Proceedings of the ASME 2022 14th International Pipeline Conference

IPC2022
September 26-30, 2022, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

IPC2022-87079

SQUEEZE THE CRACK OUT OF IT – WITH TYPE A COMPRESSION SLEEVES

David B. Futch Atul Ganpatye Josh Wilson

ADV Integrity, Inc. ADV Integrity, Inc. Allan Edwards, Inc.
Waller, Texas Waller, Texas Tulsa, Oklahoma

ABSTRACT
Type A Compression Sleeves have been a technically viable NOMENCLATURE
repair method for corrosion, lamination-like features, and 𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖 Internal pressure
longitudinal crack-like features for the past 20+ years. A Type A 𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖−𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 Interface pressure between sleeve and pipe
Compression Sleeve relies on thermal expansion/contraction of 𝜎𝜎ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜−𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 Pipe hoop stress
the steel sleeve, which once the sleeve long seam welds are made, 𝑟𝑟𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 Pipe radius
results in a compressive hoop stress in the carrier pipe at levels
𝑟𝑟𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 Sleeve radius
equal to or greater than generated at max operating pressure.
𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 Pipe wall thickness
This repair technology has been mostly marketed in Canada, and
therefore, CSA Z662 includes the Type A Compression Sleeve in 𝑡𝑡𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 Sleeve wall thickness
their list of approved permanent repair technologies. Over the ∆𝑇𝑇𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 Apparent sleeve temperature change
past five years, there’s been an increased awareness in the ∝ Coefficient of thermal expansion
United States as the technology has become referenced in E Elastic modulus
industry documents such as the PRCI Pipeline Repair Manual
and API 1176. 1. INTRODUCTION
Steel sleeves have been a mainstay pipeline repair method
This paper provides an overview of a Type A Compression since the installation of the first high pressure transmission
Sleeve, including the basis of how the repair system functions pipelines dating back over 100 years ago. Alternative repair
and how the sleeve is installed. Finally, this paper presents a methods, such as composites, have made inroads in the past 20
series of full-scale tests and numerical modeling validating this years; however, steel sleeves still remain in heavy use.
innovative repair system. The use of induction heat, rather than
open flame, provides a more consistent and traceable heat There are two variations in steel sleeves: Type A and Type
signature, allowing for confidence in the installed repair. Tests B. Type A sleeves provide structural reinforcement, whereas
include synthetic cracks generated by precracking an EDM Type B sleeves provide pressure containment.
notch to generate a sharp-tipped crack, then heat tinted to
provide a distinguishable boundary. The EDM notches, installed The technology behind a steel repair sleeve is relatively
at a maximum of 50% of the wall thickness within the ERW seam, simple; however, advances in this technology have occurred with
were subsequently repaired via the induction heating sleeve the development of higher grade steels, improved welding
technology with and without flowing water in the carrier pipe. practices, and advances in polymer-based load transfer / filler
Test samples were cycled to 100,000 cycles, burst, and material systems. One such advancement is a Type A
metallurgically examined. Post-test examination of the fracture Compression Sleeve. A Compression Sleeve is similar to a
surfaces revealed no discernable growth, therefore, indicating conventional Type A repair sleeve, except that it is designed to
the technical viability of the repair technology as a permanent also apply compression to the carrier pipe. This compression is
repair of crack-like features and provides an Operator another achieved through a combination of installation techniques that
option when making repair decisions. include heating the sleeve before welding and using a polymer-
Keywords: Compression sleeve, pipeline repair, induction based load transfer system. This additional compression,
heating achieved through heating (and cooling) of the sleeves, is

1 © 2022 by ASME
advantageous as it places the defect(s) under the repair into a (1) Monitoring strain developed when actuating the clamps
compressive stress state that reduces the maximum stress up to 4,000 psi.
experienced during both static and cyclic pressure service. This (2) Monitoring the temperature differential between the
state of stress increases the burst capacity and extends the cyclic pipe’s internal surface and the sleeve’s external surface
fatigue life of defects to a greater extent possible than using a when the induction heating unit has an output of 35 kW.
conventional welded steel repair sleeve. (3) Repeat (2), however, change induction heating unit
output to 28 kW.
Heating of the steel sleeve prior to welding has been (4) Repeat (2), however, change induction heating unit
traditionally achieved using handheld bulbous heaters using a output to 20 kW.
fuel source such as propane. The heating sources are moved in
regular intervals to distribute heat across the sleeve. A total of six trials were performed to measure the evolution
in the sleeve gap using a tapered gap gage, shown in Figure 1,
Over the past 3 years, a variation in the heating method was described below:
developed with the goal to provide a traceable record of applied (1) Install on a nominal 12.75-inch OD x 0.188-inch WT
heat. This was achieved using induction heating units and pipe
designed blankets. (2) Install on second nominal 12.75-inch OD x 0.188-inch
WT pipe
This paper examines the use of an inductively heated system (3) Install on nominal 24-inch OD x 0.312-inch WT pipe
to perform in accordance with the Type A Compression Sleeve (4) Repeat (1) through (3) by rotating sleeve approximately
requirements present within various industry standards, most 45° and repeating installation
notably CSA Z662 [1]. A series of installs and full-scale tests
were examined to provide a comprehensive examination of this
heating method. Additional calculation and numerical modeling
steps were performed to increase the confidence in the repair
method.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

This testing program was broken into three sub-stages,
including: (1) mock-up tests to understand the influence of heat FIGURE 1: EXAMPLE PHOTOGRAPH OF TAPERED GAP
GAGE
applied and potential compressive stress, (2) full-scale tests to
examine the long-term fatigue life of a repaired crack-like
2.2 Full-Scale Tests
feature, and (3) calculations using input data collected during (1)
A series of full-scale tests were performed to further
and (2).
document the ability of an inductively heated compression
sleeve to place the carrier pipe in compression at the maximum
2.1 Mock-Up Tests
operating pressure. The test matrix shown in Table 1 was utilized
Prior to completing the full-scale tests, a series of mock-up
in this study. The following subsections discuss the sample
tests were completed to replicate a compression sleeve
geometry, test plan, test results, and the post-test metallurgical
installation. The goal of this mock-up test was to better
examination of all samples.
characterize the ability of the sleeve configuration to achieve a
temperature differential between the sleeve/pipe and monitor
TABLE 1: FULL-SCALE TEST MATRIX
strain on the inside pipe surface during installation. Initially
Notch Depth
these mock-ups were completed using a nominal 12.75-inch OD Sample # Condition
(%)
x 0.188-inch WT pipe and a 0.375-inch WT tight fitting sleeve.
Later, additional mock-up tests were performed on nominal 24- 1
Ambient Install
inch OD x 0.312-inch WT pipe and a 0.375-inch WT tight fitting 2
50
sleeve to better understand and correlate the heating temperature 3 Flowing Water during
to the experienced sleeve gap before and after heating. The 4 Install
sleeve gap is the root gap present after fitting up the steel sleeve
and is easily accessed at the ends of the sleeve. The installation Four (4) eight-foot-long full-scale test vessels were
occurred using an open-ended pipe allowing access to the fabricated using nominal 12.75-inch OD x 0.188-inch WT, API
internal pipe surface during the installation process. 5L Grade X52 material manufactured via the high frequency
electric resistance welded (HF-ERW) process. One three-inch-
Initially, four total trials were performed to better long electric discharge machining (EDM) notch was placed at
understand the influence of the applied heating output and the the test vessels mid-length coinciding with the ERW seam weld.
resulting temperature differential, described below: The EDM notch was installed to a depth that was approximately
50% of the nominal wall thickness.

2 © 2022 by ASME
 5. Sleeve was welded using E7018 consumables, shown in
The test plan, described below, includes pre-cycling, Figure 6.
installation of the Compression Sleeve, pressure cycling of the 6. The strain gages installed at the edge of the compression
repair sample, and burst testing (if sample survives cycling). sleeve were monitored during installation and cooling of the
Each part of the test plan is described below. compression sleeve.
7. Samples 3 and 4 were installed with flowing water through
Pre-cycling: the pipe to simulate flowing product. The water was
1. Install clip gages across the EDM notch to monitor crack between 70 and 75 °F and flowed at approximately 5 gallons
growth (crack growth is interpreted from the opening per minute.
displacement of the EDM notch mouth)
2. Sample installed in pressure containment boxes and cycled
between 150 psig to 1,104 psig (10% – 72% SMYS) until
clip gage indicates growth.
3. Heat tint notches after growth to indicate EDM notch and
pre-crack depth, shown in Figure 2.
4. Strain gages were installed on the base pipe per Figure 3 to
monitor strain and temperature during sleeve installation.

FIGURE 4: HARDENABLE FILL INSTALL

FIGURE 2: HEAT TINTING OF NOTCH

FIGURE 3: GAGE LOCATIONS FIGURE 5: INDUCTION HEATER SET-UP

Compression Sleeve Install:
Compression sleeves were installed following a procedure
developed by Allan Edwards. A few key steps in this install
procedure [2] are listed below:
1. A polymeric hardenable fill material was locally installed
around EDM notch to assist with load transfer between the
sleeve and pipe, as shown in Figure 4.
2. Sleeve was installed and the gap between the two sleeve
halves at the weld bevel was measured using a tapered gap
gage.
3. Induction heater blanket was installed over the sleeve and
heater output was set to 35 kW (determined to be most
advantageous applied heat), shown in Figure 5.
FIGURE 6: SLEEVE WELDING
4. Sleeve gap was measured using tapered gap gage upon the
induction heater thermocouples reaching 400 °F.
Repaired Cycling:

3 © 2022 by ASME
 Pressure cycle samples to failure or runout of 100,000 (1) and Equation (2) for estimating the net compressive effect on
cycles. the pipe. These equations are generated through the use of thin-
1. Cycle samples with a pressure range of 150 psig to 1,104 pipe stress, strain, and displacement relationships with the carrier
psig (10 to 72% SMYS). pipe experiencing internal pressure and the sleeve restricting that
2. Burst Test: expansion resulting in an interface pressure. Applying a radial
a. Perform a burst test if the sample reaches the compatibility condition between the pipe and the sleeve and
runout condition of 100,000 cycles. applying the effects of heat, the radial displacement of the sleeve
b. Pressurize sample to failure with 5-minute holds at can be calculated. Further superimposing the effects of pressure
the following pressures: and temperature results in the equations below. This
i. 552 psig (36% SMYS) interpretation of temperature is termed “apparent” because
ii. 1,104 psig (72% SMYS) instead of representing the actual measured temperature, it
iii. 1,533 psig (100% SMYS). collectively represents the net effect of various physical
responses due to temperature such as sleeve and pipe
2.3 Calculations temperatures, their relative expansions, clamping pressures, etc.
There are two key assumptions associated with a stress
analysis of the compression sleeve system. The first assumption 𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖 𝑟𝑟2
𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝
+ 𝑟𝑟𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝛼𝛼Δ𝑇𝑇𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠
is that the sleeve and carrier pipe remain in perfect contact. The 𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝐸𝐸
second assumption is that the radial displacement of the pipe is 𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖−𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 = 2 (1)
𝑟𝑟𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑟𝑟2
equal to that of the sleeve at the contact interface (i.e., radial � + 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 �
𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝐸𝐸 𝑡𝑡𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝐸𝐸
displacement compatibility is maintained). In real-world
situations both these assumptions may vary due to factors such
�𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖 −𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖−𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 �𝑟𝑟𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝
as pipe ovality, surface roughness, non-uniform temperature 𝜎𝜎ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜−𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 = (2)
distribution etc., but in the present context, these assumptions 𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝
allow for efficient and reasonable evaluation of the thermal
compression concept. Where:
𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖 Internal pressure
The compression sleeve concept relies on the generation of 𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖−𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 Interface pressure between sleeve and pipe
interface pressure between the base/carrier pipe and the sleeve. 𝜎𝜎ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜−𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 Pipe hoop stress
The higher the interface pressure, the higher the resulting 𝑟𝑟𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 Pipe radius
compression on the base pipe. This is shown schematically in 𝑟𝑟𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 Sleeve radius
Figure 7. 𝑡𝑡𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 Pipe wall thickness
Sleeve
𝑡𝑡𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 Sleeve wall thickness
Pipe Sleeve Pipe
∆𝑇𝑇𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 Apparent sleeve temperature change
∝ Coefficient of thermal expansion
= + E Elastic modulus

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This testing program was broken into three sub-stages,
including: (1) mock-up tests to understand the influence of heat
Pipe and sleeve Interface pressure tending Interface pressure tending to
system in perfect to expand the sleeve contract the pipe applied and potential compressive stress, (2) full-scale tests to
contact Net pressure = Net pressure =
examine the long-term fatigue life of a repaired crack-like
FIGURE 7: CONCEPT OF INTERFACE PRESSURE BETWEEN feature, and (3) calculations using input data collected during (1)
THE PIPE AND THE SLEEVE and (2).

As discussed earlier, sleeve gaps were measured using 3.1 Mock-Up Tests
a tapered gap gage during the mock-ups. In cases where strain Analysis of the three temperature differential trials indicate
measurement is difficult or impractical, the measured gap data that the time to reach 400 °F and the temperature differential for
can be interpreted in terms of thermal stresses and strains and the three induction heater outputs (35 kW, 29 kW, and 20 kW)
can serve as a reasonable proxy for the estimated compressive are shown in Table 2. The higher induction heater output resulted
effect of the sleeves. This builds on the understanding that the in a faster time to reach 400 °F, which consequently resulted in
gaps between the sleeves will close (measured gap will be a larger temperature differential.
smaller) as the sleeve heats up relative to the pipe. When
processed with thermal expansion coefficient for steel, the These results show several key pieces of data:
measured gap closure can be interpreted as an increase in length (1) Time required to achieve approximately 400 °F on the
of the sleeve due to an “apparent” sleeve temperature increase. outside surface of the pipe, a temperature required by
This apparent sleeve temperature can then be used in Equation

4 © 2022 by ASME
 the Allan Edwards installation procedure. Presumably, TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF GAPS MEASURED
shorter time periods are advantageous as this allows for Sample
Sleeve Gap (in) Measured Gap Avg.
a shorter temperature soak time – resulting in a larger at Clamp Pressure (psi) Δ, Gap Δ
temperature differential. OD # Side 4,000 1,000 4,000 (in) (in)
(2) Temperature differential achieved between the outside A 0.041, 0.041, 0.024, 0.017,
surface of the sleeve and inside surface of the pipe when 0.090, 0.090, 0.048, 0.042,
the outside surface of the sleeve reaches approximately 1 0.050
400 °F. B 0.070, 0.071, 0.046, 0.025,
0.054 0.064 0.036 0.028
24
A larger temperature differential is advantageous as it can A 0.108, 0.108, 0.075, 0.033,
0.140, 0.141, 0.115, 0.026,
result in increased compressive strain in the carrier pipe from
2 0.050
thermal contraction. Therefore, the optimal induction heater B 0.140, 0.141, 0.112, 0.029,
output appears to be 35 kW. 0.153 0.153 0.140 0.013
A 0.085, 0.089, 0.058, 0.031,
TABLE 2: TIME AND TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIAL 0.097, 0.097, 0.055, 0.042,
Induction Heater Time to 400 °F Max Temperature 1 0.063
Output (kW) (min:sec)1 Differential (°F)2 B 0.041, 0.043, 0.010, 0.033,
35 6:30 230 0.036 0.037 0.010 0.027
28 7:00 150 A 0.088, 0.088, 0.045, 0.043,
20 7:45 175 0.040, 0.040, 0.015, 0.025,
1
400 °F as measured by induction heater thermocouples, induction heater 2 0.048
was shut off once 400 °F was achieved. B 0.030, 0.030, 0.027, 0.003,
2
Temperature differential for thermocouples installed at the top of the test 0.060 0.064 0.036 0.028
specimen (0°) determined at the time the induction heater was shut off which 12
A 0.113, 0.111, 0.074, 0.037,
would correlate to tacking the sleeve, locking in potential thermal
expansion/contraction.
0.105, 0.105, 0.039, 0.066,
3 0.084
B 0.043, 0.043, 0.015, 0.028,
Sleeve gaps were measured using a tapered gap gage during 0.045 0.046 0.010 0.036
the second set of mock-ups. Sleeves were installed, clamps were A 0.055, 0.055, 0.022, 0.033,
tightened to 4,000 psi, and the first set of measurements were 0.095, 0.095, 0.049, 0.046,
taken. Clamps were released to 1,000 psi and a second set of 4 0.066
measurements were taken. At that time, the induction heating B 0.033, 0.033, 0.009, 0.024,
unit was turned on. The clamps were tightened to 4,000 psi once 0.034 0.036 0.005 0.031
the temperature reached 400 °F, then a final set of measurements
were conducted. These measurements are summarized in Table
3. The collected strain gage data was largely inconclusive,
therefore, the performance of the sleeve was based upon the
measured sleeve gaps, pre- and post-heat.

Using the gap information provided in Table 3, and

interpreting apparent temperatures for the respective gap data,
the stresses in the pipe and sleeve were calculated; the results are
shown in Table 4. The table also shows the net development of TABLE 4: SUMMARY OF GAPS MEASURED
stresses in the sleeve and the pipe if the pipes were to be
pressurized to their respective 72% SMYS pressures after the Sample Hoop Stresses Net Hoop Stresses
sleeve installation. After Cooldown, Internal After Pressure
No Pressure (ksi) Pressure Application (ksi)
(psig)
OD #
Sleeve Pipe Sleeve Pipe

1 9.1 -10.6 973 26.2 6.9

24
2 8.9 -10.4 973 26.0 7.2

1 16.4 -30.8 1104 29.1 -17.4

12
2 12.4 -23.3 1104 25.1 -9.8

5 © 2022 by ASME
 surface. Each fracture surface was examined using a stereoscope.
3 21.9 -41.2 1104 34.6 -27.8
The fracture depths listed in Table 6 are estimates of the
4 17.2 -32.4 1104 29.9 -18.9 combined EDM “starter” notch and pre-crack depth; however, in
some cases the heat tint did not easily distinguish the pre-crack
depth.
3.2 Full-Scale Tests
Test samples were instrumented and tested as described in Sample 1 failed prior to reaching the 100,000 runout
the preceding section. Strain and temperature were monitored condition; however, the pre-crack depth appeared deeper than
during the sleeve install process. Several noteworthy were other fractures when examining the fracture surface. This could
identified during the install process: indicate an upper limit for crack repair or could indicate
(1) The sleeve temperature experiences an increase during differences in fit-up of Sample 1 that resulted in additional
the install as well as during welding. During each growth once repaired.
welding pass temperatures are generated that are greater
than approximately 350 °F. However, the temperature TABLE 6: SUMMARY OF FLAW DEPTH
during welding is inconsequential as the potential Number of EDM Notch Pre-crack
compression is locked in once the tacks occur Sample #
Cycles Depth (in) Depth (in)
(immediately after the temperature increase early in the 0.084 0.050
install). 1 8,858
(45.0%) (26.7%)
(2) The samples where water was flowing during the install 0.088 0.027
(Samples 3 and 4) cooled significantly faster than the 2
(46.8%) (14.4%)
samples installed in ambient conditions (Samples 1 and Runout
0.090 0.026
2). This condition is more representative of an install on 3 100,000
(47.9%) (13.8%)
an active pipeline as the product within the pipe would cycles
0.092 0.016
result in faster cooling. 4
(49.2%) (8.6%)
(3) The strain gage data showed resultant compression
once fully cooled; however, the gage experiencing the 3.3 Discussion
maximum compressive strain varied from sample to Three of the four installed Compression Sleeves resulted in
sample. This is likely due to potential ovality in the sufficient reinforcement to prevent crack growth. Relating
pipe/sleeve and the interface between the two. 100,000 pressure cycles at the tested range (10 to 72% SMYS)
results in an equivalent 57,764 cycles with a ∆P of 72% SMYS.
All samples were placed in pressure containment boxes and For some time, the pipeline industry has employed the data
cycled to failure or runout of 100,000 cycles. Sample 1 leaked at compiled by John Kiefner which classified pressure cycling in
8,858 cycles, and Samples 2-4 survived the runout condition. four categories based on industry surveys: Very Aggressive,
Those samples that survived were burst tested, with all failures Aggressive, Moderate, and Light (refer to data presented in Table
occurring in the base pipe outside the Compression Sleeve at 7). As noted, a Very Aggressive condition will result in 276
pressures above 100% SMYS. A summary of the results is cycles per year and a Light condition will result in 10 cycles per
shown in Table 5, with an additional unreinforced, 50% EDM year assuming a pressure range of 72% SMYS. Gas transmission
notch cycled to failure for comparison. pipelines typically experience minimal cycling, so a Light
pressure cycle condition is appropriate. Accounting for a safety
factor of 5, results in an approximate cyclic life tested of 42 years
in a Very Aggressive pressure cycling regime and 1,155 years in
TABLE 5: SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS a Light pressure cycling regime – both significantly long periods
Burst Burst when examining the 100,000 cycles each sleeve survived in this
Number of
Sample # Pressure Pressure study. It should be noted that Samples 2 through 4 did not fail;
Cycles
(psi) (% SMYS) therefore, the fatigue life would be significantly longer than the
1 8,858 N/A life mentioned above (achieving more than 100,000 pressure
2 2,188 142.7 cycles).
Runout
3 100,000 2,200 143.5
TABLE 7: ANNUAL CYCLIC PRESSURE CONDITIONS BASED
4 cycles 2,195 143.2 ON KIEFNER STUDY INDUSTRY SURVEY [3]
Unreinforced 896 N/A Percent Very
Aggressive Moderate Light
SMYS Aggressive
72 20 4 1 0
After pressure testing the EDM notches were removed,
65 40 8 2 0
further sectioned via saw cutting, chilled the sample in liquid
nitrogen, and broke the EDM notches open to reveal the fracture 55 100 25 10 0

6 © 2022 by ASME
 45 500 125 50 25 [3] Kiefner, J.F. et al., Estimating Fatigue Life for Pipeline
35 1000 250 100 50 Integrity Management, Paper No. IPC04-0167, Presented at the
25 2000 500 200 100 International Pipeline Conference, Calgary, Canada, October 4–
Total 3660 912 363 175 8, 2008.
Single equivalent number of annual cycles with ΔP as noted
72% 276 67 25 10
61% 512 124 47 18
36% 3,683 889 337 128

The crack-like feature in one sample (Sample 1) was

considerably deeper than the other three and therefore could set
a limit for the repairable depth with this system. This sample
experienced an approximately 10x fatigue life extension when
compared to the unreinforced sample. Accounting for a safety
factor of 5, the 8,858 cycles results in an approximate cyclic life
tested of 6.5 years considering a Very Aggressive pressure
cycling regime and 177 years with a Light pressure cycling
regime.

The compression sleeves were installed at zero internal

pressure. The intended compression, and target heating
temperature, would need to be compensated in the event internal
pipe pressure is present during the install. This would require a
larger temperature differential to increase the resultant
compressive stress. However, the cooling characteristics of the
product in the pipeline would help increase the temperature
differential as the internal pipe surface would be cooled during
the installation.

Based on the data collected during mock-up tests, sleeve

installation process on full-scale test samples, and subsequent
cyclic tests, it can be inferred that the installed sleeves performed
as expected. The relatively early failure of Sample 1 is likely an
outlier due to an assignable cause (such as deeper initial notch
compared to notches in the other samples or non-uniform
material properties in the vicinity of the notch); additional data
and/or detailed interpretation of the existing data may be
required to narrow down on the possible causes for the early
failure associated with this sample.

4. CONCLUSION
This study shows the feasibility of an inductively heated
Type A Compression Sleeve to provide reinforcement to
longitudinal crack-like features. The appropriate timing of heat
and weld tacks help ensure a consistent application. Collection
and analysis of gaps generated along the sleeve’s side seam can
result in a sufficient quality assurance of an installed sleeve.

REFERENCES
[1] CSA Z662, Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems, Mississauga,
Ontario: Canadian Standards Association, June 2019

[2] Compression Sleeve Install Overview, provided by

Allan Edwards, April 2022.

7 © 2022 by ASME