The Source of Insight: Expert Guidance on NDT, Radiography, CUI, and Sealed Sources

Advancing CUI Detection: The Shift to Risk-Based Inspection

Written by Jake Bourn | Feb 3, 2025 6:15:00 PM

For oil and gas, power generation, and petrochemical facilities, Corrosion Under Insulation (CUI) remains one of the most costly and difficult integrity challenges. Undetected corrosion weakens piping and equipment, increasing the risk of failures, unplanned shutdowns, and expensive repairs.

Traditional Time-Based Inspections (TBI) are often out of sync with actual degradation rates, leading to unnecessary inspections or, worse, missed damage. To address these challenges, many facilities are moving toward Risk-Based Inspection (RBI), an approach that prioritizes inspections based on actual degradation risks rather than predefined intervals.

Time-Based vs. Risk-Based Inspection: Key Differences

Time-Based Inspection (TBI)

TBI programs follow a fixed schedule, typically every three or five years, based on asset classification. This ensures consistent monitoring, but it does not account for actual corrosion rates, which vary based on moisture ingress, insulation performance, and external environmental conditions [1].

One of the major shortcomings of TBI is that it may lead to:

  • Unnecessary inspections on assets with low corrosion risk.
  • Missed early-stage degradation in high-risk environments.
  • Increased maintenance costs due to inefficient resource allocation.

Risk-Based Inspection (RBI)

RBI prioritizes inspections based on technical risk indicators rather than arbitrary timeframes. The approach assesses factors such as temperature fluctuations, insulation condition, chloride exposure, and historical corrosion data to determine inspection timing [2].

A well-executed RBI program helps asset owners:

  • Prioritize high-risk piping and equipment.
  • Reduce unnecessary inspections on low-risk assets.
  • Detect CUI before damage reaches a critical stage.
  • Improve maintenance planning and resource allocation.

BP has implemented a structured four-step RBI approach for managing CUI, ensuring inspections align with operational risk factors rather than fixed schedules. Similarly, ExxonMobil integrates RBI principles into its Operations Integrity Management System (OIMS), focusing on risk-driven corrosion monitoring and maintenance planning.

How Environmental Conditions Influence CUI Risk

CUI is highly dependent on external environmental factors. A fixed TBI schedule doesn’t account for how different conditions accelerate or slow down corrosion rates. Below are examples of how environmental conditions affect CUI development:

High-Humidity Environments (Tropical Regions)

In high-rainfall areas, chloride buildup is often minimized as rainwater continuously washes away surface contaminants. However, for insulated piping, heavy moisture penetration into insulation materials can create an ideal environment for CUI [3].

RBI Adjustment: Post-monsoon inspections should focus on assessing insulation barriers for signs of moisture retention and degradation. Identifying and addressing wet insulation early can prevent long-term corrosion damage.

Temperature Extremes (Middle East)

Desert environments may seem low risk for CUI, but large daily temperature swings cause condensation inside insulation, even in arid regions. This effect is compounded in facilities with steam lines or cyclically heated piping [4].

RBI Adjustment: RBI models should incorporate temperature cycle data to predict when and where condensation will form inside insulation, increasing the likelihood of CUI. This allows inspection teams to focus on the most affected areas rather than relying on a fixed schedule.

Arctic Conditions (Alaska, Canada, Siberia)

In cold environments, moisture does not remain stationary within insulation layers. Water may enter in one place and migrate to another, leading to hidden CUI that traditional spot inspections may miss [5].

RBI Adjustment: Inspections should account for moisture migration patterns, focusing on areas where water is likely to accumulate rather than just visible entry points. RBI models should incorporate historical data on freeze-thaw cycles to better predict high-risk locations.

These environmental considerations demonstrate why a fixed TBI schedule is not sufficient for long-term asset integrity management.

Implementing an Effective RBI Program for CUI

Transitioning from TBI to RBI requires several key components to be successful:

Access to Advanced NDT Solutions

Detecting corrosion before it reaches a critical stage is essential. Traditional visual and manual inspections are slow, resource-intensive, and prone to missing early-stage CUI.

Solution: Real-time radiography, such as OpenVision, provides an efficient way to:

  • Scan high-risk piping quickly.
  • Cover large areas of insulated piping in a single shift.
  • Provide immediate imaging feedback to assess corrosion risk.

This allows inspection teams to perform more frequent, targeted inspections rather than relying on rigid, scheduled cycles.

Skilled Technicians and Data Interpretation

RBI involves more than inspection timing. It requires specialized expertise to analyze corrosion risks, interpret NDT results, and adjust strategies based on data trends.

Solution: Training programs should focus on:

  • Identifying CUI progression indicators.
  • Properly using advanced NDT technologies.
  • Understanding how environmental factors accelerate corrosion.

Integration with Asset Integrity Programs

For RBI to be effective, it must be part of a larger asset integrity framework rather than a standalone initiative.

Solution: Facilities should:

  • Incorporate RBI data into centralized monitoring systems.
  • Use predictive modeling to anticipate future corrosion risks.
  • Adjust inspection priorities dynamically based on real-time data.

Without proper integration, RBI risks being underutilized, leading to the same inefficiencies as TBI.

The Shift Toward Data-Driven CUI Management

The transition from TBI to RBI represents a significant improvement in CUI detection and prevention. By using risk-based, real-time inspection techniques, asset owners can:

  • Reduce inspection redundancy.
  • Detect CUI before it escalates into costly failures.
  • Optimize maintenance budgets and resource allocation.
  • Improve overall safety and equipment longevity.

For facilities still relying on fixed-interval inspections, the question is no longer whether to transition to RBI, but how soon. A well-executed RBI strategy enhances detection accuracy, optimizes resources, and prevents costly failures.

How well does your current inspection program address CUI risk? If it doesn’t adjust for environmental and operational factors, now is the time to reassess.

Sources

[1] API Recommended Practice 583: Corrosion Under Insulation and Fireproofing, American Petroleum Institute, 2014.

[2] API 580: Risk-Based Inspection, American Petroleum Institute, 2016.

[3] "Impact of Moisture on Insulation Degradation," NACE International, 2020.

[4] "Thermal Cycle Effects on Piping Insulation in Middle Eastern Refineries," Journal of Corrosion Science, 2019.

[5] "CUI Detection Challenges in Arctic Environments," Society for Protective Coatings (SSPC), 2021.

This article is part of our technical series on industrial inspection methodologies and CUI management.