API Subcommittee 6



DRAFT Agenda - API Subcommittee 6

Valves and Wellhead Equipment

Winter 2010 Meeting

Date: Tuesday, February 9, 2010 Time: 8:30 to 1:00

Location: TIEC (Texas International Engineering Consultants) Training Center

480 N. Sam Houston Parkway E. Suite 270, Houston, Texas 77060

(Traveling Sam Houston Parkway, Beltway 8, Westbound; exit on Imperial Valley Drive. Make the U-Turn at the Imperial Valley Drive stop light and take the frontage road. Traveling from Sam Houston Parkway, Beltway 8, Eastbound; exit Greenspoint Dr/Imperial Valley Dr follow the Beltway 8 frontage road. Pass through the stoplights at Greenspoint Drive and then Imperial Valley Dr. From frontage road, continue to 480 N. Sam Houston Pkwy, located on the right, on the corner of Spence and the frontage road)

Agenda Items:

1. Attendance – Ed Baniak

2. Adoption of the Agenda – David Cole

3. Establish a Quorum– SC6 Membership – David Cole

4. Ratify the Summer 2009 Westminster meeting minutes (attached, see API website for attachments) – David Cole

5. Review 2009 ballot outcomes – Ed Baniak

a. Ballot 1720 – Changes to Spec 6D, Section 10 – Required Re–ballot, see 1794

b. Ballot 1721 – Addition to Spec 6D, Processes Requiring Validation – Published as part of Addendum 1, Annex G, October 2009 (Effective April 2010)

c. Ballot 1722 – Addition to Spec 6D, New Annex on Heat Treatment – Published as Addendum 1, Annex H, October 2009 (Effective April 2010)

d. Ballot 1752 – Revision of Spec 6A718 – Published 2nd Edition, December 2009

e. Ballot 1794 – Re-ballot changes to Spec 6D – Published as part of Addendum 1, Annex G, October 2009 (Effective April 2010)

f. Ballot 1795 – National Adoption of ISO 14723:2009 as next Revision of Spec 6DSS – Published 2nd Edition, December 2009 (Effective June 2010)

g. Ballot 1863 – Approval of FDIS ISO 10423 (USTAG ballot)

6. Other Document Actions 2009/2010 – Ed Baniak

a. API Spec 6A, Errata 5, issued May 2009

b. API Spec 6D, Errata 3 (includes Errata 1 & 2), issued February 2009

c. National Adoption of ISO 10423 as API Spec 6A, 20th Edition upon publication of ISO document (2010)

d. Action Needed API RP 6DR, Repair and Remanufacture of Pipeline Valves, 1st Edition

7. Report/Updates from task groups / liaisons

a. ISO 10423 – Ries Langereis

b. PER 15K – Ken Young

c. Use of Castings – Sterling Lewis

d. Pipeline Valves – Rick Faircloth

e. API 6AV1 – Austin Freeman

f. AWHEM Reports Phase I thru III, Technical Report – Austin Freeman

g. Spec 6D Test Requirements – Morg Bruck

h. 11IW – Keith Rhodes

i. Material Test Labs – Tim Haeberle

8. New Business

a. Color coding requirements of SC6 documents, notification to Monogram Program – David Cole

b. Error is Charts of API TR 6AF2 – Ken Young and David Cole

c. Other material standards (like 6A718) –Tim Haeberle

d. Propose of the proposed work is to make Annex(s) in Spec 6D similar to Annex A, B and C in API Spec 6DSS. – Rick Faircloth

e. Revise API Spec 6A, Table 49 - Bolting Requirements for End Connections to allow the use of low temperature nuts required by ASTM A 194 – Sterling Lewis

f. Resolve conflict between recent interpretation reference TI Ref: 6A-2010-1 (see below) and recent decision to allow manufactures to manufacture API flanges without a design file – Sterling Lewis

g. Define a basic set of quality control requirements for "generic" pressure controlling parts – Sterling Lewis

h. Annex G address design and rating for elevated temperatures. Minimum temperature of 00F imposes unnecessary requirements for tropical climates where ambient temperatures may not fall below 600F. – Sterling Lewis

i. Other (?)

9. Next Meetings:

a. API Summer Standards Conference in Washington, DC (June 28-July 3, 2010)

b. SC6 Meeting (Houston 2011 [date TBD]) in lieu of API Winter Standards Conference in Ft Worth, TX (January 24-28, 2011)

10. Adjourn

DRAFT 2

MINUTES

for

Meeting of the

API SUBCOMMITTEE 6 ON VALVES AND WELLHEAD EQUIPMENT

at the

2009 Summer Meeting

on Oilfield Equipment and Materials

of the

AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE

Exploration and Production Standards Conference on Oilfield Equipment and Materials

Westin Westminster, Westminster (near Denver), Colorado, USA

June 25, 2009

***

David Cole, Chairman

Ed Baniak, API Staff Representative

Roy W. Benefield, Secretary

AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSITUTE

Upstream Standards

1220 L Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005

API Subcommittee 6

Valves and Wellhead Equipment

Exploration and Production Standards Conference on Oilfield Equipment and Materials

Westin Westminster, Westminster (near Denver), Colorado, USA

Thursday, June 25, 2009

8:00 AM to 12 Noon

Draft Minutes

Yellow - motions passed Red - attachments Green - action required

1. Opening of the meeting (David Cole): David opened the meeting at 8:00.

a. Safety Issues – Evacuation routes were identified.

b. Housekeeping Issues – Room is full and we could have tripping hazards. Breaks as needed. Ed Baniak informed the group that about a new API wed-site changes using “MS SharePoint” starting July 6th. It will be necessary to log-in with a username and password. More information will be provide.

2. Roster Update (Ed Baniak) – Ed discussed the 6A and 6D voting list. Let him know by e-mail if changes are needed.

3. Roll call and update of voting categories (Ed Baniak): - Sheet was passed throughout the room and those in attendance were asked to sign in (Attachment A) A quorum was present

4. Adoption of the proposed agenda (David Cole) – Motion made, seconded (MMS) and passed (MMSP) to accept the agenda.

5. Adoption of the minutes from Houston, TX (winter meeting), February 3, 2009 (David Cole) – Clarification on item 11-b on ECS request for liaison for PER 15K should only be one person. Ken Young as appointed and agreed to be SC6 liaison to the PER 15K workgroup. MMSP to accept the minutes with the above clarification.

6. Solicitation for Vice Chair [possible chair-elect for June 2010 meeting, or thereafter] (David Cole) – David identified the need to have a vice-chair for SC6, who would eventually be the next chairman of the committee. Volunteers were requested. Normally this would be a user for the chairman. Vice-chair can be a manufacturer. This can be reconsidered if no users are available. No one volunteered in the meeting. Chair will take this matter up offline.

7. Ballots/Document Changes since last meeting (Ed Baniak): Ed provide status of ballots and recent activities.

a. Ballots 1720/1721/1722 (Changes to API 6D) – This will be discussed later in the meeting under 6D items. These are closed ballots.

b. Email – Spec 6A Products eligible for design exclusion per the Monogram Program – Previous Action (February 2009) was that Eric Wehner volunteered to develop a list of API Spec 6A products that may not require manufacture design. E-mail was circulated. Good comments were provided. The list was given to the API audit group. Ed explained the need for this list to allow for design exclusions. (Attachment B)

c. Errata 5 Issued 5/26/09 – This is not a balloted item, but corrections issued by API staff.

d. A new ballot is currently open API 6A718.

8. Task Group Chair/Project Group Leader reports:

a. API Spec 6A/ISO 10423

i. Castings/Forgings – API Spec 6A Perspective (Sterling Lewis)

Previous Action (February 2009) was for Sterling to get final language and send to ISO.

Sterling reported on this item. (Attachment C) This was discussed at the ISO 10423 meeting. Recommendations from the workgroup included 1) That a new work item to API 6D that would create a new annex for specifying PSL3 casting requirements, 2) Submit a resource/research proposal that would identify equivalent integrity between cast and forged products of the same PSL level, 3) that 6A workgroup will propose new wording for use of castings based on the report. Ries provide information on the schedule of the adopt coordination. Sterling asked for confirmation from the group present that this is the appropriate plan. The schedule was discussed. The intent is to start the adopt-back process immediately. API legal counsel reviews the adopt-back ballot as it goes out. There was a MMS to support the recommendations presented by Sterling. Annex O will be developed based on comments from the adopt back ballot. Some modifications to the attachment were noted. Motion passed. Action Item: The chairman pointed out that a budget estimate was needed. $250,000 over two years was suggested as a high level, first pass estimate. Sterling asked for volunteers to help. MMSP that we start the adopt-back process on ISO 10423 as soon as it is released (i.e., do not wait on resolution of castings which was roughly estimated as taking two years to resolve).

ii. Castings/Forgings – ISO 10423 Perspective (Alfred Kruijer) – There were no comments.

iii. Current Status of 10423 (Ries Langereis) – Ries reported (Attachment D) on the status of ISO 10423 and related items worked in the work group. The recommendation for wording on Repair and Remanufacture suggested by API was accepted by the work group. Alfred explained the variations in the ISO FDIS documents provide. ISO FDIS was officially handed over to Ed Baniak (Secretary, TC67/SC 4) in the meeting for forwarding to ISO Central Secretariat. Gratitude was expressed for the work done by this work group.

b. API Spec 6D/ISO 14313/API Spec 6DSS/ISO 14723 – Pipeline Valves (Rick Faircloth) – Rick reported on the task group (Attachment E). He pointed out that the ISO work group is included. Major issues and ballot items were discussed as listed in the attachment. Ed requested that written documentation (email is acceptable) was needed from those voting negative on withdrawal or abstaining.

[A short break was announced]

c. API Spec 6AV1 Workgroup (Eric Wehner) – Eric reported that resources were needed to complete this item on testing of SSV valves. The issue is to combine or drop the 6AV1 with the annex of 6A. 6AV1 was reaffirmed in 2008. MMS to drop this work item due to lack of interest. There has been no interest expressed in carrying out the work. Annex N makes reference to 6AV1 because it is a regional requirement. Austin Freeman volunteered to work (form a task group) on this item. Motion was withdrawn. Other task group volunteers were requested. Tim Haeberle volunteered to supply someone from GE Oil and Gas to help. Roy Benefield also volunteered. Action Item: the task group on 6AV1 will meet and report recommendations.

Eric was recognized as one of the API award recipients. All appreciated his work with Subcommittee 6 and related work groups.

d. API Spec 6A718 Workgroup (Tim Haeberle) – Tim gave a presentation (Attachment F) on the status of the work. Tim also submitted a written report on this item. (Attachment G) The ballot item is currently open and closes in July. It is changed from a “specification” to a “standard.” Other items are suggested as higher strength grades with modified age hardening and temperature range. Also validation requirements should be addressed. Validation requirements have been addressed for API 6A. Additional meetings will be called as needed for ballot comments.

9. Summary/Update of Prior Meeting Discussions/On-going Activities:

a. 20K Flanges/High Strength Bolting Materials (Shyam Patel) – John Fowler reported that there have been no further meetings.

b. PER15K Update (Earl Shanks) – Ken Young reported on the purpose of this work. Work groups include Verification (meeting July 15th at Shell), Validation, and Materials.

10. Status of Work Plan and Action Plan Update (David Cole):

a. AWHEM Reports - Metallic Material Limits for Wellhead Equipment Used in High Temperature for API 6A And 17D Applications: Phase I (dated 4-04); Phase II (dated 9-06); Phase III (dated 11-08) (Austin Freeman)

Previous Action (February 2009): Austin Freeman volunteered to lead in the effort to evaluate the status and determine a path forward (concerning AWHEM Reports - Metallic Material Limits for Wellhead Equipment Used in High Temperature for API 6A and 17D Applications: Phase I (dated 4-04); Phase II (dated 9-06); Phase III (dated 11-08)), with the help of Tim Haeberle. AWHEM should be requested put these reports in final form for publication. Eric will bring this up at AWHEM

Austin gave a presentation (Attachment H) on the status of this item. Austin also submitted a written report (Attachment I). The Technical Report will be given to API for publication. Comments were made on ASTM A453 Gr 660 by Tim Haeberle. It is an annex in the new ISO 1023. MMSP to published the Technical Report when it is given to API. Action Item: The Technical Report will be published when received by API.

11. New Business/New Work Groups Needed

a. Color coding requirements of SC6 documents – The chairman reported that this is work to be done by the committee. Ed pointed out that API will identify the individuals to do the color coding. Ed suggested that advance notice be provided to API on documents needed to be color coded, and to identify individuals who would do this. There are also product specific questions that are generated through the color coding. Don Whitaker is the person to notify. Action: SC6 chair to inform Don Whitaker of timing/need to color code 20th edition of 6A.

b. API Spec 11IW (Independent Wellhead Equipment) 2000/Reaffirmed 2008 – Ed pointed out that this document has not been looked at by SC6. It is scheduled to be reaffirmed in 2012. A group needs to be formed to review it. Volunteers were requested. Keith Roades volunteered to work (form a work group) on reviewing API Spec 11IW. Eric suggested that there may need to be a separate voting list for this document. There may not be a broad industrial need for this document. The chair proposed that the user members find out who in their company are interested in this equipment. Sterling Lewis volunteered to determine user interest in this document. The chair suggested that API survey the user members for usage to determine if there is a broad industrial need for this spec.

c. API RP 6HT (Heat Treatment and Testing of Large Cross Section and Critical Section Components) 2005 – Ed pointed out that reaffirmation is needed. This document is important and needs to be reviewed. Stephen Smith volunteered to chair a work group to review this API RP 6HT document. Joel Russo volunteered to be on the work group. Tim Haeberle also had a volunteer.

d. Other - John Fowler reported on requirement from the 2007 ASM Code and how to harmonize this with API documents. (Attachment J) He reported on the activities and recommendations of an ad hoc work group (Attachment K) including a comparison of the design requirements from API Spec 6A, API Spec 16A and API Spec 16C (Attachment L). It was recommended that API continue to use the 2004 ASME Code. One option was noted that a SC6 work group be formed to develop a standard on the ASME requirements for use in API documents. These changes apply to 6A and could be included in a regional annex. After some discussion it was decided to allow the current requirements to continue as is and after input from the 15K work group to react at that time with a coordinated API/ISO addendum.

e. Other new business – Tim Haeberle brought up the issue of material test labs. The chair requested that this be presented as a formal request for a new work item to SC6.

f. Morgan Bruck suggested a new work item to develop an annex for 6D for test requirements need for Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 49 CFR 195.310 and 49 210 CFR 192 material test requirements. Morg would chair. Eric has volunteered to work on this work group. Sterling said that he would look in his company for a volunteer.

12. Upcoming Meetings:

a. SC6 Meeting (Houston, February 2010 [date TBD]) in lieu of API Winter Standards Conference in New Orleans, LA (January 25-29, 2010)

b. API Summer Standards Conference in Washington, DC (June 28-July 3, 2010)

13. Meeting Adjourn at 11:57 AM.

January 6, 2010

TI Ref: 6A-2010-1

Hatem Mohammed Al-Sahli

Quality Manager

RasGas Drilling Department

E-mail: hmsahli@.qa

Request for Interpretation

API Spec 6A

Background Information:

This interpretation request is related to how equipment design, covered by API 6A - Specification for Wellhead and Christmas Tree Equipment, Nineteenth Edition, addresses material properties of a product. It is generally recognized that material properties of most steels may change through the cross section of a part. Some product design documentation accounts for this by assuming lower actual material properties than the product specification. The second point of the request relates to the application of different material designations in Table 4, when a part has multiple functional areas or pressure ratings. For example a single part may consist of a body and integral flanged end connections with different pressure ratings. The design method clauses 4.3.1 & 4.3.3 and material requirement clauses 5.4.1 a) & b) which, define standard and non-standard material designations and properties are considered relevant to the interpretation. Material requirements are thought to include material designations, in Table 4 for strength, in Table 5 for toughness and Table 6 for ductility.

Request for interpretation are as follows:

Question 1: Do Flanges designed by API and specified in API 6A require that standard or non-standard material properties, in clause 5.4.1 a) & b), are achieved throughout the cross section? If not, what criterion was applied for API designed Flanges?

Response 1: NO - Assumptions concerning material properties throughout the cross section of production parts are outside the scope of Spec 6A. API Specification 6A requires that the specified material properties are satisfied by testing of specimens taken from a QTC or a prolongation, and that the specified hardness testing of both QTC and production parts meet the specified acceptance criteria.

Question 2a: Can a manufacturer's design for Bodies, Bonnets and other End Connections use materials or processes that possess properties not meeting the minimum requirements of standard or non-standard materials in clause 5.4.1 a) & b) throughout the cross section (Figure 2 (B),?

Response 2a: YES - For large parts of varying cross-section, it may not be possible to achieve the specified minimum properties throughout, especially when it is necessary to meet hardness restrictions defined by ISO 15156/NACE MR0175 for low alloy steel.

Question 2b: If yes, should design documentation substantiate assumptions for the center "core" material requirements as a result of thermal response across the cross-section?

Response 2b: Not necessarily - depending on the shape and loading of the part, it may not be required. It is not intended that Specification 6A neither define all facets of design practice, nor that it replace the expertise of the designer. The manufacturer has the responsibility to determine what design methods are appropriate; and what level of detail is required in the design analysis.

Question 2c: Does the design methodology of clause 4.3 apply to designs when the actual "core" material strength, toughness and/or impact value (15 ft*lb) is less than what is defined for a standard material?

Response 2c: The manufacturer has the responsibility to determine what design methods of Subclause 4.3 are applied, what locations/sections of the part are analyzed, and whether reduced material properties and acceptance criteria are applicable at a given location.

Question 3a: All Bodies and Bonnets will have an integral End Connection. However, Table 5 treats material designations for Bodies separately from integral End Connections. Consider a Body with integral End Connections in Figure 3. Can it be assumed that component design takes into account the predictability of thermal response of a specified material only locally achieving the material designation properties for each region of the product?

Response 3a: YES - Where the size and configuration of the part and thermal response of the material would typically result in non-homogeneous properties, the design should take that into consideration. However, it is intended that a part manufactured from a single piece of material would have only one material designation.

Question 3b: Or must the design utilize homogeneous properties based on the critical function of the part, as shown in (B)?

Response 3b: NO

Question 4: Combining the three questions above, there are several possible combinations of material designations and depth to which properties are designed. What combinations of material designation and material properties through a cross-section are required?

Response 4: Specification 6A does not address combinations of material designation in a single part, except where weldment construction is employed (e.g., a 60k body section with 45k weld-neck flanges attached).

Sincerely,

Edmund Baniak

-----------------------

Edmund (Ed) Baniak, PhD

Senior Standards Associate,

Upstream & Pipeline Standards

Standards

1220 L Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005-4070

USA

Telephone 202-682-8135

Fax 202.962-4797

Email baniake@



................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download