This website uses non-intrusive cookies to improve your user experience. You can visit our cookie privacy page for more information.

2008 pipeline seminar - MCS audio Q&A

10.20-10.45 - Update on Revision of API/ISO standards and UKOOA Guidance - MCS

‘Open Forum - Question and Answers’ session at the end of the presentation by Michael O’Sullivan of MCS

Download (right click and select 'save target as...')
MCS Q&A audio [6m47s - MP3 6.21MB]
Listen online
You need flash player installed to listen to this audio clip online. Alternatively use the download link above.


Paddy O’Brien – MCS. Michael Its Paddy you know who I am so…….

Michael O’Sullivan – MCS (Presenter). I’ve met you once or twice yes (laughter).

Paddy O’Brien – MCS. No I mean I think I’d like to add to the fact that over the last three years there’s been a lot of work done in this flexible pipe technology JIP and there’s been lots of knowledge transfer and I guess you’ve put a lot of that into the new document that’s coming out but I mean the question for me I think in terms of some of the issues here that we’re dealing with today is how quickly is the industry going to be able to sort of take that on board and adapt it. I guess there’ll be some time yet before this new API document becomes you know formal if you like. I noticed the previous time with the API document people had almost adopted it before it came out so to what extent is the industry going to be able to benefit from the significant work you’ve done over the last three years and how quickly can it take on board these new things?

Michael O’Sullivan – MCS (Presenter). Yeah I mean there’s two issues there. One is the process of getting them formally adopted. Were actually going through the ISO process as opposed to the API process and unfortunately that ISO process takes approximately two years so it will be two years before these documents will become official documents. However I think because of the broad base of the JIP and the participants and because of the extent of discussions I think we will find that the participants will informally adopt them but I think what you’re finding as well is that a lot of the requirements are based upon individual company specifications and looking at the range of specifications and where there is agreement so I think when we get agreement I think you will find informally operators and manufacturers adopting them. It is problematic in the sense that API17J is a contractual document you know so therefore that does you know cloud it a little bit in the sense of you know how much can be adopted but I think because of the very much collegiate effort that has taken place between operators and manufacturers, we will see some informal adoption of various aspects of what we’ve been doing before they become official documents.

Douglas Souden – HSE (Seminar Chairman). Well I’d like to ask one actually Michael and it’s an issue that’s always…. not concerned me. But in terms of the assessment of damage of flexibles and assessing fitness for purpose - the current API documents are very scant in that area. Is there much work being done on the JIP to address this particular area?

Michael O’Sullivan – MCS (Presenter). There is, on the integrity management side what we’re trying to do is we’re trying to in as much as we can, you know start integrity management sooner in the process. Trying to acknowledge the requirement, the need for integrity management at the design stage. Now it is problematic because of the nature of API17J as a contractual document which only has a requirement up to and when the pipe leaves the factory but we are trying to ensure that there is feedback from experience at the design stage, increasing the importance of FAT testing in terms of providing benchmarks for subsequent testing in the field so what we’re trying to do is ensure and at least identify and encourage feedback because there is a gap between what happens in the field, indeed there is a gap between what happens on a manufacturing floor and what happens in a design office so to try and ensure continuous feedback link between the various areas. That’s were the focus has been in terms of trying to ensure that integrity management is foremost in the mind of both the operators and the manufacturers at the earliest stage.

Raymond Walker – ExxonMobil. I noticed that the new techniques you’d listed eddy current as a newcomer. This was developed in 1995

Michael O’Sullivan – MCS (Presenter). But is it widely used I guess is the issue?

Raymond Walker – ExxonMobil. I wondered why it’s new. Is it improved or better?

Michael O’Sullivan – MCS (Presenter). Well no I mean I think what we’re talking about here is technology which you know may be more robust at this stage which may you know, why you do have eddy current techniques I don’t believe that they have been widely used.

Raymond Walker – ExxonMobil. And do you know why they haven’t been used?

Michael O’Sullivan – MCS (Presenter). I think its because they’ve been unreliable certainly yes and I think we have done a lot of work on inspection techniques and where they have advanced so I think what we have is we have a menu of various techniques and what we’re doing is we’re trying to, well we’re more than trying, we are looking at the current status and the robustness. We’re not necessarily saying that we’re recommending it but what we are saying is it is a technique and here is where that technique is at.

Raymond Walker – ExxonMobil. Thank you.

Alan Smith - DMV. If you’re coming up with a whole series of findings and from this JIP - is that work going to be in the public domain or is it you’re going to be restricted to the sponsor group?

Michael O’Sullivan – MCS (Presenter). No no I mean the whole issue of the JIP, I mean the documents are public domain documents both the standards obviously are public domain documents. The technical reports will hopefully be published under API in the same way that you have a technical report on PA11 ageing for example. So they will all ultimately be public domain yes.

Douglas Souden – HSE (Seminar Chairman). Thank you, I think it’s important to say that, that’s for both JIPs as well and the second one will be in the same way, perhaps a little later as some of the operators or the contributors get some benefits for this sponsorship but it will become in the public domain in due course.

Yeah good morning. Bob Nye - Venture. Your presentation seemed to focus more on the actual construction of the flexible rather than end connectors which are I guess the weakest link in any flexible?

Michael O’Sullivan – MCS (Presenter). Well I mean the flexible pipe is defined as the pipe body and the end fittings. You know so that’s the focus. Other equipment and ancillary components are dealt with in a separate initiative so there was a separate initiative on ancillary equipment which will get published as API and ISO documents, API17L1 and L2 so they’re dealt with separately but the focus very much on this particular JIP has been on the pipe body and end fittings so we will be saying considerably more about end fittings but not ancillary equipment which are not dealt with in these standards.

Bob Nye - Venture. Ok thank you.

Paddy O’Brien – MCS. Can you update us on the status of the other API standard dealing with ancillary equipment?

Michael O’Sullivan – MCS (Presenter). I mean that work is complete and they’re now going through the API balloting process at this point in time. They should be published in I would expect the first half of 2009.

Updated 2012-10-05