Our Vision: Support and develop our client’s technical know-how while creating trust

Often, Inspectors and engineers have to make prompt, accurate, and sound decisions concerning the general Mechanical Integrity and Structural Fitness for continued use of in-service systems (piping, Pressure Vessels, Tanks, and peripheral) when indications are found and classified as defect WRT their design standards and operating conditions.

Currently, Plant Reliability engineers, Asset integrity engineers usually have to go through various standards and develop models to compute L1/L2 structural integrity assessments to make Go/No-Go calls during plant runtime and Outage work windows for continued running, repair, replace and required level of follow-up work. Nowadays, plant inspectors are becoming more engaged and needed to make such calls too. This is usually time-consuming, and often, when assessment results are challenged, they are found to have various inconsistencies and assumptions based on the risk profile of the specialist conducting the assessment.

Another approach has been to involve 3rd party consultants with the expectation of advanced knowledge. However, it doesn’t solve the problem of prompt delivery. In addition, it often comes with a high price tag and errors in modeling due to limited 1st hand field knowledge of the defect/system and interpreting customer inspection information while offsite.

The level of assessment, quality of the results, and final decision directly affect the plant’s safety, reliability, productivity, and thus bottom-line. Industrywide (Chemical and Petrochemical), approximately 30% of defects require in-depth and advanced (Level 3) Fitness for Service evaluations which may involve custom modeling and FEA analysis. The other 70% need less rigor; the component design standard and Level 1 or 2 fitness for service evaluation are appropriate and usually sufficient. The focus of Rapidsolve™ is this 70%.

Rapidsolve™ is developed to give prompt, accurate, and consistent L1/L2 defect evaluation and results in minutes.

Rapidsolve™ is Modelled primarily around the API579-1 FFS and many years of recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices REGAGEP. Certified engineers did the code validations and SMEs using actual plant defect findings and case scenarios in API579-1 and API579-2. A good understanding of the concept of FFS as specified in API597-1 is required to use and interpret the results using this application properly.

Rapidsolve™ is not intended to replace provincial/state requirements, Design Standard guidelines, and user-owner risk profile models. It is not a detailed engineering analysis and is not intended to be a comprehensive tool. The tool does not consider advanced level assessment approaches and several complex external loads and conditions. The use of this tool requires adequate knowledge of the steps and limitations as specified in the applicable design standard and FFS-API579-1 standard of the defect analyzed. Engineering analysis plus Level 3 are required when the limits as detailed in the standard relate to a system in question. The software entails the following features and level of assessment capabilities:

• Structural Integrity & fitness procedure for Defects & Damage Mechanisms.
• Prompt & Accurate Analysis. Visual Aids and graphs for defect illustration.
• Simple Go/No Go Step-wise screening for Repair-Rerate-Replace FFS decisions.
• Cloud-based Access. No computer installation is required. Free Updates!
• Assessment procedures Verified with known actual and verifiable cases.
• Review & Updates by SME Engineers and Inspectors using a MOC/SR process.

Brittle Fracture Part 3 (L1 & L2)

Assessment Procedure specified uses Method A and B Only of the reference code API579-1/ASME FFS-1. This explores evaluating the resistance to brittle fracture of existing carbon and low alloy steel pressure vessels, piping, and storage tanks. Criteria are provided to assess normal operating, start-up, upset, and shut-down conditions. Procedure assessment condition exceptions: Systems under substantial supplementary loads, full vacuum conditions, and application when Impact Test Results are unavailable. System Geometry: Cylindrical and Conical profile only.

General Metal Loss Part 4 (L1 & L2)

Assessment procedures specified explores cases of general corrosion. Thickness data used for the assessment can be either point thickness readings or Grid detailed thickness profiles. When the Metal loss profile is not general, the method and approach in the assessment procedures of Part 5 are applicable. Procedure assessment condition exceptions: Systems under substantial supplementary loads, full vacuum conditions, and application when Impact Test Results are unavailable. System Geometry: Cylindrical and Conical profile only.

Local Metal Loss Part 5 (L1 & L2)

Assessment procedures specified explores cases of single Thin Ares, closely spaced Local Thin Areas LTSs and groove-like flaws. Thickness data used for the assessment can be either point thickness readings or precise thickness profiles (Grid). In addition, the procedure can be utilized to assess standalone pits or blisters as per Part 6 and Part 7. When the Metal loss profile is not localized, the method and approach in the assessment procedures of Part 4 are applicable. Procedure assessment condition exceptions: Systems under substantial supplementary loads, full vacuum conditions, and application when Impact Test Results are unavailable. System Geometry: Cylindrical and Conical profile only.