API 580 and ASME PCC-3: One RBI Story, Two Roles - CANCELLED (C2026-00428)
CANCELLED
Interested in reading the entire paper? Click on the "Paper" button below to read on the AMPP Knowledge Hub!
*Please note, if your registration came with access to the conference proceedings don't forget to login to your AMPP Knowledge Hub account to access the paper for free. If you login and don't have access to the paper, you can purchase the individual paper or purchase the entire conference proceedings on your Knowledge Hub account.
Yashar Behnamian, DUANE SERATE, Simon Yuen, Robert Gao, Aaron McDonald, Sudeep Bohra, Nirav Mehta, Nihar Soni
ASME PCC-3-2022 standard and API 580 are compared in the context of implementing Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) programs for pressure equipment. Both standards define risk as a function of the probability and consequence of failure and offer guidance on using qualitative, semi-quantitative, or quantitative risk assessment methods. ASME PCC-3 provides detailed, prescriptive procedures for RBI implementation, focusing on risk categorization, damage mechanisms, inspection planning, and mitigation. It is designed for broad applicability across industries and includes a formalized process for quantifying risk and updating risk rankings. API 580, while aligned in principle, is more flexible and serves as a recommended practice tailored to the oil, gas, and chemical industries. It emphasizes integration with existing inspection and mechanical integrity programs and relies on API 581 for quantitative methodologies. The comparison highlights that PCC-3 is generally more structured and comprehensive in its RBI approach, while API 580 offers adaptability and broader acceptance in regulated industries. The two standards can be complementary when applied together, leveraging PCC-3’s procedural rigor and API 580’s integration framework.
