Avoid Exchanger Replacement Using Advanced Analysis and Fit for Service Approach

Abstract

Shell & Tube Heat exchangers are critical for incessant operation of processing plant. These exchangers may face integrity threats due to reduction in shell thicknesses at Nozzle to Shell Junction below design code requirements. This paper presents the Cost Effective fit for purpose approach utilizing advance Finite Element analysis to explore and recommend the solutions for existing numerous exchangers that are to be safely used even after reported low thickness on account of manufacturing imperfection. Reduction in Shell thickness below design value can affect its ability to sustain design pressure & vacuum including nozzle integrity for associated piping loads and service life reduction for exclusion of corrosion allowance. As short-term Mitigation methodology, weld overlay was adopted to restore the areas with lower thickness. For long term solution, fit for purpose review approach was adopted for continued usage of exchangers which involves nozzle load analysis using WRC & FEA based on PAUT thickness data and utilizing actual piping loads, derating of design pressure, comparison of thickness data to establish corrosion rate and service life of exchanger. Thorough Integrity review based on design Code (ASME BPVC Section VIII) and WRC analysis have confirmed that majority of the exchangers have thickness higher than that required to sustain design pressure, vacuum conditions when considered with piping loads acting on nozzles. Thickness data comparison between three (03) year old manual UT and latest Phase array UT confirmed that majority of the exchangers are in clean non-corrosive service thus allowance for corrosion is not required. Where in the nature of exchanger service require corrosion allowance, it is considered in analysis and usage of stiffeners at nozzle to shell intersection and/or on full circumference of shell is recommended to prevent overstress due to piping loads / buckling distortion due to vacuum conditions respectively, based on detailed Finite element analysis (FEA). In order to establish more reliable long-term corrosion rate, next inspection after four (04) years is recommended and impact on integrity can be further evaluated based on the latest data. Change in exchanger nameplate is recommended to consider for design pressure as MAWP and accordingly adjust hydro test pressure followed by R-stamp requirements for rerating and repair. Shell side hydro test is restricted until recommendations are implemented Although conventional approach of replacing complete Shells to meet code requirement would have ensured process safety, performance and structural integrity. However, alternative fit for purpose approach utilizing advanced FEA has not only ensured all these but also led to potential cost saving of multimillion US$. Associated risks of thickness reduction due to corrosion may still be observed, however analysis confirmed structural integrity and safety of heat exchangers with low thicknesses. Accordingly, potential risk is mitigated.