People | Locations | Statistics |
---|---|---|
Naji, M. |
| |
Motta, Antonella |
| |
Aletan, Dirar |
| |
Mohamed, Tarek |
| |
Ertürk, Emre |
| |
Taccardi, Nicola |
| |
Kononenko, Denys |
| |
Petrov, R. H. | Madrid |
|
Alshaaer, Mazen | Brussels |
|
Bih, L. |
| |
Casati, R. |
| |
Muller, Hermance |
| |
Kočí, Jan | Prague |
|
Šuljagić, Marija |
| |
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-Artemi | Brussels |
|
Azam, Siraj |
| |
Ospanova, Alyiya |
| |
Blanpain, Bart |
| |
Ali, M. A. |
| |
Popa, V. |
| |
Rančić, M. |
| |
Ollier, Nadège |
| |
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro |
| |
Landes, Michael |
| |
Rignanese, Gian-Marco |
|
Kagarise, Christopher
in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%
Topics
Publications (3/3 displayed)
Places of action
Organizations | Location | People |
---|
article
Optimizing Corrosion Mitigation Costs Using Failure Analysis
Abstract
Failure analysis and root cause analysis of corroded pipelines and pipingsystem components canprovide operators with valuable information to help prevent future failures while optimizing mitigation costs. Using some basic steps for preparation and investigation, operators can determine the applicable corrosion mechanism(s)causing the corrosion and implementor adjust the measures taken to mitigate the corrosion. Collecting multiple lines of evidence about chemicaland microbiological conditions, corrosion products, and operating parameters is essential. Targeting mitigation measures to only the applicable corrosion mechanism(s) can support mitigation cost optimization, such as byapplying only the most efficacious chemical treatments.