Potential Benefits of Data Integration for Pipeline Integrity Management Programs
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Pipeline Integrity Management Programs are a requirement under Annex N of CSA Z662.07. Annex N requires that data from many sources and details be collected, integrated, and analyzed on a continuous basis. The stated goal is to provide guidance for developing, documenting, and implementing pipeline integrity management programs (PIM) which provide safe, environmentally responsible and reliable service[1]. If executed properly, there should be improved pipeline integrity with measurable improvements and benefits. An important step in reaching this goal is risk assessment, which requires continuous data input to maintain valid integrity assessments. This dynamic process of data collection and integration enables continuous analysis and potentially leads to a more proactive integrity management system. The biggest problem for most operating companies in creating a dynamic and proactive integrity management program (IMP) compliant with Annex N is in handling the elephantine data issues. Indeed the data collection, integration and analysis are the most daunting tasks of the program. A software solution that accepts data from the many activities involved in the lifecycle of a pipeline system would be potential beneficial. Application of integrated software tools in the oil and gas industry will result in improved integrity management, greater confidence in our pipeline infrastructure, and economic benefits. We will review some of the data requirements of Annex N of CSA Z662.07 and identify the components of the program that may differ from your existing management plan. The nature and detail of data to be managed will be presented. Finally, we will provide an example of the role that software tools can play to assist in meeting the requirements of this challenging regulatory initiative. Introduction Many pipeline operating companies are having trouble meeting the requirements of CSA Z662.07 Annex N, Guidelines for pipeline integrity management programs. In Canada, all oil and gas pipeline systems are designed, constructed, operated and maintained in accordance with the latest revision of CSA Standard Z662. Pipeline systems that convey liquid hydrocarbons, oilfield water and steam, carbon dioxide used in enhanced oilfield recovery schemes and hydrocarbon gas all fall under these requirements[1]. Annex N of CSA Standard Z662 addresses integrity management programs which are now mandatory for all sweet and sour pipeline systems in Alberta and British Columbia. Integrity management programs that are in accordance with Z662 are mandatory throughout Canada for all sour pipelines. Although most pipeline operating companies have been diligent in maintaining some form of integrity management they fall short in meeting the mandatory requirements of Annex N. Annex N requires that an integrity management program (IMP) include methods for collecting, integrating and analyzing information related to all facets of design, construction, operations, and maintenance. This requires a great deal of data collected from many different groups during the lifecycle of a pipeline system. Whereas most companies' integrity management programs are static and reside as manuals on shelves, Annex N style IMP are meant to be dynamic and proactive in nature. Just like car maintenance or dental health, integrity assessments must be continuous in order for the integrity program to be effective.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».