ASME PCC-2–2018

Article 312
Inspection and Repair of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers

312-1 DESCRIPTION (c) current operating parameters, i.e., pressures,

temperatures, changes from normal to peaking service.
This Article provides general good recommendations (d) determination if a pressure and/or temperature
and requirements for the following repair techniques: rerate is required.
(a) determining the type of inspection technique to use (e) determination if there is a need for conducting
for the inspection of the tubes and tube bundle of a shell failure analysis to reduce the potential for future
and tube heat exchanger damage. Reference also API 579/ASME FFS-1.
(b) determining the type of inspection technique to use
for the inspection of the tubesheet and the tube-to-tube- 312-3.2 General
sheet assembly of a shell and tube heat exchanger
(c) determining the type of inspection to use for the (a) Materials used for replacement components shall
other pressure containing components of a shell and be of the same material type as the original component
tube heat exchanger unless an engineering analysis is performed indicating the
(d) providing repair techniques for common mechan- need to change the material due to the damage
ical failures of various components in a heat exchanger mechanism(s). This analysis shall account for new
mechanisms introduced due to potential material inter-
312-2 LIMITATIONS actions. When selecting the material to use, this analysis
shall also consider the need to match strength, toughness,
312-2.1 General and P-number, and to meet the current toughness require-
ments of the applicable construction code.
Part 1 of this Standard, “Scope, Organization, and (b) Replacement components shall be of equal or
Intent,” contains additional requirements and limitations. greater thickness unless an engineering analysis is
This Article shall be used in conjunction with Part 1. performed indicating the need for a thickness less than
the original component thickness.
312-2.2 Exclusions (c) When considering the repair method for tubes and
(a) This Article shall not be applied to heat exchangers tube bundles, the user shall consider the impact on the
constructed in accordance with ASME BPVC, Section VIII, efficiency and other operational characteristics of the
Division 3. heat exchanger due to the potential reduction of heat
(b) Heat exchangers other than shell and tube design transfer area. Consultation with a heat transfer specialist
are not included in the scope of this Article. may be necessary.
(d) The following additional factors should be
312-3 DESIGN considered:
(1) Determination of acceptable wall loss will
This section provides guidelines for consideration when depend on a number of factors that include
determining repairs to components of heat exchangers. It (-a) duration of current service run
may be necessary for the user to have completed an (-b) time to the next planned outage
inspection of the components, consider previous (-c) the criticality of the exchanger operation
damage experienced, or consider lessons learned in the (-d) damage mechanisms that the tubes are
operation of similar equipment prior to beginning exposed to including the rate of corrosion
design work. (-e) historical rate of failure and whether that rate
has been increasing
312-3.1 Existing Conditions (-f) potential for metallurgical upgrade
Existing conditions are as follows: (-g) the potential consequence due to tube failure
(a) the original design conditions and calculations. (-h) equipment accessibility
(b) ensuring that the design conditions, with an appro- (-i) the scope of the inspection work
priate margin, correspond to the actual normal operating (-j) the accuracy and effectiveness of the inspec-
modes including startup, shutdown, and upset conditions. tion method

158

Provided by IHS Markit under license with ASME

 ASME PCC-2–2018

(2) For heat exchangers deemed critical to the opera- and lead to tube vibration induced issues. If zero, consid-
tion and/or process safey of the facility, the following eration should be given to assigning a nominal value of 3
should also be considered: mm (1∕8 in.).
(-a) total replacement of the tube bundle when (2) Consideration should be given to use of alloy
tubes inspected indicate a wall loss of 40% or more of support plates/baffles instead of thicker carbon steel;
the initial, nominal thickness however, harder material may result in more damage
(-b) tube bundle replacement or individual tube to the tubes rather than the support plates/baffles.
replacement when tubes inspected indicate a wall loss Also, the effects of differential thermal expansion
of 20% to 40% of the initial, nominal thickness should be considered. Consultation with a materials/
corrosions specialist may also be necessary.
312-3.3 Tubes and Tube Bundles (3) The spacing between the support plates should
be evaluated and adjusted if analysis indicates potential
(a) Tubes and tube bundles should be assessed using
vibration of tubes resulting in damaged tubes and/or
the data obtained by inspection performed in accordance
support plates. Evaluation per TEMA RCB Section 5
with Mandatory Appendix 312-I for the types of repairs to
and Section 6 should be considered. Consultation with
perform; plugging by welded, mechanical, or friction fit
a heat transfer specialist may also be necessary.
plugs, partial replacement of the tube bundle, or full re-
(4) Tube stakes are rods, strips, or other devices
placement of the tube bundle.
inserted between tubes for bracing and/or support.
(b) When considering the use of mechanical or friction
They may be used to add tube support to an existing
fit plugs, the user should consider the impact on the effi-
bundle for the purpose of eliminating tube vibration.
ciency and other operational characteristics of the heat
Installation requires access from the shell side, and the
exchanger due to the reduction of heat transfer area, espe-
main advantage is that disassembly of the tube bundle
cially for heat exchangers that are deemed as critical to the
is not required. Special consideration may be necessary
operation and/or process safety of the facility.
for the use of stakes in U-tube bends because some stake
Consultation with a heat transfer specialist may be
designs require that the tubes be round and evenly spaced.
necessary.
Tube stakes were developed for use when a change in
(c) Sleeves may be installed in tubes to line a region of
tube material or an increased flow rate requires additional
tube damage or to restore tubes that have thinned. They
tube supports, and increasing the number of support
are not typically used for protection of tube ends; see para.
plates is not possible or desirable. They can be used
312-4.4 and (d) below.
any time additional tube support is required such as to
(d) Ferrules may be installed in tubes for entrance
provide additional support for deteriorated or
erosion protection of for thermal protection of tube
damaged support plates, to provide additional support
ends. They are not typically used for general tube
between segmented baffles, or to provide additional
damage; see para. 312-4.3 and (c) above.
support at inlet nozzles. If tube stakes are fabricated
(e) For (c) and (d), one should consider the following:
from flat bar and inserted in every other tube row, it
(1) uniformity of contact between the sleeve or
may be necessary to vary the bar thickness such that
ferrule and tube, see paras. 312-4.3(b) and 312-4.4
each tube is contacted or even displaced from its original
(2) possibility of crevice corrosion between the
position.
sleeve or ferrule and tube
Evaluation of the shell-side pressure drop, and
(3) possibility of bulging the tube, which can make
changes in shell-side flow are necessary. The compatibility
retubing difficult
of tube and stake materials should be evaluated. Also, the
(4) additional pressure drop
effects of differential thermal expansion should be
(5) reduction of tube fluid flow due to the sleeve or
considered.
ferrule
(g) If impingement protection is required to prevent
(6) additional heat transfer resistance
flow-induced erosion, refer to applicable standards
(7) differential radial and axial thermal expansion
such as API Standard 660, TEMA, and HEI for design
between sleeve or ferrule and tube
requirements.
(f) The tube bundle supports should be assessed using
the data obtained by inspection performed in accordance
312-3.4 Tubesheet
with Mandatory Appendix 312-I. If data indicates that
failure of tubes is due to damaged support plates, consid- (a) Material used to replace a tubesheet shall be of the
eration should be given to replacing with alternative same or greater allowable stress as used for the original
designs. Specific items to consider include the following: component.
(1) The corrosion allowance provided for the (b) If an engineering analysis indicates tube replace-
support plate should be twice the value for the shell ment of a larger diameter is required, additional analysis
side due to the potential for the plates to corrode at on the tubesheet shall be performed to determine if the
the regions where the tubes penetrate the supports ligament efficiency is acceptable. The analysis shall meet

159

Provided by IHS Markit under license with ASME

 ASME PCC-2–2018

the original construction code, or if this is not known, the (c) removing the tube and performing weld buildup of
analysis shall meet the requirements of ASME BPVC, the tube hole and then remachining the tube hole to the
Section VIII, Division 1. original tube hole diameter. Design of the mechanical joint
(c) Tubesheets should be assessed using the data should be made to the original construction code or ap-
obtained by inspection performed by a method listed plicable post-construction code, or to ASME BPVC, Section
in Mandatory Appendix 312-II for determination of VIII, Division 1, Nonmandatory Appendix A. Caution must
repair or replacement of the tubesheet. Common condi- be exercised to avoid damage to adjacent tubes.
tions for consideration include (d) seal welding or strength welding of the joint. Design
(1) cracking (not through the total thickness) of of the welded joint, if previously welded, should be made
tubesheet on shell side; more typical in vertical units. to the original construction code or applicable post-
Installation of a tubesheet vent and drain should be construction code, or to ASME BPVC, Section VIII,
considered to promote liquid full operation. The vent Division 1, Nonmandatory Appendix A. Consideration
should be a 19 mm (3∕4 in.) nozzle welded to the edge should be given to the cleanliness of the joint considering
of the tubesheet, with a 16 mm (5∕8 in.) hole in the tube- potential residue from the fluids.
sheet that is parallel to the tubes to the midsection of the (e) consideration shall also be given to the effect of style
tubesheet, then normal to the tubes to the edge of the of heat exchanger on loading of the tube-to-tubesheet
tubesheet. A gate or ball valve should be installed on joint. For example, a fixed tube exchanger may have
the nozzle along with a blind flange or plug. higher loadings due to differential thermal expansion
(2) separation of weld overlay cladding resulting than a U-tube exchanger.
from wire drawing of high-pressure tubeside fluid
leaking through tube-to-tubesheet joints. 312-3.6 Bimetallic Shell-to-Tubesheet Welds
(3) cracking in the ligament of the tubesheet. A When the shell and tubesheet are made of different
failure analysis should be performed to determine the materials, the thermal stress between the shell and tube-
damage mechanism. The decision to repair versus sheet should be considered. A common solution to
replace the tubesheet should be based on the damage cracking of this weld is to change the shell material to
mechanism along with the extent of the ligament cracking. match the tubesheet. An entire shell may be replaced,
(4) corrosion of the tubesheet can occur on the back- or bands or shell material may be installed adjacent to
side (shell side) of the tubesheet. When the corrosion the tubesheet. Reevaluation of the heat exchanger
allowance on the backside has been consumed, the tube- mechanical design due to the change in thermal expansion
sheet should either be replaced or an engineering evalua- or strength of the shell may be required.
tion performed to determine its fitness for service.
(5) corrosion of the tubesheet can occur on the front 312-3.7 Shell, Channel, or Other Pressure-
face (tube side) of the tubesheet. When the corrosion Retaining Components
allowance on the face has been consumed, the tubesheet
should either be replaced or an engineering evaluation (a) Materials used to replace or repair pressure-
performed to determine its fitness for service. retaining portions of a shell or channel shall be of the
Alternatively, the face of the tubesheet may be repaired same allowable stress as the original component,
by weld buildup that is conditioned by grinding or other unless additional analysis is performed to justify changing
mechanical means such that it is returned to the original the material.
thickness of the tubesheet. Factors to consider when (b) Replacement of these or other pressure-retaining
pursuing this option include components shall comply with the applicable construction
(-a) minimum distance between the front face of code. For additional guidance on replacement, see Article
the tubesheet and the groove for tube-to-tubesheet joints 301.
(-b) the need for welding, strength or seal, of the (c) Non-pressure-retaining portions of components
tube-to-tubesheet joint and the need for setback from the shall meet the original construction code or applicable
front face post-construction code.
(d) Additional guidance on pass-partition plates may
312-3.5 Tube-to-Tubesheet Joints be found in API Standard 660.
Tube-to-tubesheet joints should be assessed using the
data obtained by inspection performed by one of the 312-4 FABRICATION
methods listed in para. 312-5.3 for determination of
repair type. Repair types for leaking joints include
312-4.1 General Considerations
(a) replacement of a damaged tube, see para. 312-4.6 (a) When multiple heat exchangers are in use in a
(b) plugging a tube, see para. 312-4.2 parallel configuration, consideration should be given to
the flow requirements for each exchanger. Experience
has shown that a single heat exchanger removed from

160

Provided by IHS Markit under license with ASME

 ASME PCC-2–2018

Figure 312-4.2-1 Typical Friction Fit Tapered Tube Plug (e) When it is known that a tube or multiple tubes are
leaking, consideration shall be given to pulling a tube for
failure analysis to aid in determination of the damage
mechanism.
(f) All welded repairs shall be made using qualified
welding procedures. Welders and welding operators
shall be qualified in accordance with the requirements
of the applicable construction code or post-construction
code. Welding procedure qualifications shall include
impact tests if required by the applicable construction
code for the component being repaired.
(g) Welding materials and processes shall be as
currently permitted by the applicable construction
code or post-construction code for the component.
Welding of carbon and low alloy steels should be
performed with low hydrogen electrodes and processes.

312-4.2 Tubeside Repair by Plugging

service can result in higher flows to the other heat Repair of tubes may be accomplished by plugging the
exchanger(s) that may cause damage from erosion, tube at the tubesheet with a welded or mechanical
tube bundle vibrations, or other mechanical damage. attachment.
(b) Prior to repairs and to increase accuracy of inspec- (a) All tubes that are plugged should be pierced to
tion, the tubes should be evaluated for the need to be provide for venting and draining. When doing so, vertical
cleaned. Cleaning may be performed by high pressure tubes should be pierced at each end, and horizontal tubes
water blasting, chemical solutions, or abrasive should be pierced on top and bottom of the tube. Piercing
blasting/scrubbing. Selection of a cleaning methodology of each tube prevents possible plug blowout and permits
shall give consideration to the nature of fouling, tube the validation of the integrity of the tube plug, see (b)(4).
material type, and tube enhancements. Large temperature differential between tubeside and shell
(1) High pressure water blasting is normally side may require the tube to be cut in two.
performed at 70 MPa (10,000 psi). In some cases, (b) Friction fit tapered plugs (Figure 312-4.2-1) shall
ultra-high pressure water blasting may be necessary at only be used in services that meet all of the following
pressures up to 275 MPa (40,000 psi). Other factors essen- conditions, unless an engineering evaluation is performed
tial to removal of deposits include water flow rate and the indicating the acceptability of these plugs in other
spray tip configuration. services:
(2) When cleaning with chemical solutions, a mate- (1) shell-side operating pressure 1.5 MPa (200 psi)
rials engineer should be consulted to ensure no detri- or less
mental effects occur to the tubes and/or shell of the (2) shell-side operating temperature 205°C (400°F)
heat exchanger. For example, a caustic solution should or less
not be used in 300 series stainless steel tubes. (3) tube-to-tubesheet joints are expanded and not
(3) When performing abrasive blasting/scrubbing, welded
care shall be exercised to ensure no adverse damage NOTE: Inspection of the expanded tube for tube thinning
to the tubes occurs. Deterioration of heat transfer should be made to ensure that installation of the plug does
capability shall be considered when cleaning tubes not further damage the tube leading to seal failure between
with internal components designed to enhance heat the plug and the tubes.
transfer by increasing turbulence through the tubes. (4) tapered plugs that are installed where tubes are
(c) Inspection of the tubes periodically during the not pierced can present a serious safety hazard. If the tube
cleaning process should be made to ensure consistent cannot be pierced, the tube should be pulled or other
results. Use of a boroscope may improve inspection measures should be taken to ensure personnel protection,
results. such as welding the plug to the tubesheet and draining all
(d) When a tube bundle must be removed from its shell liquids from the tube being plugged.
for purposes of inspection or repair, caution should be (c) Mechanical plugs (Figure 312-4.2-2) should be
exercised to avoid damage to the tubes or other considered in situations where friction fit tapered
components. plugs are not appropriate for the pressure and/or
temperature of service or other mechanical/environ-
mental conditions. These types of plugs have been
used in services of up to 50 MPa (7,000 psi) and

161

Provided by IHS Markit under license with ASME

 ASME PCC-2–2018

Figure 312-4.2-2 Typical Mechanical Fit Tube Plugs

595°C (1,100°F). Mechanical plugs are typically installed (d) A plug map should be developed to record the
by a pneumatic or hydraulic system. See Figure 312-4.2-3. number and location of tubes that have been plugged.
Other styles of plugs may be considered for higher pres- Additionally, the number of tubes, cumulative number
sures. Consideration shall also be given to the following: of tubes versus the duration, should be charted. When
(1) tubes with internal surface severely corroded or the sharp turn in tube failure numbers occurs, replace-
cracked ment of the tube bundle should be considered. See
(2) when the tube and the plug have dissimilar Figure 312-4.2-4 for example chart.
metallurgy (e) Tracking of pressure loss due to tube pluggage
(3) installation in severely corrosive service should be considered as some exchanger types cannot
(4) condition of the mechanical joint of the tube-to- function properly beyond certain tubeside pressure
tubesheet in rolled tube situations losses. Provisions for internal bypass should be consid-
ered if repair is not performed in order to prevent
failure of pass partitions. Proper design of this bypass
Figure 312-4.2-3 Typical Installation of Mechanical Fit
can be determined from industry references in section
Tube Plugs
312-7 of this Article.

312-4.3 Tubeside Repair by Sleeving Tubes

(a) Sleeving versus tube replacement may be advanta-
geous when repairing previously plugged tubes because of
perforations in discreet identifiable locations, or to bridge
failures in discreet locations of tubes that are otherwise
intact.
(b) The methods of sleeve installation include the
following: forcing a ball though the sleeve, welding the
ends of the sleeve, roller expansion of the sleeve, explosive
bonding of the sleeve and hydraulic expansion of the
sleeve. One should consider the possibility of bulging
the tube, which can make retubing difficult. A mock-up
may be advisable to ensure weld or expansion quality.
(c) A map should be developed to record the number
and location of tubes that have been sleeved. Additionally,
the number of tubes, cumulative number of tubes versus
GENERAL NOTE: ©2006 Photo courtesy of EST Group Inc., used with the service time should be charted. If a sharp increase in
permission. tube failures occurs, replacement of the tube bundle

162

Provided by IHS Markit under license with ASME

 ASME PCC-2–2018

Figure 312-4.2-4 Sample Chart: Number of Tube Failures by Month

Number of Tube Failures

Tube bundle
replacement should
be considered here

Number of Months

should be considered. See Figure 312-4.2-4 for example 312-4.7 Tubesheet Repair
chart.
312-4.7.1 Weld Repair of Cracks
312-4.4 Tubeside Repair by Ferrule Installation (a) Repair of general cracks that are not completely
Ferrules may be held in place by a flanged end with a through the thickness of the tubesheet and are not in
tight fit to the tube inside diameter, by expanding the ends the ligaments may be made in accordance with the guide-
of the ferrule into the tube at the tubesheet, or by welding. lines of Article 304.
Uniform contact with the tube may be achieved by roller or (b) Repair of general cracks that are through the thick-
hydraulic expansion of the ferrule. One should consider ness of the tubesheet and not in the ligaments may be
the possibility of bulging the tube, which can make repaired by preparing a U- or V-shaped groove to the
retubing difficult. A mock-up may be advisable to full depth and length of the crack and then filling the
ensure weld or expansion quality. groove with weld metal in accordance with paras. 312-
4.7.1 and 312-4.7.2.
312-4.5 Tubeside Repair by Pulling Tubes (c) Repair of cracks in the ligament area of the tube-
sheet may be made in accordance with (a) or (b) above.
(a) Pulling the tube from the exchanger and plugging Consideration may also be given to performing an engi-
the tubesheet as described in para. 312-4.2 should be neering analysis to determine if the equipment may
considered as a repair option when plugging is not a continue to operate with the damaged tubesheet. This
viable alternative, or when the tube will be retained analysis may be performed in accordance with API
for laboratory metallurgical analysis or other specific 579-1/ASME FFS-1 or other post-construction standard.
examination. (d) When making tubesheet repairs, consideration
(b) When pulling a tube and not replacing, potential should be given to the impact of this repair on the
damage to the baffle could occur and consideration to tubes in the general area of the repair. The following
replacing the tube should be made. Consultation with a actions may be necessary:
heat transfer specialist may also be necessary. (1) removal of tubes in the general area of the repair.
See para. 312-4.5(b).
312-4.6 Tubeside Repair by Replacement (2) repair of the tube-to-tubesheet joints.
Repair may be performed by tube replacement, which
312-4.7.2 Face Repair by Overlay and Machining
may be accomplished in one of the following methods:
(a) replacing individual tubes, which may include (a) General and localized thinning of tubesheets may be
repair/refurbishing of the tubesheet in the area of the repaired by overlay welding and remachining of the face.
subject tube. (b) See Article 202 for additional items of
(b) replacement of the entire tube bundle. See para. consideration.
312-3.2(c).

163

Provided by IHS Markit under license with ASME

 ASME PCC-2–2018

312-4.8 Tube-to-Tubesheet Joint Repair required by the applicable construction code for the
tubesheet.
312-4.8.1 Re-Expanding
(d) Welding materials and processes shall be as
(a) Cleaning and inspection shall be performed to currently permitted by the applicable construction
determine the condition of the tube-to-tubesheet joint code or post-construction code for the tubesheet.
prior to performing this type of repair. See para. 312-4.1. Welding of carbon and low alloy steels should be
(b) Tube-to-tubesheet joints with leaks of a small flow performed with low hydrogen electrodes and processes.
rate, otherwise known as weeping tubes, where no
apparent damage has occurred to the seating surfaces, 312-4.9 Repair of Pressure Containment
may be re-expanded to obtain an acceptable mechanical Components
fit of tube to tubesheet. Rerolling is one acceptable method
Repairs to the heat exchanger shell may be performed to
of re-expanding.
the original construction code or applicable post-
(c) Prior to re-expanding, the existing inside diameter
construction code. See also Article 201 and Article 202.
of the tube in the tubesheet shall be determined as well as
the loss of material due to corrosion/erosion. Calculations
for allowable maximum inside diameter shall be based on 312-5 EXAMINATION
measured field conditions, tube properties, and tubesheet Examination of heat exchangers typically covers three
ligament condition. areas; external, internal, and tube bundle. It is not neces-
(d) See ASME BPVC, Section VIII, Division 1, sary for each inspection to have the same frequency.
Nonmandatory Appendix HH for additional
considerations. 312-5.1 Examination of Tubes and Tube Bundle
312-4.8.2 Weld Buildup Repair of Tube Holes and It is important for the proper examination technique to
Machining be selected for the application at hand. The following
nondestructive examination (NDE) techniques should
(a) When a tube is replaced and the tube hole has been be considered for the given application. See also Table
damaged, repair may be effected by weld buildup and 312-I-1.3-1 for effectiveness of examination methods.
machining of the hole. Other examination methods may be chosen by the
(b) All welded tube hole repairs shall be made using owner/operator, as follows:
qualified welding procedures. Welders and welding (a) Eddy Current Examination (ET) is generally
operators shall be qualified in accordance with the re- selected for inspection of nonferromagnetic tubes, or
quirements of the applicable construction code or those that are slightly magnetic. Note that the sensitivity
post-construction code. Welding procedure qualifications of this method decreases for the U-bend portion of U-tube
shall include impact tests if required by the applicable bundles.
construction code for the tubesheet. (b) Remote Field Eddy Current (RFET) is generally
(c) Welding materials and processes shall be as used for inspection of ferromagnetic tubes. Its sensitivity
currently permitted by the applicable construction and accuracy may be less than desired or required and will
code or post-construction code for the tubesheet. require a higher number of tubes to be inspected. It is a
Welding of carbon and low alloy steels should be quicker method than ultrasonic methods.
performed with low hydrogen electrodes and processes. (c) Partial Saturation Eddy Current (PSET) can locate
(d) Machining of the hole shall be to original manufac- and size cracks in ferromagnetic tubes. It might not be
turer’s specifications for diameter and grooving. sensitive to O.D. defects.
(d) Magnetic Flux Leakage (MFL) may also be selected
312-4.8.3 Seal Welding or Strength Welding
for inspection of ferromagnetic tubes. However, sensi-
(a) Tube-to-tubesheet welds shall be in accordance tivity of this method can be poor for carbon steel
with the applicable construction code or post-construc- tubes, and might only be best at determining the
tion code. overall condition of the tube, not determining individual
(b) If seal welds are to be made, consideration shall be defect location.
given to the mechanical tube-to-tubesheet joint to ensure (e) Ultrasonic examination systems designed to
its strength. If seal welds are determined to be inadequate, measure tube wall thickness may be used for small
the weld shall be full strength to ensure the integrity of the heat exchangers, where damage may be localized, or
joint. for validation of other NDE results. These ultrasonic exam-
(c) All welds shall be made using qualified welding ination systems are particularly suited for carbon steel
procedures. Welders and welding operators shall be qual- tubes due to the lack of sensitivity of other NDE
ified in accordance with the requirements of the applica- methods. One type of system is the Internal Rotary
ble construction code or post-construction code. Welding Ultrasonic Inspection (IRIS) system. IRIS is an accurate
procedure qualifications shall include impact tests as NDE method for detecting and sizing I.D. and O.D.

164

Provided by IHS Markit under license with ASME

 ASME PCC-2–2018

metal loss in tubes. Another type of system is Shear Wave API 579-1/ASME FFS-1, Fitness-For-Service, 2nd Edition,
IRIS (SWIRIS) and this can be effective for detecting I.D. 2007
and O.D. cracks. Both IRIS and SWIRIS require clean tubes. API Standard 660, Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers for
(f) Other NDE methods may be more appropriate for General Refinery Services, 2003 Edition
the inspection. Consideration should be given to the use of Publisher: American Petroleum Institute (API), 1220 L
radiography (RT) or video probe inspection. These Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005 (www.api.org)
methods may be better suited for inspection of the U-
bend portion of U-tube bundles. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, 2007 Edition,
(g) Consideration should be given to the monitoring Section V — Nondestructive Examination
and trending of tube condition as part of a predictive main- ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, 2007 Edition,
tenance and/or replacement program. Section VIII, Division 1 — Rules for Construction of
(h) The minimum number of tubes to be inspected may Pressure Vessels
be determined by the methods provided in Mandatory ASME PCC-3, Inspection Planning Using Risk Based
Appendix 312-I. Methods
Publisher: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers
312-5.2 Examination of Tube-to-Tubesheet Repair (ASME), Two Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990
(www.asme.org)
Repairs shall be examined by one or more of the
following methods: ASTM E2283-03, Standard Practice for Extreme Value
(a) pressure or leak testing on the shell side; see section Analysis of Nonmetallic Inclusions in Steel and Other
312-6 Microstructural Features
(b) liquid penetrant examination (PT) in accordance Publisher: American Society for Testing and Materials
with the applicable construction code or post-construc- (ASTM International), 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O.
tion code Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959
(c) visual examination (VT) in accordance with ASME (www.astm.org)
BPVC, Section V, Article 9
Wolf, Gerald M. and Adams, Robert B., An Improved
312-5.3 Examination of Tubesheet Repair Plugging System for HX Tubing, EPRI BPO
Conference paper , June 1996
(a) VT in-process weld examination shall be Publisher: Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), 3420
performed. Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94304 (www.epri.com)
(b) Surface examination by PT shall be performed at
the completion of the weld repair. Standards for Power Plant Heat Exchangers, 4th Edition,
(c) Volumetric examination by UT should be consid- 2004
ered when there is a possibility of additional flaws Standards for Closed Feedwater Heater, 7th Edition, 2004
being introduced to the tubesheet during the repair. Publisher: Heat Exchange Institute, Inc. (HEI), 1300
Summer Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44115
312-5.4 Examination of Pressure Containment (www.heatexchange.org)
Components Repairs
Standards of the Tubular Exchanger Manufacturers
(a) All welded repairs should receive VT and PT or MT Association, 8th Edition
examination, especially for heat exchangers deemed Publisher: Tubular Exchanger Manufacturers Association,
critical to the operation and/or process safety of the Inc. (TEMA), 25 North Broadway, Tarrytown, NY 10591
facility. (www.tema.org)
(b) Where possible, welded repairs shall receive volu-
metric examination by RT or UT. Andreone, Carl F. and Yokell, S., Tubular Heat Exchanger
Inspection, Maintenance and Repair, McGraw-Hill, New
312-6 TESTING York, 1997
Wang, W. David, Ph.D., “Extreme Value Analysis of Heat
Following completion of the inspection, a pressure test Exchanger Tube Inspection Data,” Proceedings of
or tightness test in accordance with Article 501 should be PVP2006-ICPVT-11, 2006, ASME Pressure Vessels
considered, particularly if the integrity of the tube-to- and Piping Division Conference July 2006
tubesheet joint is in question. Bypass-calculation-R3.xls (http://www.mgt-inc.com/
docs/Bypass-calculation-R3.xls)
ð18Þ 312-7 REFERENCES
The following is a list of publications referenced in this
Article. Unless otherwise specified, the latest edition shall
apply.

165

Provided by IHS Markit under license with ASME

 ASME PCC-2–2018

Mandatory Appendix 312-I

Methods for Determining Minimum Number of Tubes to Inspect

312-I-1 Introduction 312-I-1.3 Use of Inspection Planning

This Mandatory Appendix provides general good rec- (a) An inspection planning program may be imple-
ommendations and requirements for determining the mented to determine the number of tubes to inspect
number of tubes to inspect by different methods. The and the frequency at which the tubes shall be inspected.
user may select any method, and may also deviate (b) Program implementation guidelines are provided
from the recommendations and requirements of each in ASME PCC-3. The following factors should be
method based on the requirements of the heat exchanger. considered:
(1) inspection effectiveness required, see Table 312-
312-I-1.1 Fixed Tube Count I-1.3-1 for various effectiveness and the associated
The following minimum number of tubes inspected methods of inspection.
should be considered: (2) maximum inspection interval permitted.
(a) 50 tubes or 25% of tube total, whichever is greater, (3) type of inspection required for the suspected
for heat exchangers with a total tube count of less than 500 damage mechanism. See Table 312-I-1.3-1 for additional
tubes details.
(b) 20% of tube total for heat exchangers with a total (c) See para. 312-5.1 for inspection methods.
tube count of 500 tubes or more, up to 750 tubes
(c) 15% of tube total for heat exchangers with a total
312-I-1.4 Use of Extreme Value Analysis (EVA)
tube count of 750 tubes or more, up to 1,000 tubes (a) Use of EVA makes it possible to accurately assess
(d) 10% of tube total for heat exchangers with a total the remaining life of large numbers of tubes using rela-
tube count of more than 1,000 tubes tively minimal data.
(b) EVA assessment is based on ASTM E 2283,
312-I-1.2 Tube Bundle “Standard Practice for Extreme Value Analysis of
The following areas of the tube bundle should be exam- Nonmetallic Inclusions in Steel and Other
ined at a minimum: Microstructural Features.”
(a) the first three rows adjacent to the inlet nozzle and (c) Use of EVA to assess the maximum wall loss data has
the last two rows adjacent to the exit nozzle. been described in conference publications; see Table 312-
(b) every second tube around the perimeter of the I-1.3-1, Note (4).
bundle. For multipass heat exchangers, the perimeter (d) The EVA method and results may be incorporated
of each pass shall be included. into an inspection planning assessment.
(c) a selection of tubes in the interior section of the (e) With smaller sample sizes, ideally 20 to 30 tubes
bundle. regardless of the number of tubes in the exchanger,
(d) areas with a history of active damage mechanisms. the appropriate inspection effectiveness may be achieved
(e) areas that have not previously been examined. by using the lower bound value of 99%, 95%, 90%, and
(f) failure of 10% of the tubes examined shall require an 80% confidence intervals.
additional 10% of tubes to be examined in the examined
area, as per (a) through (e).

166

Provided by IHS Markit under license with ASME

 ASME PCC-2–2018

Table 312-I-1.3-1 Inspection Effectiveness Table

Number of
Number of Nonferrous Number of
Inspection Ferrous Tubes Tubes by Tubes by
Effectiveness by Intrusive Intrusive Nonintrusive
Category Damage to Consider Inspection Method Inspection Methods Inspection Methods Inspection Methods
Highly effective Wall loss IRIS 80% to 100% 80% to 100% Not applicable
[excluding MIC]
… IRIS and EVA 20 to 30 20 to 30 …
99% CI as
lower bound
… RFET or MFL 100% and pull Not applicable …
2 worst tubes
for lab analysis
… ET Not applicable 100% …
Cracking SWIRIS 100% Not applicable …
Cracking or MIC ET Not applicable 100% …
Usually effective Wall loss or IRIS 60% to 80% 60% to 80% Profile RT 50%
localized and at 0 deg and
general corrosion 90 deg
(excluding MIC)
… IRIS and EVA 20 to 30 20 to 30 …
95% CI as
lower bound
… RFET or MFL 100% and use Not applicable …
IRIS on 2
worst tubes
PSET 90% Not applicable … …
… ET Not applicable 80% …
Cracking SWIRIS 80% Not applicable …
… PSET 100% Not applicable …
Cracking or MIC ET Not applicable 80% …
Fairly effective Wall loss IRIS 40% to 60% 40% to 60% Not applicable
(excluding MIC)
… IRIS and EVA 20 to 30 20 to 30 …
90% CI as
lower bound
… RFET or MFL 80% and use Not applicable …
IRIS on 2
worst tubes
PSET 70% Not applicable … …
… ET Not applicable 60% …
Cracking SWIRIS 60% Not applicable …
… PSET 80% Not applicable …
… RFET or MFL 100% … …
Cracking or MIC ET Not applicable 50% …
Poorly effective Wall loss IRIS 20% to 40% 20% to 40% Not applicable
(excluding MIC)
… IRIS and EVA 20 to 30 20 to 30 …
80% CI as
lower bound
… RFET or MFL 60% and use Not applicable …
IRIS on 2
worst tubes
PSET 50% Not applicable … …
… ET Not applicable 40% …
Cracking SWIRIS 40% Not applicable …
… PSET 60% Not applicable …
… RFET or MFL 80% … …
Cracking or MIC ET Not applicable 30% …

167

Provided by IHS Markit under license with ASME

 ASME PCC-2–2018

Table 312-I-1.3-1 Inspection Effectiveness Table (Cont’d)

GENERAL NOTE:
ET = eddy current testing
EVA = extreme value analysis
IRIS = internal rotary inspection system
MFL = magnetic flux leakage
MIC = microbiologicaly induced corrosion
RFET = remote field eddy current
PSET = partial saturation eddy current
SWIRIS = shear wave internal rotary inspection system

168

Provided by IHS Markit under license with ASME

 ASME PCC-2–2018

Mandatory Appendix 312-II

Examination of Pressure Containment Components

312-II-1 EXAMINATION 312-II-2 INSPECTION

Examination of the shell, channel, and other pressure The inspection of these components should occur
containment components, excluding the tubes, may be concurrently with the inspection of the tubes.
performed by any of the following methods:
(a) RT 312-II-3 SUITABILITY
(b) UT
(c) MT Pressure containment components are particularly
(d) VT suited for inspection planning methods such as described
(e) internal inspection by removal of tube bundle by ASME PCC-3.
(f) internal inspection by remote camera or other
inspection probe instrument

169

Provided by IHS Markit under license with ASME