API RP 584-2014 Integrity Operating Windows (First Edition) .pdf

1、Integrity Operating WindowsAPI RECOMMENDED PRACTICE 584 FIRST EDITION, MAY 2014Special NotesAPI publications necessarily address problems of a general nature. With respect to particular circumstances, local, state, and federal laws and regulations should be reviewed.Neither API nor any of APIs emplo

2、yees, subcontractors, consultants, committees, or other assignees make any warranty or representation, either express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained herein, or assume any liability or responsibility for any use, or the results of su

3、ch use, of any information or process disclosed in this publication. Neither API nor any of APIs employees, subcontractors, consultants, or other assignees represent that use of this publication would not infringe upon privately owned rights.API publications may be used by anyone desiring to do so.

4、Every effort has been made by the Institute to assure the accuracy and reliability of the data contained in them; however, the Institute makes no representation, warranty, or guarantee in connection with this publication and hereby expressly disclaims any liability or responsibility for loss or dama

5、ge resulting from its use or for the violation of any authorities having jurisdiction with which this publication may conflict.API publications are published to facilitate the broad availability of proven, sound engineering and operating practices. These publications are not intended to obviate the

6、need for applying sound engineering judgment regarding when and where these publications should be utilized. The formulation and publication of API publications is not intended in any way to inhibit anyone from using any other practices.Any manufacturer marking equipment or materials in conformance

7、with the marking requirements of an API standard is solely responsible for complying with all the applicable requirements of that standard. API does not represent, warrant, or guarantee that such products do in fact conform to the applicable API standard.Users of this Recommended Practice should not

8、 rely exclusively on the information contained in this document. Sound business, scientific, engineering, and safety judgment should be used in employing the information contained herein.All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmi

9、tted by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Contact the Publisher, API Publishing Services, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005.Copyright 2014 American Petroleum InstituteForewordNothing contained in any A

10、PI publication is to be construed as granting any right, by implication or otherwise, for the manufacture, sale, or use of any method, apparatus, or product covered by letters patent. Neither should anything contained in the publication be construed as insuring anyone against liability for infringem

11、ent of letters patent.Shall: As used in a standard, “shall” denotes a minimum requirement in order to conform to the specification.Should: As used in a standard, “should” denotes a recommendation or that which is advised but not required in order to conform to the specification.This document was pro

12、duced under API standardization procedures that ensure appropriate notification and participation in the developmental process and is designated as an API standard. Questions concerning the interpretation of the content of this publication or comments and questions concerning the procedures under wh

13、ich this publication was developed should be directed in writing to the Director of Standards, American Petroleum Institute, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005. Requests for permission to reproduce or translate all or any part of the material published herein should also be addressed to the dir

14、ector.Generally, API standards are reviewed and revised, reaffirmed, or withdrawn at least every five years. A one-time extension of up to two years may be added to this review cycle. Status of the publication can be ascertained from the API Standards Department, telephone (202) 682-8000. A catalog

15、of API publications and materials is published annually by API, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005.Suggested revisions are invited and should be submitted to the Standards Department, API, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005, standardsapi.org.iiiContentsPage1 Purpose and Scope. . . . . . .

16、. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Normative References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Terms an

17、d Definitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Parameters that May Require Different Types of IOWs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 IOW Work

18、Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 IOW Risk Ranking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

19、. . . . . . 117 Examples of IOWs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 IOW Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

20、 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 General Considerations for Establishing IOWs and Their Limits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2010 Documenting, Implementing, and Training on Established IOWs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2211 Moni

21、toring and Measuring IOW Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2412 Updating IOWs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

22、513 Roles, Responsibilities, and Accountabilities for IOWs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2614 Integrating IOWs with Other Related Work Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Annex A (informative) Exa

23、mples of Potential Process Parameters for IOWs for Generic Process Units. . . . 28Annex B (informative) Sample Format for Recording IOWs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32Annex C (informative) Example of an IOW Development for a Heat Exchanger . .

24、. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35Figures1 Zones of Operation Including Target Ranges with Standard and Critica

25、l Limits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Suggested IOW Development Work Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Generic Risk Matrix for Assessing IOW levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

26、 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Example Risk Chart for IOW Types/Actions/Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 Example of IOW Limits for HTHA in a Hydroprocess Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

27、 . 136 Examples of Different Types of IOWs for Fired Heater Tubes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Table1 Examples of Accelerated Corrosion Rates That Can Occur Under Some Circumstances . . . . . . . . . . . 21vviIntroductionIn todays operating environment, it i

28、s not enough to base future inspection plans only on prior recorded/known history of equipment condition. A fundamental understanding of the process/operating conditions and resulting damage mechanisms are required in order to establish and maintain an inspection program that yields the highest prob

29、ability of detecting potential damage. Inspection plans should be dynamic and account for changing process conditions and current equipment condition. A fundamental step is to frequently rationalize and align the developed degradation knowledge base of the materials of construction with the operatio

30、n of the equipment, its inspection history, measured corrosion rates and known industry problems. With the move to risk based inspection programs, it is even more vital to identify and track process information that validates or might cause changes to existing inspection plans.In order to maintain t

31、he integrity and reliability of pressure equipment in the refining and petrochemical industry, several process safety management systems are necessary. Many of those management systems are oriented toward having a rigorous inspection program, as well as all the supportive engineering activities, to

32、maintain pressure equipment integrity and reliability.In addition to the application of industry codes, standards, and recommended practices, a number of other PSM systems are vital to support a rigorous inspection and mechanical integrity program in order to predict/avoid/prevent pressure equipment

33、 damage/corrosion; leaks and failures; and improve reliability. Three key elements of those supporting PSM programs include: the establishment, implementation, and maintenance of integrity operating windows (IOWs); an effective transfer of knowledge about unit specific IOWs to all affected personnel

34、; and an effective MOC program to identify any changes to the process or the physical hardware that might affect the integrity of pressure equipment.In order to operate any process unit, a set of operating ranges and limits needs to be established for key process variables, to achieve the desired re

35、sults (i.e. product within specification, safe operation, reliability, etc.). These limits are generally called operating limits or operating envelopes. IOWs are a specific subset of these key operating limits that focus only on maintaining the integrity or reliability of process equipment. Typicall

36、y IOWs address issues that involve process variables that, when not adequately monitored or controlled, can impact the likelihood and rates of damage mechanisms, which may result in a loss of containment. For purposes of this document, maintaining the integrity of the process unit means avoiding bre

37、aches of containment, and reliability means avoiding malfunctions of the pressure equipment that might impact the performance of the process unit (meeting its intended function for a specified time frame). In that sense, integrity is a part of the larger issue of pressure equipment reliability, sinc

38、e most breaches of containment will impact reliability. IOWs are those preset limits on process variables that need to be established and implemented in order to prevent potential breaches of containment that might occur as a result of not controlling the process sufficiently to avoid unexpected or

39、unplanned deterioration or damage to pressure equipment. Operation within the preset limits should result in predictable and reasonably low rates of degradation. Operation outside the IOW limits could result in unanticipated damage, accelerated damage and potential equipment failure from one or more

40、 damage mechanisms.Pressure equipment is generally fabricated from the most economical materials of construction to meet specific design criteria based on the intended operation and process conditions. The operating process conditions should then be controlled within preset limits (IOWs) in order to

41、 avoid unacceptable construction material degradation and achieve the desired economic design life of the assets. One of the simplest examples of IOWs is the establishment of fired heater tube temperature limits to avoid premature rupture or unplanned replacement of the tubes. For example, heater tu

42、bes that have an API 530, 100,000 hour design temperature of 950 F (510 C) would have an increasingly shortened service life if operated at temperatures viiabove this design temperature. So when this limit (950 F) is exceeded, operators would be directed to adjust fired heater controls to get the tu

43、be temperature back to below 950 F (510 C) within a preset amount of time. That limit of 950 F (510 C) would be an IOW limit for those fired heater tubes. At an even higher temperature, say 1025 F (550 C), the operator might be directed to take more immediate actions to regain control or even shut d

44、own the fired heater. As such there may be more than one IOW limit for the same process parameter (in this case fired heater tube temperature), for tracking/trending or to gain control prior to reaching a critical IOW limit. In addition, there may be more than one predefined response, depending upon

45、 the degree of exceedance of the process parameter limit. A properly structured, efficient, and effective inspection program depends on IOWs being established and implemented to improve inspection planning and to avoid unanticipated impacts on pressure equipment integrity. Inspection plans are typic

46、ally based on historic damage mechanisms and trends and are not generally designed to look for unanticipated damage resulting from process variability and upsets. Inspection plans generally assume that the next inspection interval (calculated based on prior damage rates from past operating experienc

47、e) are scheduled on the basis of what is already known and predictable about equipment degradation from previous inspections. Without a set of effective and complete IOWs and feedback loop into the inspection planning process, inspections might need to be scheduled on a more frequent time-based inte

48、rval just to look for anything that might potentially occur from process variability. viii1Integrity Operating Windows1 Purpose and Scope1.1 The purpose of this recommended practice (RP) is to explain the importance of integrity operating windows (IOWs) for process safety management and to guide use

49、rs in how to establish and implement an IOW program for refining and petrochemical process facilities for the express purpose of avoiding unexpected equipment degradation that could lead to loss of containment. It is not the intent of this document to provide a complete list of specific IOWs or operating variables that might need IOWs for the numerous types of hydrocarbon process units in the industry (though some generic examples are provided in the text and in Annex A); but rather to provide the user with information and guidance on the work process for