CORROSION FORUM

1
CORROSION FORUM

• Industry Perspective
• Sheldon W. Dean
• 20 May 2003

2
Industry Perspective Issues

• Cost of Corrosion
• Communications
• Standards

3
Cost of Corrosion

• C C Technology Study - 2001
• 3.2 GDP
• Battelle Study 1975
• 4.2 GDP
• Industry View

4
Cost of CorrosionIndustry View

• Cost of Corrosion Prevention
• Cost of Corrosion Failures
• Safety and Reliability

5
Cost of Corrosion Prevention

• Capital costs
• Operation costs
• Failure analyses
• - Key to continuous improvement
• Education, training development
• - Culture change

6
Cost of Corrosion Prevention

• CAPITAL COSTS
• Upgrade to resistant alloys
• High performance coatings
• Cathodic protection systems
• Design improvements analyses

7
Cost of Corrosion Prevention

• OPERATING COSTS
• Inhibitors
• Cathodic protection operation
• Maintenance
• - Repairs
• - Touch-up
• Inspections

8
Cost of Corrosion Prevention

• FAILURE ANALYSIS
• Failure analysis policy
• - What failures to examine?
• Responsible organization
• - Internal lab or outside lab?
• Follow up Fix
• Who? When?

9
Cost of Corrosion Prevention

• EDUCATION, TRAINING DEVELOPMENT
• Engineering purchasing
• Operations
• Policy
• Communications

10
Cost of Corrosion Failures

• Loss of capital
• Cost of fix
• Inspection of similar equipment
• Related costs

11
Cost of Corrosion Failures

• Cascading effects
• - Many items fail in sequence
• Damage depends upon random factors
• Any analysis contains subjective elements

12
Safety Reliability

• Safety and reliability are key issues
• Safety is not subject to cost analysis
• Consequence analysis
• Probability of failure
• Reliability is a key benefit of corrosion
  control

13
Communication Key Issues

• Who needs to be involved?
• What level of communication needed?
• - Technical level?
• - How extensive?
• Who is responsible?
• What are the deliverables?

14
Communications

• Review of Air Products materials and corrosion
  programs
• Presented as an example of a successful
  activity
• Developed over 25 years
• - Evolutionary process
• - Designed to meet changing needs

15
Air Products MC Program

• M C Seminar
• M C Workshops
• M C Round tables
• A P University presentations
• Other

16
M C Seminar

• Intended for new engineers (1 to 3 yrs)
• Featured different departments
• 10 to 20 presentations
• 30 to 45 minutes for each subject
• 1 to 2 days duration
• Presented annually
• Attendance 60 to 100

17
M C Seminar

• Presentation of technologies in M C area
• Notebook with written papers
• College level assumed
• -Chemistry and basic engineering
• Responsibility rotated - senior M C staff

18
M C Workshops

• Local presentations at operating plants
• Small group of presenters, 2 to 4
• - Include local specialists if possible
• Tailored to specific plant issues
• - e.g. sulfuric acid if used in plant
• - agenda negotiated with plant
• Arranged by request from plant

19
M C Workshops

• Duration ½ to 2 days
• Attendance 15 to 40
• Frequency every 2 to 3 years
• Level No technical training assumed

20
M C Workshops

• Responsibility
• - M C Department sets agenda
• - Local management absorbs costs
• - Safety Department involved
• Program
• - General topics
• - MTI videos
• - Specific plant topics ( Failure analyses)

21
M C Roundtables

• Professional level group
• World wide participation
• Purpose to share recent problems and results
• Encourage joint action and cooperation

22
M C Roundtables

• Meeting 4 times a year or more
• Typical attendance 10 to 20
• Teleconference web and video
• Responsibility rotating among senior M C
  engineers (2 year term)

23
A P University

• Wide range of technical topics covered
• M C only small part of program
• 1 hr. presentation (lunch time)
• Topic Recent developments with major
  technical impact
• Presenter Responsible engineer

24
A P University

• Attendance 30 to 100
• - Wide range, engineers and managers
• Frequency As needed (one per yr.)
• Policy level communication

25
Communications - Other

• Materials Technology Institute News Letter
• -Distributed world wide to engineers
• NACE ASTM developments
• Liaisons
• - Safety Environment Dept.
• - Engineering Dept.
• - Management

26
Standards

• Corrosion Standards
• - ASTM, NACE, ISO
• Voluntary consensus documents
• International scope
• Documents with wide usefullness

27
NACE Standards

• RP Recommended Practices
• - Industry recognized practices
• MR Material Requirements
• TM Test Methods
• 5 year review
• Committee Reports state of the art

28
ASTM Standards

• Test methods
• - Measure property or characteristic
• - Precision and Bias provided
• - Important in corrosion evaluations
• Practices
• - Procedure only
• - Does not give a result

29
ASTM Standards

• Specifications
• -Specific requirements for product
• - Important for purchasing
• Classifications
• - grouping of materials with similar properties
• Terminology
• -Definitions of terms in standards

30
ISO Standards

• Documents similar to ASTM
• ISO favors European members
• Voting based on one per country
• Negative votes require a majority
• ASTM now no longer supports ISO for corrosion
  standards

31
Wrap Up

• The cost of corrosion prevention is a
  necessary cost of being in business. Reducing
  this cost is not necessarily beneficial but may
  create significant problems.

32
Wrap up

• Safety and reliability are key issues in
  corrosion prevention. Corrosion control should
  increase safety and reliability if it is
  effective.

33
Wrap up

• Communication is an essential component of a
  successful corrosion control program.
  Communication should deliver the necessary
  information to the individuals responsible for
  corrosion control in a timely and understandable
  manner.

34
Wrap up

• The communication process must be tailored to
  the appropriate individuals at the level that
  will be most helpful. It should present new
  developments in a timely fashion.

35
Wrap up

• Standards provide a valuable resource for
  engineers and purchasing people to obtain proven
  results by the most reliable methods known to
  industry. Government people should be active in
  standards organizations to take full advantage of
  the expertise in these organizations.

36
(No Transcript)
37
Thank You!

• Questions please?