1.65 1.00 1.60 1.68

1.00= (4+3)/(2+1)

1Two-line system(NPS 12 and NPS 36)

without collateral 2

= 2 + 1

3Two-line system(NPS 12 and NPS 36)

with collateral 4

= 4 + 3


Demo 2 Part BTotal Risk for NPS 12 Gas

Line Section Comb Impact Prob Fail Exp Cost Exp Fatal Exp Volume IRR($ / yr) ( / yr) ($ / yr) ( / yr) (cu m / yr)

1NPS 12 2.78E+04 2.00E-02 1.18E+04 7.98E-03 0.00E+00 2.05E+00Two-line system(NPS 12 and NPS 36)

with collateralw/oNPS 12 1.10E+05 2.00E-02 4.05E+04 3.47E-02 0.00E+00 4.18E+00 3with oneChange 3.96 1.00 3.43 4.35 2.04 = 3 / 1

1

5

= 5 / 1

Three-line system(NPS 12, NPS 36 and NPS 36-2)

with collateral

NPS 12 2.78E+04 2.00E-02 1.18E+04 7.98E-03 0.00E+00 2.05E+00w/oNPS 12 1.92E+05 2.00E-02 6.92E+04 6.13E-02 0.00E+00 6.31E+00with bothChange 6.91 1.00 5.86 7.68 3.08

Collateral DamageCollateral Damage ModelModeling ApproachModeling ApproachCollateral Damage ModelProbability of Involving Adjacent LineGas Pipeline Craters Can be LargeGas Pipeline Crater Width ModelGas Pipeline Crater Width UncertaintyProbability of Involvement Gas LineProbability of Involvement Liquid LineConsequences of Adjacent Line FailureConsequences of Adjacent Line FailureHazard Area OverlapCollateral Damage ModelPIRAMID ImplementationPIRAMID ImplementationPIRAMID ImplementationPIRAMID ImplementationPIRAMID ImplementationPIRAMID ImplementationPIRAMID ImplementationPIRAMID ImplementationCollateral Damage ModelDemo 2 Part ADemo 2 Part BDemo 2Demo 2 Part ASection Risk Results (single adjacent line)Demo 2 Part ASystem Risk Results (single adjacent line)Demo 2 Part BTotal Risk for NPS 12 Gas

Date post:	14-Sep-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	rodolfo
View:	241 times
Download:	0 times

Session 3C Overheads

Documents