Primatech White Paper - How to Conduct a Damage Mechanism Review (DMR)

DMRs are now considered an essential precursor to PHA studies and they play
an important part in MI programs and MOC reviews. A procedure for performing
DMRs is described in the white paper, How to Conduct a Damage Mechanism
Review .

View other Primatech white papers by clicking here .

PRIMATECH WHITE PAPER

HOW TO CONDUCT A DAMAGE MECHANISM REVIEW (DMR)

Abbreviations

Abbreviation Meaning
API American Petroleum Institute
CML Corrosion monitoring location
DMR Damage mechanism review
HAZOP Hazard and operability
MI Mechanical integrity
MOC Management of change
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PFD Process flow diagram
PHA Process hazard analysis
PSM Process safety management
P&ID Piping and instrumentation drawing
RBI Risk-based inspection

Introduction

A damage mechanism is a mechanical, chemical, physical or other

process that results in equipment or material degradation. Damage mechanisms

result in flaws and defects that affect the integrity of process piping, vessels, and
other equipment. For example, virtually all crude oil feeds contain sulfur

compounds and, as a result, sulfidation corrosion is a damage mechanism

present at refineries that process crude oil. Sulfidation corrosion can cause

thinning to the point of pipe failure when not properly monitored and controlled.

Many different damage mechanisms exist [1]. Table 1 provides examples of

different types of damage mechanisms. Table 2 provides examples of process

safety incidents that resulted from such causes. The occurrence of such
incidents demonstrates the importance of addressing damage mechanisms in

process safety.

A damage mechanism review (DMR) identifies potential process damage

mechanisms, and the consequences of failures that may result from them, to

help ensure that hazards they cause are properly identified and analyzed and

effective safeguards are in place to control the hazards and/or new systems are

implemented to control or eliminate the hazards.

A knowledge of equipment damage mechanisms is important when

developing mechanical integrity (MI) and risk-based inspection (RBI) programs

to establish inspection and testing plans, including corrosion monitoring

locations (CMLs). It is also necessary when conducting management of change

(MOC) reviews and performing process hazard analysis (PHA) studies.

On October 1, 2017 , the Division of Occupational Safety and Health

within the California Department of Industrial Relations amended its process
safety management (PSM) regulations for petroleum refineries in California to
include requirements for conducting DMRs, preparing DMR reports, and
addressing DMR reports during PHA studies [2]. However, no guidance for
performing DMRs or addressing DMR reports in PHA was provided or

referenced.

Currently, there are no industry standards governing the performance of

DMRs. API RP 571, Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in the

Refining Industry , contains a compilation of different types of damage

mechanisms. The document provides a description of each mechanism, a list of

materials susceptible to the mechanism, inspection guidelines for the
mechanism, and measures that can be taken to prevent the mechanism. It is a

valuable reference for performing DMRs.

The Energy Institute, an industry technical working group organized in

the United Kingdom (UK), with contributions from regulators, including the UK’s
Health and Safety Executive, as well as other entities, developed a document in

2008 that provides guidance on damage mechanism hazard reviews in the UK’s
offshore petrochemical industry [3]. The guidance notes that damage
mechanism hazard reviews should provide a structured framework for

identifying risks associated with corrosion and developing suitable risk reduction
measures, and that these reviews should cover failure mechanisms including,

but not limited to, corrosion, environmental cracking, erosion, and mechanical
damage, such as vibration induced fatigue. The guidance states that a formal,
documented quantitative and logic-based assessment should be used when
conducting corrosion reviews.

DMRs are new in the context of process safety . This white paper

provides guidance on how to conduct DMRs to support process safety

management activities, including PHA studies.

Damage Mechanisms

Damage mechanisms may cause the failure of process equipment

resulting in loss of containment or impaired operability of equipment. They may

cause damage to equipment that contains hazardous materials, such as tanks
and reactors, or through which hazardous materials flow, such as piping, valves
and pumps. Damage mechanisms also may affect equipment safeguards that

protect against process incidents, such as fireproofing, dikes, and deluge

systems. Some safeguards may be in contact with process fluids, such as flame
arresters, while other are not, such as barriers and fireproofing. Damage
mechanisms can exist for either case. Damage mechanisms also may affect
equipment in utilities and support systems whose failure may impact on or result

in a process safety incident.

Damage mechanisms can arise internally or externally, such as from

internal or external corrosion. They can affect not only equipment or materials
made from metals, including alloys, but also others, such as polymers, including
plastics; ceramics, including refractories; composites, including concrete; and
glasses.
 Damage mechanisms may apply to a particular part of a process or
throughout a process, that is, they may be local or global. For example, one
particular vessel may be susceptible to low temperature embrittlement but

piping throughout a process may be susceptible to corrosion. Damage

mechanisms can be considered to include failures due to causes such as liquid
hammer and vibration.

The susceptibility of equipment to damage mechanisms depends on

numerous factors such as materials of construction; chemicals present,
including contaminants; process operating conditions; operating and
maintenance regimes; environmental conditions; and process history.

Performance of DMRs

A DMR may be performed for an entire facility or each process within it

may be studied separately depending on the types of damage mechanisms
present. Damage mechanisms may affect particular or all parts of a process.

Consequently, processes are subdivided into sections for analysis in a similar

manner to performing PHA studies where, for example, Hazard and Operability
(HAZOP) studies use nodes, defined as pipe sections and vessels. There does
not need to be a one-to-one correspondence between the sections used in the
DMR and PHA. Certainly, it is possible that damage mechanisms may be

possible only for some process sections or that the same mechanism(s) may be
present in multiple sections. Of course, the possible presence of damage
mechanisms must be considered for all parts of a process.
 DMRs must consider all materials of construction that may be subject to
damage mechanisms, for example, not just piping but also fittings, connectors,
and welds.

DMRs should be performed by a team with expertise in engineering,

equipment and pipe inspection, damage and failure mechanisms, and the

operation of the process under review. Individuals whose expertise covers

possible damage mechanisms for the process are needed. Typical team
members may include:

• Materials scientist

• Metallurgical engineer

• Reliability engineer

• Maintenance engineer

• Process engineer

• Process safety engineer

• Facilitator

Information needed to perform a DMR includes:

• Process flow diagrams (PFDs) and piping and instrumentation drawings

(P&IDs)
• Equipment specifications

• Equipment fabrication records

• Materials of construction

• Process materials

• Presence of contaminants

• Presence of corrosives

• Safety data sheets (SDSs)

• Heat and energy balances

• Operating and maintenance regimes

• Environmental factors

Information is needed for all process operating modes.

DMRs should be completed for each existing and new process for which

damage mechanisms exists. All modes of process operation should be

addressed. DMRs should be revalidated on the same schedule as PHAs.

DMRs should be completed for processes before PHAs are performed.

DMRs should be reviewed as part of a major change on a process for which

damage mechanisms exist. If a major change may introduce a damage
mechanism, a DMR should be conducted. Where a damage mechanism is

identified as a contributing factor in an incident investigation for a process and a

DMR has not been performed, a DMR should be conducted.

Items to Address in a DMR

Key items to be addressed in a DMR include:

• Identification of potential damage mechanisms. This information must be

provided to PHA study teams and MOC reviewers.

• Determination that the materials of construction are appropriate for their

application and resistant to potential damage mechanisms. Changing materials

may be less expensive than the costs of incurring an incident.

• Methods to prevent the occurrence of damage mechanisms or mitigate

damage that may occur considering the design intent and operating envelope
for the process. This is particularly important for new processes where an

opportunity exists to incorporate safeguards that may not have been

considered.

• Identification of operating parameters that affect damage mechanisms. Such

information allows PHA teams to recognize circumstances in which process

conditions may accelerate or worsen damage. Also, it allows recommendations

to be made to modify process conditions to minimize or eliminate damage.

• An assessment of previous experience with damage mechanisms for the

process, including the inspection history. Loss of corporate memory is a real

phenomenon. The identification of previous problems can help prevent future

ones.

• A review of industry-wide experience with the process. Learning from the

experience of others is an inexpensive way of avoiding the same problems.

• Identification of applicable standards, codes and best industry practices.

Requirements relating to damage mechanisms are contained in various places

and should be identified and addressed. Standards, codes and practices

embody lessons learned over the lifetime of an industry and should not be
neglected. In some cases they may be required by law.

Procedure for DMRs

Typically, DMRs are recorded in a worksheet (see Figure 1). DMRs can be

accomplished by following these steps:

Step 1. Identify process sections for study and their design intentions

Processes are divided into sections for study. Sections can be defined in

a similar way to HAZOP nodes, that is as lines and vessels, or What If systems,

that is, as combinations of lines and vessels. Alternatively, process sections can
be defined as corrosion circuits. Corrosion circuits are process sections that

share common damage mechanism susceptibilities. They have similar:

• Process stream compositions

• Operating conditions (pressure, temperature, etc.)

• Materials of construction

• Phases (liquid, vapor, etc.)

• Operating envelopes

• Startup and shutdown considerations

• Equipment characteristics (type of insulation, presence of heat tracing, types of

coatings, etc.)

• Environmental conditions

Some damage mechanisms are specific to individual pieces of

equipment. Others may apply throughout the process and can be addressed in

a global node or system.

Design intention covers all factors that may influence which damage

mechanisms are possible for a process section. They must be specified so that
damage mechanisms can be identified. In particular, the presence of process

materials or contaminants that can accelerate corrosion should be noted. Such

chemicals include:

• Acids

• Carbon dioxide
• Chlorides

• Cyanides

• Hydrogen sulfide

• Oxygen

Step 2. Identify equipment items in the process section

All the pieces of equipment within each process section that are

susceptible to damage mechanisms must be listed in the DMR worksheet. Both

equipment names and tag numbers, or other identifiers, should be recorded.

Some practitioners add a Description column to the worksheet to provide more

information for each equipment item, e.g. design specifications.

Step 3. Identify materials of construction for equipment items

Pieces of equipment may contain multiple different types of construction

materials. For each piece of equipment, all construction materials that are

susceptible to damage mechanisms must be listed. Some pieces of equipment

may be susceptible to the same damage mechanisms and they can be grouped

together in the worksheet.

Step 4. Damage mechanisms

Damage mechanisms that are possible for the materials of construction

for each piece of equipment in a section are listed. Reference sources on
possible damage mechanisms, such as API 571, and company data are

consulted to identify those possible. The feasibility of particular damage

mechanisms depends on the design intent for the section, that is the materials

of construction, operating conditions, operating regime, etc.

Some practitioners add worksheet columns to record information on

damage mechanisms such as expected damage rates, susceptible locations,

etc.

Step 5. Conditions

Those operating parameters that affect the damage mechanisms

identified must be listed. They allow the PHA team to recognize circumstances

in which process conditions may accelerate or worsen damage. Also, it allows

recommendations to be made to modify process conditions to minimize or

eliminate damage.

Step 6. Effects

The consequences of equipment failure resulting from each damage

mechanism are recorded in the Effects column of the worksheet. The effects

may be hazardous material releases, or the impairment of equipment including

safeguards, utilities, and support systems.

Step 7. Safeguards

Safeguards that are in place to protect against the occurrence or the

effects of each of the damage mechanisms are listed. Safeguards include items

such are corrosion coupons that monitor corrosion rates, use of protective
coatings, and alarms on process parameters such as temperature with operator

response .

Step 8. Recommendations

Recommendations are made for any additional safeguards and an

assignment of responsibility is made for each recommendation. Decisions on

the need for recommendations is made based on the existing safeguards

present. Some practitioners use criticality or risk rankings to assist in the

determination.

DMR Reports

At the conclusion of a DMR, a written report should be prepared, which

includes:

• Process description including process drawings

• DMR approach used

• Team members and their qualifications

• Data sources employed

• DMR worksheets
• List of recommendations for temporarily mitigating or preventing damage

mechanisms

• List of recommendations for permanently mitigating or preventing damage

mechanisms

Recommendations from DMRs should be implemented as soon as

possible, preferably before PHAs are conducted. DMR reports should be

retained for the life of the process and made available to stakeholders.

Conclusions

The results of DMRs are needed to support process safety activities such
as MI programs, MOC reviews, and PHA studies. DMRs are valuable not only

for petroleum refineries but also for any facility where equipment failures may

result in catastrophic accidents.

References

1. API 571: Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in the Refining

Industry , 2nd Edition, April 2011.

2. General Industry Safety Order (GISO) §5189.1 Process Safety Management

for Petroleum Refineries , State of California, Department of Industrial Relations,
Division of Occupational Safety and Health, October 1, 2017 .

3. Energy Institute, Guidance for Corrosion Management in Oil and Gas

Production and Processing , May 2008.

Table 1. Damage Mechanisms.

Type Examples
Mechanical loading Ductile fracture, brittle fracture, mechanical fatigue and
failures buckling
Erosion Abrasive wear, adhesive wear and fretting
Uniform corrosion, localized corrosion and pitting,
Corrosion
sulfidation corrosion
Thermal-related
Creep, metallurgical transformation and thermal fatigue
failures
Cracking Stress-corrosion cracking
High-temperature hydrogen attack, low temperature
Embrittlement
metal embrittlement

Table 2. Examples of Incidents Involving Damage Mechanisms .

Incident Consequences Damage Mechanism

Esso Gas
Explosion and fire. 2 fatalities, 8
Plant,
injuries. Destruction of one plant Low temperature metal
Longford,
and shutdown of two others. Loss embrittlement
Australia,
of gas supplies to businesses.
1998
Bethune Point
Wastewater Explosion and fire. 2 fatalities, 1
Treatment critical injury. The aluminum flame
Corrosion of aluminum by
Plant, City of arrester on a methanol tank had
methanol
Daytona corroded to the point that it no
Beach, FL, longer functioned.
2006
Silver Eagle
Refinery, Explosion that damaged nearby
Sulfidation corrosion
Woods Cross, homes.
UT, 2009
Stress corrosion cracking.
NDK Crystal, Temper embrittlement, or
Inc., High-pressure vessel rupture. One some other form of heat
Belvidere, IL, public fatality, one public injury. treatment embrittlement,
may have been a
2009
contributing factor .
Tesoro
Petroleum
High temperature
Refinery, Explosion and fire. 7 fatalities.
hydrogen attack
Anacortes,
WA, 2010
Millard One employee and 152 offsite
Refrigerated workers sustained injuries. 32
Services, workers were admitted to the Hydraulic shock
Theodore, AL, hospital, and four were placed in
2010. intensive care.
15,000 members of the public
Chevron sought treatment for various
Refinery, ailments including breathing
Sulfidation corrosion
Richmond, problems. Approximately 20 people
CA, 2012 were admitted to local hospitals as
inpatients for treatment.

Figure 1. Example of DMR Worksheet.

PHAWorks RA Edition