8 1 0 2 / 6 e u s s I e Journal Pipeline Technology Journal On The Occasion of Transneft’s 25 Anniversary On The Occasion of Transneft’s 25 Anniversary COMPREHENSIVE TOPICS www.pipeline-journal.net ISSN 2196-4300

PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 3 EDITORIAL Competition stimulates business Under this well-known slogan one should classify what can currently be observed in pipeline technology: Large TSO with their technology subsidiaries from Asia and Eastern Europe (e.g. Transneft, Sinopec and others) are pushing their way into the markets in North America and Western Europe. This development naturally has several facets: On the one hand, they bring with them specific experience that re- quire the companies that have dominated the technology and the market to adapt their technology. On the other hand, their step into the international markets also enables these companies to compare their technology with their competitors and adapt it to the requirements. Dr. Klaus Ritter Editor in Chief However, both opportunities can only be exploited if they can take place on the ba- sis of an open market. This means that technology and service providers also gain access to the markets where their new competitors are at home. Technical journals as well as conferences and exhibitions are the right channel to foster such an expansion. However, entrants to new markets must consider that they are expected to convince potential customers that their technology can com- pete in terms of safety, reliability and profitability. As one of the world’s largest TSO, Transneft gained valuable operational experi- ence with large pipelines and therefore possesses Know-How, it is displayed in this editions segment “Company Profile” on the occasion of the company’s 25th anni- versary. This segment offers companies, in this case Transneft and its subsidiaries PTI and Diascan, the opportunity to present themselves in a striking way. These companies will also present themselves at the upcoming Pipeline Technology Con- ference (ptc), 18-21 March 2019 in Berlin. The next ptc will feature an array of interesting plenary discussions. One of them will focus on Eurasia and the regions significance for the pipeline industry. In this context, the appearance of the International Association of Oil Transporters IAOT at the ptc exhibition is also interesting. By providing a platform for international exchange, ptc and ptj both aim to foster the use of state of the art pipeline solutions in order to increase our industry’s safe- ty, reliability and profitability. Yours, > Dr. Klaus Ritter, President EITEP Institut

Construction on Enbridge’s Line 3 Replacement Program progresses in Alberta and Saskatchewan. The L3RP, with a targeted completion date of 2019, will fully replace 1,660 kilometres (1,031 miles) of Line 3, one of the primary conduits in Enbridge’s Mainline crude oil network, between Hardisty and Superior, Wisconsin. In Canada, this $5.3-billion project will create thousands of jobs, generate hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue, and contribute billions to the gross domestic product (GDP). Copyright: Enbridge

RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT / TECHNOLOGY PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 9 BACKGROUND At the European level, the functional requirements for pipelines in public gas grids at operating pressures of above 16 bar are governed by EN 1594 [1]. According to Section 7.2, the internal pressure is supposed to be the leading load case for the dimensioning (“standard load condition”). The influence of additional loads and the interaction with the surrounding soil are not taken into consideration in this approach. For pipeline sections where significant external loads may be encountered, a more extensive planning has to be performed using es- tablished analysis methods as specified by Section 7.3. There are several technical assessment concepts avail- able which utilize simplifications to address day-to-day engineering needs for standard cases of buried piping systems. VdTÜV Instruction Sheet 1063 [2] can be for example used to investigate ovalization of the pipeline’s cross-section subjected to traffic loads. The application of the EN 1594 Annexes A to F enables the estimation of soil-induced shifts which may result in additional strain- ing along the pipeline. The standardized methods consid- er individual aspects, e.g. with regard to settlement, min- ing subsidence, frost heave or potential impact caused by earthquakes. Comparatively few assessment models are available for holistic investigations of complex and combined load profiles. As a possible approach, EN 1594 specifies numerical simulation models in line with the finite element method (EN 1594:2013, Section 7.3.3). NUMERICAL ASSESSMENT APPROACH The finite element method is basically suitable for the numerical solution of physical field problems which are described by differential equations. The method has “The potential for numerical approaches has been increased rapidly over the last years, also in the field of pipeline integrity. Johannes Brückner become an efficient engineering tool against the back- ground of the continuously increasing computing capaci- ty of modern computers. The accuracy of each numerical model must be evidenced by means of comparisons with established methods (validation). Within the context of the work presented here, a finite element model has been developed which simulates the buried pipeline subjected to any load configuration. Validation has been performed step by step for the pipeline and the surrounding soil. All simulations have been carried out using the commercial software package Abaqus FEA, Version 6.13-3. First, three decisive base load cases were simulated on the straight pipe and compared with analytical solu- tions from literature. The ovalization load case (Figure 1) is shown exemplarily of this process step. Surface loads which correspond to the bedding conditions of the buried pipeline were applied to the outer surface of the pipe. The lateral soil pressure was varied as a relative component of the vertical load over the lateral pressure coefficient λ along the lines of [2]. Maximum ovalization results from the theoretical case of the laterally unsup- ported pipe (λ = 0). The simulated circumferential stress very well matches the analytical solution as specified by [3]. Similar to this load case, the deflection of the pipe subjected to a bending load was simulated for an elastic bedded pipe and compared with the analytical solution according to [4]. The internal pressure load case was validated with reference to [5]. Surface load in vertical direction Internal pipe surface, 12 o’clock External pipe surface, 9 o’clock Lateral pressure coefficient acc. to [2] Simulated ovalization Internal pipe surface, 9 o’clock External pipe surface, 6 o’clock Figure 1: Simulated ovalization in comparison with analytical solution

RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT / TECHNOLOGY PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 11 Quadratic Soil body with rectangular load (quarter-symmetric) sKP,FE = 16,9 mm sKP,Kany = 18,4 mm Simulated settlement for soil stiffness 5 MN/m² sKP = 16,9 mm smax = 23,1 mm Figure 3: Simulated settlement in comparison to standardized calculation traversals at different crossing angles can be simulated. Since the consistency of the lateral soil beside the pipe has an influence on the ovalization stress, this param- eter has been considered in the simulation model as a numerical bedding criterion. ATV-DVWK Code of Prac- tice 127 [13] defines four soil zones which characterize the layer composition within the pipe trench: Numerical model Truck load (60-tonne) Rotatable disc 10 m Pipeline 20 m Soil body 50 m Cover 1 m Cover 2 m Cover 3 m Nominal width 400 Nominal width 900 Nominal width 1200 Crossing angle 0° Crossing angle 30° Crossing angle 90° Figure 5: Soil zones according to ATV-DVWK-A 127 E1 designates the cover fill above the pipe crown and E4 the soil below the pipe. Soil zones E2 and E3 designate the lateral soil layer, with the possibility of distinction between the backfill in the trench and undisturbed soil (E2 ≠ E3) or if viewed as an overall layer (E2 = E3). The effective vertical stiffness modulus is then quantified us- Figure 4: Parametric model of the pipe-soil-system

RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT / TECHNOLOGY PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 13 The middle diagrams give the vertical soil stress in depth sections of 0.29 m (close to surface), of 1.0 m (pipe crown level), of 1.457 m (pipe centreline level) and of 2.06 m (close to pipe bottom level). Load cases 2 and 3 shows a characteristic hump-shaped stress profile below the truck axles. The relative peak under the middle axis corresponds to the increased system stiffness given by the pipeline. The absolute value falls away rapidly with increasing depth. Corresponding to the cross-section perspective, the right-hand diagram row shows the hoop stress in the pipe wall on the inner and outer fibres (index i for internal and index a for external). The cross section is shown perpendicular below the truck load (variable UM) and the at the model end (variable U0, outside of the influence by the traffic load). The charac- teristic shape caused by the pipe ovalization is clearly visible. The magnitude of the circumferential stress in load case 3 (pipeline subjected to operating pressure) shows that the internal pressure is the leading load case in this configuration. Load case 1 „Dead load“ “Simulation models provide efficient tools to assess complex structural configurations of pipe systems including the soil. Johannes Brückner Similarly, Figure 7 shows the configuration in length- wise section with diagrams of the vertical soil stress (middle column, depth sections of 0.29 m, 1.0 m and 2.06 m) and the longitudinal stress in the pipe wall (right column). The middle truck axis causes a perpen- dicular load across the pipeline which led to a bend- ing-typical configuration. The soil underneath the pipe acts as elastic bedding in this scenario. The distribution of the vertical soil stress corresponds to the characteristic shape of the truck load, with max- imum values below the tires. The red graph reflects the contact pressure on the pipeline crown at 12 o’clock position. In the right-hand diagrams are the correspond- Load case 2 „Dead load + Traffic load“ Longitudinal stress in pipe wall Vertical soil stress Longitudinal stress in pipe wall Load case 3 „Dead load + Traffic load + Pressure“ Vertical soil stress Max. Vertical soil stress Longitudinal stress in pipe wall Figure 7: Simulated stress caused by a 60-tonne truck load (longitudinal section)

RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT / TECHNOLOGY PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 15 W 2 y 2 W z d tR 0 5 . 3 2 W x GEH V v V V V V V V V V V z y x x y z x y 2 2 2 z GEH = Mises equivalent stress, σx, σy, σz = normal stress- σv es, τx, τy,τz = shear stresses, Rt0.5 = SMYS For the purposes of practical application, the given concept provides an approach for structural assess- ment of any load configuration against a standardized strength criterion. PRACTICAL EXAMPLE As a practical example, the construction of a motorway slip road is shown which was to be banked up above an existing pipeline of the German network operator Open Grid Europe. The crossing situation was modelled as shown in Figure 9 for the following calculation parame- ters: nominal diameter 800, wall thickness 14.2 mm, nom- inal pressure 100 bar, material grade L 485 MB as defined by [17] with SMYS 485 MPa, ramp 4.7 m high and 30 m wide, soil cover without ramp 1.9 m, specific soil weight 21 kN/m³, exact modelling of the soil layer stiffness in line with a subsoil survey, 60-tonne truck load as per [8]. For the purpose of considering all potential loads, a thermal longitudinal pipeline expansion for a temperature differ- ence of 25°C and an additional elastic laying stress in line with DVGW Code of Practice G 463 [18] were applied. These assumptions are to be seen as conservative. Figure 9 shows the vertical soil stress distribution and the von Mises equivalent stress for the nominal pipe pressure condition. Deformation has been scaled by a factor of 20 for visualisation purposes. The maximum equivalent stress is 390.0 MPa and lies perpendicular below the centre of the 60-tonne truck load on the inner pipe wall side at 12 o’clock position. Since the maximum equivalent stress is less than the specified minimum yield strength of the pipe material (390.0 MPa < 485 MPa), the structural design fulfils the formal requirements according to EN 1594 [1] and is thus acceptable in terms of strength. SUMMARY The presented numerical model can be used to inves- tigate specific engineering questions which are not covered by the validity of simplified approaches. The modular structure allows any loads to be applied, e.g. as a result of earth banks, traffic loads, canals or railway lines. Further additional loads, e.g. caused by tempera- ture expansion or pipelaying, can also be considered. The simulated stress level is assessed by a standard- ized criterion in line with the “extended elastic analysis” as defined by [1]. For practical applications, it provides an expert tool for the assessment of new constructions or modifications of high-pressure gas pipelines. The re- sult can also be provided to certified assessors as part of their statements. References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] DIN EN 1594: Gas infrastructure - Pipelines for maximum operating pressure over 16 bar - Functional requirements: German version EN 1594: 2013 VdTÜV-Merkblatt 1063: Technische Richtlinie zur statischen Berechnung einge-erdeter Stahlrohre: 1978 Sturmath, R.: Statik geschlossener Kreisringbauteile: Berechnungsbeispiele aus dem Maschinenbau und der Bautechnik: VDI-Verlag: 1988 Kempfert, H.-G.; Raithel, M.: Geotechnik nach Eurocode: Band 1: Bodenmechanik: 3. Auflage: Beuth Verlag: 2012 Budynas, R.G.: Advanced Strength and Applied Stress Analysis: 2nd ed.: McGraw-Hill: New York: pp. 348–352: 1999 Boussinesq, J.: Application des potentiels à l’étude de l’équilibre et du mouvement des solides élastiques: Gauthier-Villard: Paris: 1885 Love, A. E. H.: The stress produced in a semi-infinite solid by pressure on part of the boundary: Philo- sophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Ser. A: pp. 377-420: 1928 DIN 1072: Road bridges: Design loads: 1985 DIN 4019: Soil - Analysis of settlement: 2015 Kany, M.: Berechnung von Flächengründungen: 2. Auflage: Verlag Ernst und Sohn: 1974 DIN EN ISO 22476-2: Geotechnical investigation and testing - Field testing - Part 2: Dynamic probing: German version EN ISO 22476-2: 2012 Steinbrenner, W.: Tafeln zur Setzungsberechnung: S. 121-124: 1934 ATV-DVWK-Arbeitsblatt 127: Statische Berechnung von Abwasserkanälen und -leitungen: 3. Auflage: August 2000 DIN EN 1991-2: Eurocode 1: Actions on structures - Part 2: Traffic loads on bridges: German version EN 1991-2: 2010 Helwany, S.: Applied Soil Mechanics with ABAQUS Applications: John Wiley & Sons: 2007 Wehnert, M.: Ein Beitrag zur drainierten und undrainierten Analyse in der Geotechnik: Dissertation am Institut für Geotechnik: Universität Stuttgart: Mitteilung 53: 2006 DIN EN 10208-2: Steel pipes for pipelines for combustible fluids - Technical delivery conditions - Part 2: Pipes of requirement class B: German version EN 10208-2: 2009 DVGW G 463 (A): High Pressure Gas Steel Pipelines for a Design Pressure of more than 16 bar; Construction: 2016 Authors Johannes Brückner Open Grid Europe Structural Engineer & DVGW Certified Expert johannes.brueckner@open-grid- europe.com Dr. Ulrich Marewski Open Grid Europe Head of Integrity Pipelines ulrich.marewski@open-grid- europe.com Dr. Michael Steiner Open Grid Europe Head of Integrity michael.steiner@open-grid- europe.com

RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT / TECHNOLOGY PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 17 Transportation of fluids in pipelines is increasing all over the world, and with good reason: pipelines are among the safest and most economical transportation systems over long routes. To ensure this cost-effectiveness and safety, both new, and especially existing, pipelines must reflect the standard of the most current technology. Leaks pose a potential safety risk. Leaks occur for a wide variety of reasons, from earthquakes, corrosion and material failure to drilling by product thieves. Special leak detection systems are often used to limit these risks. In general, leak detec- tion in pipelines refers to the recognition and quick localization of product leaks. Reasons to employ leak detection include the following: • • • • To minimize the effects of accidents To minimize downtime To minimize product loss Regulatory compliance Leak detection in pipelines can be performed in various ways, from simple visual controls during inspections to computer-supported systems that monitor conditions, even for underground and undersea pipelines. Selecting a suitable leak detection system is not an easy task for pipeline operators. The system must meet the needs of the particular application and comply with [relevant] regulations. The “Technical Rules for Pipelines” (German: TRFL “Technische Regel für Rohrfernleitungsanlagen) are published since 2003 by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety. Those rules are the result of consolidating three former regulations, the “Regulation for pipelines trans- porting dangerous liquids” (German: TRbF 301 „Richtlinie für Fernleitungen zum Befördern gefährdender Flüs- sigkeiten“), the “Regulation for pipelines transporting products dangerous for water” (German: RRwS „Richtlinie für Rohrleitungen zum Befördern wassergefährdender Stoffe“) and the “Technical rules for high pressure gas pipelines” (German: TRGL “Technische Regeln für Gasho- chdruckleitungen”) The “Technical Rules for Pipelines” were originally intended only for applications within the German federal territory; nowadays they provide a model for other national regulations. In May 2017 an updated version of the TRFL has been issued, including modifications to the relevant leak de- tection paragraphs. These changes should be known to all pipeline operators. It also kept one of the most mem- orable and important statement regarding sensitivity: The minimum detectable leak rate will depend on the chemical and physical properties of the medium, the local conditions and the prevailing operating conditions. It is determined on a case-by-case basis by an inspec- tion authority. Therefore the TRFL leak detection point of view is not a plain technical consideration stating rigorous detection thresholds or insisting on specific methodologies, it

RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT / TECHNOLOGY PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 19 An E-RTTM leak detection system creates a virtual im- age of a pipeline based on measured data. Measured values from flow, temperature and pressure sensors installed at the inlet and outlet of the pipeline and along the pipeline in places such as pump and valve stations are crucial. The flow, pressure, temperature and density at each point along the virtual pipeline are calculated from the measured pressure and temperature values. E- RTTM-based leak detection systems are able to handle transient conditions that are not recognized by less sophisticated internal leak detection systems. An E-RTTM- based leak detection system works with dynamic values, which also boosts robustness, the sys- tem becomes independent of the absolute accuracy of the virtual pipeline. It can adapt automatically and very quickly to changes in the operating conditions such as sensor failure, communications failure, a valve closing or a product change in the pipeline. The model compares the calculated flow values with the actual values from the flow meters. If the model detects a flow discrepancy, the leak signature analysis module then determines whether it was caused by an instrument error, a gradual leak or a sudden leak. The E-RTTM introduced here is the basis of the PipePa- trol leak detection system by KROHNE. The system is suitable for monitoring liquid and gas pipelines (includ- ing liquefied gas and supercritical products) and meets all the requirements of TRFL. E-RTTM provides a high degree of sensitivity and quick leak detection with real-time comparison of existing measuring results against leak signatures, which are stored in a database. Comparing of mea- sured values with the leak signatures is also critical to the reliability because it provides a high degree of protection from false alarms. Next to the vertical combination of the virtual pipeline with pattern recognition, a horizontal approach combin- ing different TRFL methods into one system is present. The latest versions of PipePatrol also cover the TRFL requirement for gradual leak detection as they deploy the Pressure-Temperature-Method. Figure 2: Extended functional principle of E-RTTM

RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT / TECHNOLOGY PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 21 Method was chosen to monitor this pipeline for gradual leaks. Other methods which were also considered could not be used due to existing traces of hydrocarbons in the pipeline environment. The system has been imple- mented on the LDS server supplied by customers IT department. The server is connected to a set of redun- dant OPC servers found in the demilitarized zone. The demilitarized zone connects via a firewall to the operat- ing company’s terminal bus. This protects the customers SCADA system and DCS from any influence of 3rd party applications, but also al- lows remote access according to latest company it stan- dards to the systems for the suppliers. The redundant OPC servers provide the field data of pipeline instrumen- tation and valves which are read by PipePatrol DT. As always required in Germany, leak detection systems need to be approved by independent third party author- ity like TUV. As systems are tested and approved for all operating conditions and methods, PipePatrol DT has also been subject for approval. Instead of creating a gradual leak, the opposite proce- dure was accepted as test criteria. An automatic PipePa- trol DT test has been processed, and in parallel indepen- dent third party authority did a manual DT test according to VdTÜV-Technical bulletin 1051. Figure 4: PipePatrol System Architecture

VERSATILE. Always a leading innovator, we supply customers with cutting-edge diagnostic and system integrity solutions. This, bound with our focus on flexibility, reliability, cost and quality, leads to offerings beyond your expectations. www.rosen-group.com

INTRODUCTION As part of the Southern Gas Corridor, the Trans Ana- tolia Natural Gas Pipeline (TANAP) aims to transport Azeri Gas from the Shah Deniz gas field and other fields of Azerbaijan, and possibly from other neigh- bouring countries, to Turkey and Europe via the Southern Gas Corridor comprising of the South Cauca- sus Pipeline (SCPX) extending from Caspian Sea to Georgia/Turkey border and the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) extending from Greece/Turkey border to Italy. TANAP project is an API 5L X70 onshore pipeline system of 1850 km in length comprising 56” diameter with three different wall thicknesses of 19.45, 23.34 and 28.01mm as well as 48” diameter with 16.67, 20.01 and 24.01mm. It also includes a 21 km of API 5L X65 offshore section beneath the Marmara Sea comprising two parallel 36” of 22.9mm wall thickness pipelines. The pipeline system will transport natural gas to required specifications and quantity and implemented in four phases. The project also comprises 7 Com- pression Stations (CS), 4 Measuring Stations (MS), 11 Pigging Stations (PS), 49 Block valve Stations (BVS) and 2 Off-Take Stations. Engineering Critical Assessment (ECA) is a fitness for purpose approach based on fracture mechanics prop- erties of the linepipe base material and weldments which is used to produce alternative acceptance criteria for TANAP Onshore/Offshore pipeline girth welds flaws. This approach however is only practical when used in conjunction with Automatic Ultrasound Techniques (AUT) as the Non Destructive Testing (NDT) method for the assessment of the pipeline girth weld flaws which is discussed in a separate article [1] (Figure 1). The fitness for purpose (FFP) approach using Engi- neering Critical Assessment is to confirm girth welds mechanical integrity under static and cyclic (fatigue loading) stresses during installation and operation in Figure 1: Schematic Illustration of Flaws in pipeline girth weld RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT / TECHNOLOGY PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 25 the presence of weld flaws. This approach provides alternative acceptance criteria for planar flaws in the weld metal other than the Quality Control approach workmanship criteria as specified in the various international codes and standards [3] & [6]. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE Engineering Critical Assessment is used to provide alternative acceptance criteria for TANAP pipeline girth weld flaws, which is generally a more realistic approach compared to Quality Control workmanship acceptance criteria. This is based on a fitness for purpose approach, using much more realistic con- ditions such as the actual flaw size and the specific service conditions. Welding procedure qualification tests API 1104 Annex A guidelines with additional project specification requirements is followed for TANAP onshore stress based designed pipeline sections. In addition to conventional welding procedure qual- ification tests, fracture toughness properties of the weld metal and Heat Affected Zone (HAZ) identified by Crack Tip Opening Displacement (CTOD) testing in accordance with ISO 15653. Overmatching of actual weld metal strength relative to actual pipe martial strength is confirmed by both con- ventional cross weld tensile testing in accordance with API 1104 Annex A as well as all weld tensile testing using round specimens in accordance with ASTM E8. In order to be able to apply ECA to TANAP pipeline these properties are to be identified for each pipe mill and steel source combination. Considering the linepipe supply chain complexity, applying ECA approach to TANAP pipeline required an extensive welding proce- dure qualification tests. To reduce the number of welding procedure qualifica- tions, repair and tie-in welds excluded from fitness for purpose approach and ECA only applied to mainline welding. TANAP mainline welding produced using mechanised welding systems (m-GMAW). Providing a same filler batch by supplier, the fracture toughness of the weld metal considered independent of the linepipe supply condition. Hence by qualifying combinations of the sources, the number of required qualifications is significantly reduced.

carried out using more advanced fracture toughness behaviour of the girth weld e.g. J-R curve which is a measure of the evolution of the fracture toughness with tearing of the flaw (Figure 4). eca validation TANAP pipeline welds fracture toughness properties used as ECA inputs and cross-checked by random and frequent full production tests. This includes cutting out random produced welds during actual construction and perform full destruc- tive tests to check against the results obtained during welding procedure qualification tests. Furthermore, the produced acceptance criteria also validated on a case-by-case basis using full segment tensile tests having the worst detected weld flaw during construction (Figure 5). In addition, three-dimensional Finite Element Anal- ysis (FEA) modelling is also developed to validate the ECA produced alternative acceptance criteria. Figure 4: J-R curves RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT / TECHNOLOGY PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 27 Figure 5: TANAP Pipeline full segment tensile test set up In which case, the crack driving force (J-integral) corresponding to max- imum nominal strain with presence of surface breaking flaw in weld toe at Internal Diameter and Outer Diameter in con- junction with maximum misalignment (worst case scenario) is modelled. RESULTS DISCUSSION Table 2 on the next page tabulated the comparison for reject rate percentage between ECA and QC ap- proach on TANAP onshore and offshore sections as well as The Welding Institute industrial survey figures [11]. For Onshore section applying Annex A of API 1104 reduced the repair rate (average repair rate data provided as number of repaired welds versus the total number of welds) from 9.76% to 3.54%. This essentially

14TH PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE 18-21 MARCH 2019, BERLIN, GERMANY Europe’s Leading pipeline conference & exhibition   800+ DELEGATES 80+ EXHIBITORS   50+ DIFFERENT NATIONS DELEGATIONS FROM 70+ DIFFERENT PIPELINE OPERATORS Diamond Sponsor Platinum Sponsors origin of pipeline operators attending ptc Golden Sponsors Silver Sponsors www.pipeline-conference.com

INTRODUCTION According to “Global Trends in Renewable Energy In- vestment 2017” [Ref./9/], in 2016 the overall investment in renewable energy resources reached a total of $241.6 billion reportedly roughly doubling that of fossil fuel generation and raising the capacity derived from renew- ables to 55 per cent of the overall new power; the high- est to date. Increasing investment in renewable energy resources led, in recent years, to a significant growth in wind energy and an associated increase in wind farm installations in many countries. It is to be noted that Wind Farm and Oil & Gas Pipeline Industries share some of the key criteria for selecting new development areas. In particular, national regula- tions as well as the need to constantly improve sustain- ability performances by minimizing environmental and social impacts associated with the construction and operation of such infrastructures have led to a wide pref- erence for remote and rural areas. As a consequence, in recent years many wind turbines have been installed in shared corridors or in proximity with existing buried pipelines and vice versa. However, they were very often completed in the absence of spe- cific requirements and limitations (e.g. minimum safety distances) with regard to possible mutual interferences. Although the mechanical failure of wind turbines is reportedly considered an unlikely event, the significant energy associated with possible impacts of wind turbine parts (blades, nacelle, etc..) falling to the ground has Figure 1: Pipeline and Wind Turbine in close proximity RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT / TECHNOLOGY PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 31 the potential of creating massive dynamic overpres- sures within the soil that could threaten the integrity of services buried nearby. This article describes the state of the art approach to assessing possible impacts on buried pipelines due to this relatively new hazard and presents possible future developments. PROBABILISTIC ANALYSIS FOR RELEVANT WIND TURBINE FAILURE SCENARIOS Various wind turbine mechanical failure scenarios can be considered relevant for the integrity of a buried pipeline. It is known that any falling mass impacting the ground generates dynamic overpressures that spread within the soil until complete dissipation. If a pipeline is buried in the portion of soil affected by the distribution of this over- pressure, the effects in term of stress and strain induced on the pipeline strongly depend on the energy released by the impact, the nature of the soil and the minimum distance of the pipeline from the surface impact point. It should be noted that wind turbine failure scenarios are unpredictable in nature as mechanical failures are typically associated with a number of different possible causes and collapse mechanisms. From a qualitative assessment of the available data re- ported in “Wind Turbine accident compilation” [Ref./4/] (www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk), where a total of 1614 accidents of varying nature involving wind turbines occurred were studied from the 80’s in the case of mechanical failure of wind turbines, it was observed that the falling masses generally consisted of: fragments of blades or whole blades nacelles • • • masts An estimate of the annual failure frequency for the dif- ferent failure scenarios are reported in the article “Failure frequency calculation of transmission pipeline or sta- tions due to nearby wind turbines” [Ref./7/]. The article discusses the methodology that includes potential wind turbine mechanical failures in quantitative risk assess- ment which was developed by DNV GL and presented in “Handboek Risicozonering Windturbines” [Ref./6/]. The mentioned methodology was published by the Neth- erlands Enterprise Agency and is the standard used in the Netherlands. The failure frequency was estimated considering three source databases: • Accident database presented in the Caithness Wind- farm Information Forum. This database reports wind turbine accidents occurring in Holland, Great Britain,

The estimate of the risk buffer zones was conducted following the identification of credible collapse mech- anisms for wind turbines. More specifically, the extent of the buffer zone generated by each wind turbine was determined as the larger of the following two values: • • estimated maximum distance that a typical blade of a standard wind turbine might cover under nominal operating conditions, assuming that the whole blade breaks off at the root [Ref./5/]. estimated maximum distance reached by winds tur- bine parts assuming that critical failure of the foun- dation leads to a rigid rotation of the mast around the base point. This distance is then increased by an additional safety freeboard. Namely, this value is set as follows: blade length + mast length (above ground) + 10% Should the interference with the risk buffer zone gener- ated by a wind turbine be unavoidable and the pipeline route fall within the buffer zone, then PROG.1 would require a specific engineering assessment to assess possible consequences of critical mechanical failure of the wind turbine on the buried pipeline. USE OF SIMPLIFIED STATIC ELASTIC MODELS TO PREDICT POSSIBLE EFFECTS OF WIND TURBINE COLLAPSE ON BURIED PIPELINES Possible failure modes of a wind turbine that can be considered relevant for the integrity of a nearby buried service are those involving significant masses falling and hitting the ground surface. The impact generates dynamic overpressure that spreads into the soil and that can be ultimately transferred to a buried pipeline in re- lation, among other factors, to the minimum distance of the pipeline from the impact point, the nature of the soil, and the impact energy. RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT / TECHNOLOGY PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 33 Standard analytical methods available for simplified static elastic analyses can be used to predict the effects on a buried pipeline caused by the surface impact of falling masses. Of particular interest for the Oil & Gas Pipeline Industry are the analytical expressions presented in ASCE-ALA “Guidelines for the Design of Buried Steel Pipe” [Ref. /3/]. According to the model presented in mentioned ASCE- ALA guidelines, the falling object is schematically considered to be cylindrical in shape with an equivalent impact radius r0. Figure 4: Static surface load due to large falling weights: ASCE-ALA “Guide- lines for the Design of Buried Steel Pipe” [Ref./3/] The above equation can be used to calculate the static surface load Pmax generated by the mechanical failure of a wind turbine according to the relevant failure scenarios considered: blade, nacelle and mast rupture. The effects in terms of stress and strain on a buried pipeline can be estimated from Pmax applying standard Boussinesq, through-wall bending stress, ring deflection, side wall crushing and critical ring buckling equations. In addition to standard stress and strain verifications, in case of large weights falling to the surface near the pipe location, it is important to verify that ground penetration depth does not exceed the burial depth of the pipeline in order to exclude the possibility of damage to the pipe- line due to direct contact with falling masses. According to the provisions of the ASCE-ALA guidelines, the penetration depth can be estimated as follows: Figure 3: Fall of a heavy object to the surface: ASCE-ALA “Guidelines for the Design of Buried Steel Pipe” (Ref./3/) where: xp = penetration depth Pa = weight per unit impact area V = impact velocity k = coefficient of penetration

RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT / TECHNOLOGY PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 35 1, reduces to a value of 4.28 x 10-5 the probability that a wind turbine blade would collapse to the ground resulting in a significant loading case for the 56” pipeline buried nearby. The same methodology can be used to assess other relevant wind turbine failure scenarios. example 2: design of risk mitigation measures The static elastic model presented in the ASCE-ALA “Guidelines for the Design of Buried Steel Pipe” [Ref. /3/] can be used for the design of possible mitigation measures against the risk of wind tur- bine blade failure as shown in Ref. /1/. The adopted mitigation philosophy is to enclose the production pipeline in a steel casing pipe that provides suffi- cient mechanical protection against the overpres- sure generated by the surface impact. According to the selected concept, the annulus, annular space between casing pipe and product pipe, is respon- sible for a key engineering function: it provides mechanical disconnection between the casing pipe and the product pipe which is vital for ensuring pipeline integrity after the impact. In particular, the casing pipe and the annulus should be adequately engineered so that any deformation of the casing pipe resulting from impact loads does not transfer significant loadings onto the product pipeline. For the same reason, proper design consideration is to be given to permanent accessories installed inside the casing pipe such as collar spacers. Improved casing pipe resistance to ovalisation can be achieved by specifying adequate compac- tion requirements of the sidefill and, if deemed necessary, the replacement of native soils with engineered soil mixes. Wherever possible and if required, enhancement of mechanical protection can also be achieved by constructing an engineered embankment above the natural ground level to reduce stress resulting from impact loads by: Figure 8: Example of sensitivity analysis to identify the extent of a risk buffer zone in the event of a blade failure scenario buffer zone across the pipeline centreline was assumed. The credible impact area for that type of blade, should the entire blade break off at the root, under nominal operating conditions, was considered to be circular in shape with a radius of 150m (according to Ref. /5/). The intersecting area between the credible impact area (150m radius circle centred from the wind turbine location) and the 20m wide risk buffer zone across the pipeline is, in this case, 3600m2. This lead to a proba- bility modifier of 0.05095 that, applied to the blade failure frequency shown in Table Figure 9: Example of a risk mitigation measure for blade failure

RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT / TECHNOLOGY PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 37 Figure 12: Dynamic-Viscoelastic-Hardening Model implemented in MIDAS software • • dissipation effects 3D effects A preliminary comparison with the results obtained using standard static elastic models would show signifi- cant margins to decrease the conservatism. References 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. SPC. LA-E-80530: “Studio Interferenze con Aerogeneratori C24, C25, C34, E82”. - Assessment of possible impacts of wind turbine mechanical failure on gas pipelines – Performed by Saipem and commissioned by Snam. GASD C.04.01.00 “Manuale di progettazione gasdotti - PROG.1” Rev.2 – Gas pipeline Design Manual - Snam “Guidelines for the Design of Buried Steel Pipe July 2001 with addenda through February 2005” - ASCE-ALA “Wind Turbine accident compilation” (www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk) “Calcolo della traiettoria di una pala in caso di distacco in condizioni nominali di funzionamen- to” Impianto Eolico “Galliano” – Regione Puglia “Handboek Risicozonering Windturbines” (“Handbook on Risk Zoning of Wind Turbines”), version 3.1. Rijksdienst voor Ondernemend Nederland, September 2014. - Faassen, C.J., Franck, P.A.L., and Taris, A.M.H.W. Failure frequency calculation of transmission pipeline or stations due to nearby wind turbines, September 2016 - R.P. Coster, M.T. Middel, M.T. Droge. “The induction of vibrations on transmission pipelines by the fall of a heavy structure nearby: modelling the safety distances”- Dr Charles Fernandez, Laurent Bourgouin, Frederic Riegert, and Alain Pecker. “Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2017”, published by UN Environment, the Frankfurt School-UNEP Collaborating Centre, and Bloomberg New Energy Finance Authors Francesco Olivi Saipem Onshore Pipeline Engineer francesco.olivi@saipem.com Carlo Caffarelli Saipem GeoHazard Engineer carlo.caffarelli@saipem.com Agostino Napolitano Saipem Head of Onshore Pipeline agostino.napolitano@saipem.com

With a pipeline length of around 70,000 km, Transneft is the world’s largest transporter of crude oil and petroleum products. Transneft was founded by the initiative of the Russian government in 1993. This initiative brought together all individual activities in the largest territorial state in the world - the Russian Federation, newly founded in 1991. Much has happened since then - the company has been modernized and the “dripping” Russian pipelines have slowly disappeared from the inves- tigative Western European press. Today, the company is ready to put its experiences up for discussion worldwide. Transneft does this itself, or through its subsidiaries PTI and Diascan, through increased appearanc- es in international trade journals, conferences and exhibitions. The Pipeline Technology Journal (ptj) dedicates this issue to the 25th anniversary of Transneft. Furthermore, the pipeline operator is a platinum sponsor with several presentations at the upcoming Pipeline Technology Conference (ptc), 18th to 21st March 2019 in Berlin. The following overview is based on information provided by Transneft. Dr. Klaus Ritter Editor in Chief Chairmen of the ptc GENERAL INFORMATION • • The company’s history goes back to the 1970s. In 1993 joint-stock oil transportation company Transneft was incorporated by the resolution of the Russian Government. • By the late 2000s the company launched a number of grand projects, namely, Eastern Siberia Pacific Ocean Pipeline System, Taishet – Skovorodino section (ESPO-1), Skovorodino–Kozmino section (ESPO-2) and Baltic Pipeline System-1,2. • Since the moment of Transneft incorporation the company has transported 10.1 billion tons of oil and 309 million tonnes of petroleum products over the past 10 years. • Over the past 25 years, the company’s oil transportation volumes have risen by nearly 40%. • The company’s oil pipelines connect the largest Russian oilfields with refineries and external markets in Europe and Asia, both directly and via seaports, which makes it one of the largest oil pipeline companies in the world. The company’s structure comprises oil and petroleum products transportation subsidiaries as well as auxiliary services and business activities (providing technological communications, de- partmental security, accounting services etc). Transneft subsidiaries regularly maintain, repair and upgrade pipelines and other industrial facil- ities, adopt energy and resource saving technologies, develop and use innovative methods and technologies of in-line inspection and pipeline condition monitoring. Transneft pays special attention to environmental and social issues, economic efficiency and busi- ness development of the Group. A broad range of measures aimed at ensuring counter-terrorist protection of industrial facilities, including the use of technical equipment, is being implemented. • • •

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT In accordance with the Program of Strategic Development of Transneft till 2020, the main objective of the company is the development of the trunk pipeline transport in the Russian Federation in order to fully meet the needs of oil and oil-product transportation through application of state-of- the-art technologies and to ensure high reliability and industrial and environmental safety. The main ways to achieving this goals are: • Increase in capacity of the trunk pipeline system in order to ensure oil transportation in compli- ance with the projected volumes of oil production at operated and new oil fields; Improvement of energy efficiency through arrangements aimed to saving energy resources; Improvement of labor productivity; Innovative development of the production activity; • • • • Maintenance of reliability of the operated oil and oil-product trunk pipeline systems based on the results of diagnostics, reconstruction and modernization of the main assets; Improvement of environmental and industrial safety at industrial facilities of the company; • • Development of social guarantees for the company employees. • Harmonious combination of efficient activities of Transneft in these directions is the basis for the company’s sustainable development.

INNOVATIONS AND R&D Innovative development is a priority area for Transneft. The company leads the industry by development and adoption of proprietary technologies with integrated systems for monitoring technical conditions of oil pipelines, high-precision in-line in- spection tools, enhanced efficiency energy-saving pump units, pipeline repair and overhaul tech- nologies and equipment, oil and petroleum products quantity and quality metering systems and oil vapour recovery units. Adoption of new technological solutions enables the company to maintain reliability and safety of trunk oil and petroleum product pipelines, ensuring continuous oil and petroleum product trans- portation to consumers in Russia and abroad, improving the economic performance, reducing costs and considerably enhancing process efficiency. In 2016, Transneft developed its Innovation Development Program for 2017–2021 based on the findings of the independent technological audit.

By accomplishing tasks of national importance in the field of transportation of Russian crude oil and petroleum prod- ucts, Transneft diversifies supply flows and develops its operating infrastructure, including through cooperation with foreign partners aimed at constructive dialogue and work in areas of mutual interest. Figure 1: Skovorodino pipeline station tank farm, Transneft East Transneft is one of the largest pipeline companies in the world. Having some 70 thousand km of pipelines in operation and an impressive production capacities strong enough to manufacture equipment for pipelines and oil & gas industries, Transneft does not limit itself to the domestic demand, but promotes its products at external markets. Today, Transneft transports 84 % of crude produced in Russia, about 479 MMT. Technological upgrade, as well as manufacturing and pro- duction of new efficient equipment are a key to achieving planned indicators and retaining corporate efficiency. Transneft adopts innovative products, including those of its own factories, spending more than 1.4 % of its revenue on their development and upgrading. To name a few: high-precision in-line inspection tools, energy efficient pumping units with increased output efficiency, electric motors, lease automatic custody transfer units with enhanced parameters, electric drives for shut and control valves, as well as other types of highly reliable process equipment. SMART ELECTRIC DRIVE Facilities in Transneft’s vast pipeline network are mostly equipped with drives manufactured by TOMZEL factory in Tomsk, a Transneft subsidiary.

“Tapping into external markets is one of the key tasks for today. We’ve determined goals and objectives to achieve this. First of all, we need to ensure stable quality and reliability to cut maintenance and operational costs. Then, we should diversify the range of products”, - says Oleg Nikoforov, TOMZEL CEO. In order to expand the factory’s product range, the company’s management has decided to develop and put into production a new type of equipment in demand throughout the oil and gas sector. These include tools for measuring density and viscosity of crude oil and petroleum products, gas environment control units, ex- plosion-proof lighting and industrial computers. TRANSNEFT POTENTIAL FOR RELATED INDUSTRIES The modernized plant of Transneftemash (Velikiye Luki, Pskov Region) gives a good example of prod- ucts demanded by pipeline and oil producing compa- nies alike. The plant’s products are also used by other companies of CIS countries. Figure 3, 4, 5: Transneftemash plant

CHELYABINSK IS A PRODUCTION SITE FOR THE PIPELINE INDUSTRY In last October another production plant, Russian Elec- tric Motors, was inaugurated at the same site with TOP. The company’s priorities for today are innovations and development of new technologies and equipment. As the first step, the plant began manufacturing power engines ranging from 0.3 MW to 14.5 MW. It is planned to extend the product range up to 45-MW motors, thus fully covering the domestic demand in electric motors to drive LNG compressors. Such motors are required for energy projects in the northern parts of Russia. The plant’s output capacity will reach 300 electric mo- tors a year starting from 2019. Although the plant has been commissioned only re- cently, Transneft partners from CIS countries already express their interest in the products. The plant has been built in partnership with Nidec ASI S.p.A., Italy. CONCLUSION Transneft is celebrating its 25th anniversary as one of the world’s pipeline leaders, having strong infrastructure and a broad range of specialized equipment equivalent to the world’s best prototypes in terms of technical parameters. Authors Dmitry A. Dvornikov Transneft Head, Production Management Section dvornikovda@ak.transneft.ru Andrey F. Kopysov Transneft Chief Power Engineer kopysovaf@ak.transneft.ru STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE PTJ-NEWSLETTER Latest pipeline news from all over the world Newest Products and Solutions for the industry Biweekly update, comprehensive, free of charge and reliable https://newsletter.eitep.de

During the last few years, the Russian company Transneft has made an innovation breakthrough in boosting effi- ciency of its operations and saving energy resources. Reasonable prioritizing policy and investment in R&D helped Transneft to develop technologies now demanded on both domestic and international markets. Figure 1: Steel anchor mast for a 110-kV power line Transneft started to use a system approach to energy saving years ago, making it one of its priorities. management system under the international standard ISO 50001:2011. Though the company is a major electricity consumer, 1.3 % of the overall national consumption, it has reduced its specific electricity consumption by 16% over the last 9 years (from 2009 through 2017), having saved 2.8 billion kWh, or about EURO 90 mn. “Within the next 5 years Transneft is going to undertake energy saving measures to reduce its specific electricity consumption for oil pumping by 1.9%, which will save us additional 0.6 bn kWh, or EURO 8 mn”, says A. Kopysov, Chief Power Engineer of Transneft. Transneft is going to reach this figure by optimizing oil pumping processes, using energy-saving equipment and alternative energy resources. In 2014, Transneft became the first Russian major company to have comprehensively adopted the energy M. Drechsel, a representative of the certifying authority, CEO of DQS Holding GmbH and president of IQNet says: “Transneft is the first Russian major company to have certified the entire system of its energy management, encompassing both the control functions of the compa- ny’s management and all operating facilities, including 13 oil trunk pipelines and 4 sea terminals”. NATIONAL PRIORITY In 2017, Transneft’s efforts in the field of energy saving were highly appraised by both the professional com- munity and the Russian Ministry of Energy as the best comprehensive program implemented in the fuel and energy sector for raising energy-saving awareness and enhancing energy efficiency. The program also included the results of energy saving technologies approved after relevant R&D work by Transneft.

Figure 2: ADIPEC 2018 exhibition & conference, IAOT stand efficiency benchmarking of oil transportation facilities. “Energy efficiency benchmarking” means a tool to com- pare the company’s key energy indicators with those of its peers in order to identify possible opportunities for energy efficiency increase. The energy efficiency benchmarking method has a good potential to assert itself at Eurasian markets. The meth- od was made public at the ADIPEC 2018 international conference in Abu Dhabi, UAE, and drew interest from pipeline companies around the world. The method was developed by the PTI on order from the International Association of Oil Transporters, whose members are companies from Russia, Hungary, Czech Re- public, Slovakia, China, Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine. The method provides a solution for one of the industry’s most acute problems: how to reduce specific electricity consumption for oil and petroleum products transporta- tion. It is based on the analysis and comparison of energy efficiency of various processes. The obtained results deliver comprehensive conclusions and practical recom- mendations on energy efficiency enhancing. CONCLUSION Transneft is constantly working on new technologies that help reduce energy consumption. The anticipated effect of such innovative energy saving technologies shall exceed EURO 65 mn by 2020. Today, according to KPMG, the international audit group, Transneft is one of the most energy efficient pipeline companies in the world in terms of specific electricity consumption. Authors Andrey F. Kopysov Transneft Chief Power Engineer kopysovaf@ak.transneft.ru

CONFERENCES / SEMINARS / EXHIBITIONS PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 55 Pipeline T Conference 2010 14TH PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE & EXHBITION EUROPE’S LEADING PIPELINE EVENT THE ANNUAL GATHERING OF THE INTERNATIONAL PIPELINE COMMUNITY IN THE HEART OF EUROPE After starting as a small side event of the huge HANNOVER MESSE trade show in 2006, the Pipe- line Technology Conference developed into Eu- rope’s largest pipeline conference and exhibition. Since 2012 the EITEP Institute organizes the ptc on its own and moved the event to Berlin in 2014. EXHIBITORS OF PTC 2018: 70+ Pipeline Operators 17 thematic focuses at ptc 2019 Construction Corrosion Protection Digitalization Environmental Impact Illegal Tapping Inline Inspection Integrity Management Leak Detection Maintenance & Repair Materials Offshore Technologies Planning & Design Pump & Compressor Stations Stress Corrosion Cracking Third Party Impact Trenchless Technologies Valves & Fittings ptc Side Conferences • Qualification & Recruitment • Public Perception ptc Seminars • Inspection Technologies for Traditional and Challenging Pipelines • Inspection of Offshore Pipe- lines and Risers • Pipeline Life-cycle Extension Strategies • Risk Assessment and Man- agement of Pipeline Projects subjected to Geohazards 2 4

CONFERENCES / SEMINARS / EXHIBITIONS PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 57 CONFIRMED EXHIBITORS AS OF 06.12.2018  50+ DIFFERENT NATIONS  DELEGATIONS FROM 70+ DIFFERENT PIPELINE OPERATORS FROM ALL AROUND THE WORLD  800+ DELEGATES  80+ EXHIBITORS  100+ PRESENTATIONS  25 TECHNICAL SESSIONS  ACCOMPANYING SCIENTIFIC POSTER SHOW REGISTER YOUR STAND AT www.pipeline-conference.com/stand-booking THEMATIC FOCUSES: CONSTRUCTION CORROSION PROTECTION DIGITALIZATION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ILLEGAL TAPPING INLINE INSPECTION INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT LEAK DETECTION MAINTENANCE & REPAIR MATERIALS OFFSHORE TECHNOLOGIES PLANNING & DESIGN PUMP & COMPRESSOR STATIONS STRESS CORROSION CRACKING THIRD PARTY IMPACT TRENCHLESS TECHNOLOGIES VALVES & FITTINGS

EUROPE’S LEADING PIPELINE CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION 14TH PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE 18-21 MARCH 2019, BERLIN, GERMANY Seminars organized within the framework of the Pipeline Technology Conference 2019 18 MARCH 2019 SEMINAR TOPICS Pipeline Life-cycle Extension Strategies Inspection Technologies forTraditional and Challenging Pipelines Risk Assessment and Management of Pipeline Project subjected to Geohazards Inspection of Offshore Pipelines and Risers ein Event Euro Institute for Information and Technology Transfer Mehr Informationen unter: www.pipeline-conference.com/seminars

CONFERENCES / SEMINARS / EXHIBITIONS PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 61 ONE SERVICE - MULTIPLE CHANNELS International Universities Offensive approach: We push forward and gen- erate attention to our career market directly at the universities. We also collect CVs from inter- national graduates and experts and forward it directly to you. Website Continuous promotion : Your vacancies are published on the Pipeline Technology Journal (ptj) website. In Addition, the ptj contains your vacancies too. Biweekly Newsletter Dead on target: We send your vacancies or your company profile to our database of 50,000 international pipeline professionals. International Events Physical appearance: The job & career market has an indi- vidual booth during all EITEP events. Questions? You get: Please contact Mr. Admir Celovic for further information and booking requests. celovic@eitep.de +49 / 511 / 90992-20 The most cost-effective support to your recruitment efforts available to the market

PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 63 COMPANY DIRECTORY Construction 2/2 Inline Inspection 2/2 VACUWORX Netherlands www.vacuworx.com Vlentec The Netherlands www.vlentec.com Construction Machinery Maats Netherlands www.maats.com Worldwide Group Germany www.worldwidemachinery.com VIETZ Germany www.vietz.de Engineering ILF Consulting Engineers Germany www.ilf.com KÖTTER Consulting Engineers Germany www.koetter-consulting.com Inline Inspection 1/2 3P Services Germany www.3p-services.com A.Hak Industrial Services Netherlands www.a-hak-is.com Baker Huges, a GE company United States www.bakerhughes.com Intero Integrity Services Netherlands www.intero-integrity.com/ KTN AS Norway www.ktn.no LIN SCAN United Arab Emirates www.linscaninspection.com NDT Global Germany www.ndt-global.com Pipesurvey International Netherlands www.pipesurveyinternational.com PPSA - Pigging Products and Services Association United Kingdom www.ppsa-online.com Romstar Malaysia www.romstargroup.com Rosen Switzerland www.rosen-group.com Inspection Ametek – Division Creaform Germany www.creaform3d.com Applus RTD Germany www.applusrtd.com EMPIT Germany www.empit.com Integrity Management Metegrity Canada www.metegrity.com Pipeline Innovations United Kingdom www.pipeline-innovations.com

PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 65 COMPANY DIRECTORY Safety Trenchless Technologies DEHN & SÖHNE Germany www.dehn-international.com/en HIMA Germany www.hima.de Signage Franken Plastik Germany www.frankenplastik.de/en Surface Preparation MONTI - Werkzeuge GmbH Germany www.monti.de GSTT - German Society for Trenchless Technology Germany www.gstt.de Rädlinger Primus Line Germany www.primusline.com Valves & Fittings AUMA Germany www.auma.com Zwick Armaturen Germany www.zwick-armaturen.de Further boost your brand awareness and list your company within the ptj - Company Directory www.pipeline-journal.net/advertise January 2019 In the next Edition of ptj: Inline Inspection & Integrity Management The next issue of Pipeline Technology Journal (ptj) will address Inline Inspection & Integrity Management. This is a great opportunity for skilled authors to submit insightful papers and to contribute to the global pipeline industry’s constant professional exchange.

14TH PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE Europe’s Leading Pipeline Conference and Exhibition 18-21 MARCH 2019, ESTREL CONVENTION CENTER, BERLIN, GERMANY www.pipeline-conference.com Next Issue: January 2019 Pipeline Technology Journal In the next Edition of ptj: Inline Inspection & Integrity Management www.pipeline-journal.net Event Calendar 14th Pipeline Technology Conference (ptc) 19 - 21 March 2019 Berlin, Germany ptc Side Conferences: on Qualification & Recruitment on Public Perception 18 March 2019 18 March 2019 Berlin, Germany Berlin, Germany Commercial UAV Expo Europe 08 April 2019 Amsterdam, Netherlands UESI Pipelines 2019 Conference 21 July 2019 Nashville, Tennessee, USA