The International Journal of Robotics Research€¦ · Additional services and information for The...

http://ijr.sagepub.com

The International Journal of Robotics Research

DOI: 10.1177/02783649030227009 2003; 22; 603 The International Journal of Robotics Research

Hagen Schempf, Edward Mutschler, Vitaly Goltsbergm and William Crowley GRISLEE: Gasmain Repair and Inspection System for Live Entry Environments

http://ijr.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/22/7-8/603 The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Multimedia Archives

can be found at:The International Journal of Robotics Research Additional services and information for

http://ijr.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

http://ijr.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

© 2003 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. at CARNEGIE MELLON UNIV LIBRARY on August 10, 2008 http://ijr.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://www.ijrr.org/multimedia.html

http://ijr.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://ijr.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav


Hagen SchempfEdward MutschlerVitaly GoltsbergWilliam CrowleyCarnegie Mellon UniversityRobotics Institute5000 Forbes Ave.Pittsburgh, PA [email protected]@[email protected]@ri.cmu.edu

GRISLEE: GasmainRepair and InspectionSystem for LiveEntry Environments

Abstract

US gas companies spend over $300 million annually detecting andrepairing gas leaks in urban and suburban settings. The currentapproach is one of above-ground leak detection and pinpointing,followed by excavation, repair and restoration. The major cost in-curred is typically that of digging and restoring the excavation site.The Gas Research Institute and the National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration are funding a program at Carnegie Mellon Univer-sity (CMU) Robotics Institute and Maurer Engineering to reduce thecost of repairing gas distribution mains using advanced remote androbotics technologies to provide up to 50% cost savings over con-ventional repair methods. Under this program, CMU has developedGRISLEE (Gasline Robotic Inspection System for Live Entry Envi-ronments), a coiled-tubing deployed, remotely controllable, modu-lar leak-detection, inspection, surface-preparation and repair robotsystem for the real-time in situ spot repair of live 4 inch diameterdistribution gas mains. The system is capable of repairing two ormore leaks per day from a single excavation over a 2000 ft lengthunder live conditions (i.e., without downtime of the gas main andthus no customer service interruption). The prototype system hasundergone laboratory testing and proven the feasibility of its mod-ular inspection, sensing, preparation, and repair technologies andsystems. Field trials with multiple utilities will be carried out duringlate 2002.

KEY WORDS—modular robot, gas pipe, inspection, repair,pipe leaks

The International Journal of Robotics ResearchVol. 22, No. 7–8, July–August 2003, pp. 603-616,©2003 Sage Publications

1. Introduction

The natural gas pipeline industry consists of transmission anddistribution companies. These pipeline systems can be sim-ple or complicated. However, all gas pipeline companies areheld to the same safety standards. Figure 1 represents one ofthe many possible configurations of natural gas transmissionand distribution systems typically found in the US and world-wide. Note that connection lines denoted as pipelines are notto scale and can signify thousands of miles (cross-countrypipelines) and highly deviated and interconnected networks(urban areas).

In order to understand natural gas flow, we can envisionthat the natural gas flows:

• from the producing wells into gathering line(s);

• through gathering lines and compressors or compressorstations;

• after the compressor(s), through transmission lines;

• to a processing plant, where the heavy ends, such aspropane, butane, ethane or natural gasoline, which areinitially components of the gas stream, are removed;

• through the transmission line and additionalcompressors;

• from the compressors to underground storage or a Liq-uefied Natural Gas (LNG) plant (where natural gas isliquefied by reducing its temperature to−260◦ Fahren-heit), or directly to a city gate station or master metersystem.

603


http:\\www.sagepublications.com


604 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ROBOTICS RESEARCH / July–August 2003

Producing Wells

Gathering Lines Transmission Line

Processing

Plant

Compressor

Stations

Underground

Storage

DISTRIBUTION

SYSTEM

Large Volume

Customer

Regulator

Meter

City

Gate

LNG Plant

Natural Gas Pipeline

System

Fig. 1. Overview of gas-production to consumer life-line.

Figure 2 shows a schematic diagram of a distribution sys-tem that consists of mains and services operating at differentpressures, which are controlled by regulators.

Ordinarily, industrial customers receive gas servicethrough high-pressure distribution mains, while small com-mercial and residential gas systems can be either low- or high-pressure distribution systems.

Just like many other commodities supplied to end-users(water, electricity, etc.), natural gas represents a vital com-ponent of the human comfort/survival of daily life, whetherthis be for heating, cooking, power generation or other uses.Natural gas is delivered to the ultimate end-user through a net-work of pipelines, both (inter)continental (termed transmis-sion lines) and local (termed distribution lines). These distri-bution lines have been installed in cities over decades and havefollowed the trends of the latest technologies available on themarket at the time; ranging from lead-jointed hollow woodenlines, through cast-iron (low-pressure) to steel (medium tohigher pressure) and lately plastic lines.

Typically, the greatest hazard and usually the largest con-tributor to potentially dangerous situations is third-party dam-age, caused by inadvertent main strikes from excavation

equipment, resulting in explosive or combustible situations.However, these incidents are rare and, despite being costly,do not necessarily represent the only operational need forsafeguarding the gas main distribution infrastructure in urbansettings.

2. Problem Statement

Leak and repair crews in all utilities are busy throughout theyear responding to gas-detection calls from customers, de-tecting and locating the leak and classifying it into several ur-gency classes. Currently, between 800,000 to 1,000,000 leakrepairs are carried out per year in the US, at a (national av-erage) cost of between $750 to $1,250 each, including leakdetection and leak pinpointing, excavation, repair and roadrestoration (costs are highly variable). The process usuallyinvolves the use of sensitive gas-detection equipment to lo-cate, pinpoint the leak (Staff Report 2000), mark, and exca-vate the site around the pipe, verify the leak, apply an externalpatch (clamp or weld-on), verify the seal, and then restore theexcavation/street/sidewalk. Most of these steps (excluding lo-cating and pinpointing) are pictorially rendered in Figure 3.

The main issue with manual leak repair centers on the costsof excavation and the repair system. If a gas-main section isto be relined or replaced, there would be the need to shut offgas flow to customers on the local grid. In highly urban areas,especially in larger cities with high population densities, thenumber of inconvenienced customers during the outage, thelogistics involved in planning and notifying residents, etc.,can be a burdensome and involved activity for utilities.

The utilities were interested in the usage of robotics to pro-vide a lower-cost alternative to pipeline repair and thus to ex-tend their usable life or mean-time-between-repairs (MTBR),providing an alternative to relining and complete replacement(typically with plastic pipe). Utilities thus sought to developa remote repair system, capable of entering a live gas mainwithout requiring gas-flow interruption and capable of in-specting and locating leaks and also repairing them from asingle excavation with a substantial reach (>1,000 ft). Theirexpectation was that such a system could drastically reducerepair costs and repair frequency, and potentially provide fora preventative maintenance tool as part of the inspection forgas-distribution utilities. The main question was what tech-nology was available and what needed to be developed so asto achieve an optimal combination of system performance andcost-effectiveness.

3. Technology Maturity

There are many examples of prior-art robotic systems foruse in underground piping (transmission-pipeline pigs ex-cluded). Most of them, however, are focused on water andsewer lines, and meant for inspection, repair and rehabilita-



Schempf et al. / GRISLEE 605

60 psig

1/4 psig

1/4 psig

60 psig

Industrial

Commercial

City Gate

Station

Low

Pressure

System

Residential Service

Lines

DistributionMain

450 psig

Transmission Pipeline

High Pressure Regulator

Valve

Meter

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of a distribution system.

Fig. 3. Conventional leak-repair method.

tion: for example, Pearpoint (2003), Beaver, KA-TE (2003),ARIES (2003), etc. As such, they are mostly tethered (BakerHughes 2003), and utilize cameras and specialized tooling(British Gas/Advantica 1999), etc. (see Figure 4).

Two of the more notable exceptions are the autonomousKurt I system from GMD, Germany (Kolesnik and Baratoff2000) used for sewer monitoring (not commercial nor hard-ened), and the (albeit tethered) cast-iron pipe joint-sealingrobot (CISBOT; Engineering Services Inc. 2003), which is de-ployed through a bolt-on fitting and injects anaerobic sealantinto the leaking jute-stuffed joint (these systems are shown inFigure 5).

Fig. 4. Prior-art robots in use in the sewer industry.

There are several types of distribution gas-main repair sys-tems commercially available today. The low-pressure repairs(i.e., on cast-iron) are primarily carried out externally, by ap-plying a screw-tightened clamp with an elastomeric seal alonga section of pipe and over the leak-spot. High-pressure mains(typically steel) are sealed using a metallic weld-on sleeve,which is also applied externally; both can be applied underlive conditions (see Figure 6).

Internal repairs are either performed with a dead main and(almost exclusively) for joint repair, using either internally-set




Fig. 5. Tethered gas line (right) and untethered autonomous(Kurt I) robots developed to date by industry and researchers.

Low-Pressure Cast-IronExternal Clamp-on Sleeve

Internal Link-Pipe Sleeve

High-Pressure SteelExternal Weld-on Sleeve

Fig. 6. Existing gas-main repair systems.

epoxy-hardening sleeves (LinkPipe Inc. 2003) or also external(live) fiber glass–epoxy sleeve clamps (not shown). (Note thatinternal joint sealing with anaerobic sealant jute injection isnot explored here.)

It seemed that none of the existing technology solutionscould achieve what the utilities were seeking to accomplish interms of performance and cost. It was at that point that the GasResearch Institute (GRI) and the National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA) contracted Carnegie MellonUniversity (CMU) and Maurer Engineering, Inc. (MEI) totake on a novel development program.

As part of the program, CMU was tasked to develop asimple, rugged, yet effective repair robot system that couldbe deployed in a modular fashion and perform the detection,preparation and area repair/reinforcement of a leaking live gasmain. CMU was teamed with MEI to utilize GRI’s live-pipeaccess and coiled tubing (CT) deployment system (structuralpush–pull steel-tubing “tether”) to deploy their robotic system(to be called GRISLEE); Figure 7 shows a schematic diagramof the deployment and robot system.

The GRISLEE system was envisioned to consist of severalindependent modules, which were to be deployed utilizingthe CT system through a live-access weld-on valve on the gasmain. A top-side operator was to monitor a computer/videodisplay that relayed magnetic flux leakage (MFL) data andvideo imagery from the modules through the CT unit (seeFigure 7).

4. Requirements and Specifications

In order to develop the most appropriate system to repair leaksin live gas mains, it is imperative that the performance require-ments of the complete system be spelled out as quantitativelyas possible. Towards that end, a complete list of requirementshas been developed and compiled:

• faster, cheaper and more convenient repair method thanis possible with current methods;

• access and work within live gas mains from a singleexcavation and allow maximum travel from a singleentry point in both directions;

• fit into and pass through 4 inch internal diameter steelgas mains;

• reasonably negotiate bends, debris and protruding taps;

• operate safely within a natural gas environment;

• identify, mark, acquire, clean and repair the defectivearea(s);

• install a reliable sealing patch;

• guaranteed system retrieval under worst-case systemfailure;

• modularly interchangeable with existing/future deploy-ment and sensing components;

• easy to operate with minimal and manual operator in-teractions.

Based on the above performance requirements imposed onthe design, and an iterative concept development and evalua-tion process, the robot development team sought to implementthe following set of system specifications:




USER INTERFACE

COILED-TUBING UNIT

LIVE PIPE-ACCESS SYSTEM

COILED-TUBING PIPING

MODULAR INTERFACE CONNECTOR

TOOLING

VIDEOINSPECT

MODULESLOCATEFLAW&REPAIR

Fig. 7. GRISLEE and CT system architecture.

• system to be designed as a multi-module exchange-able work-head system capable of viewing, inspecting,marking, cleaning and repairing pipe-leaks;

• unit to interface to existing CT deployment system fromMEI;

• the hard module-diameter not to exceed 3 inch outerdiameter;

• inert materials (SS) with internal purging and nitrogenpressurization to 100 psig, as well as potting and im-mersion to be used as safing techniques;

• the repair head to have a forward-looking live-videocamera monitoring system;

• the system to have an independent visual flaw-markingemplacement (coupled to MFL head) and detection (onrepair head) system;

• the system to be able to fine-position itself using theCT-unit to within±1 inch or better;

• the internal pipe surface to be cleaned mechanically;

• the frontal cleaning head and repair modules to be in-terchangeable;

• the operator controls to be integrated with existing CT,MFL and camera controls;

• the system to be deployable in the same manner as thecurrent camera and MFL inspection systems.

In order to resolve “architectural” issues, a preliminary de-sign study was undertaken. It revealed that for many techni-cal, operational and logistical reasons (including a time-and-motion study), these modules should be made interchangeableand deployable as individual “trains”, rather than having allmodules hooked into a single train inside the pipe.

The utilities also tasked the team to determine whether livemain spot repair from the inside under live conditions with aremote robotic system was cost effective. CMU and MEI en-gaged in a preliminary review of a gas utility’s repair records,and generated relevant data as to the number, frequency andspacing of spot repairs in a suburban distribution network inthe north-eastern US. The results are shown in Table 1.

It was found that over a period of one year, repairs carriedout in specific areas, tended to result in multiple repairs withincertain lengths of pipe. More than 75% of these repair jobspatched two or more leaks within less than a 325 ft separationbetween leak locations. Based on preliminary cost estimatesfor live robotic gas-main repair, it was determined that if morethan two repairs could be carried out from a single excavation




Table 1. Spot Repair Data from a Gas Utility

Total # of 1999 repairs 60Average repairs per cluster 2.6Average cluster spread (ft) 118Max cluster width (ft) 325

% of clusters with 1 repair 21.7%% of clusters with 2 repairs 43.5%% of clusters with 3 repairs 4.3%% of clusters with 4 repairs 17.4%% of clusters with 5 or more repairs 13.0%

100.0%

Note: Repair cluster is defined as a section of CT accessiblepipe with a sequence of known leak locations.

$0

$1,000

$2,000

$3,000

$4,000

$5,000

$6,000

$7,000

1 2 3 4 5

No. of Repairs

Co

st (

$)

Conv. Repair - Circle ClampConv. Repair - Welded SleeveInternal Robotic Repair

$0

$1,000

$2,000

$3,000

$4,000

$5,000

$6,000

$7,000

1 2 3 4 5

No. of Repairs

Co

st (

$)

Conv. Repair - Circle ClampConv. Repair - Welded SleeveInternal Robotic Repair

Fig. 8. Payback cross-over for live internal repair.

within a 2000 ft distance around the excavation, live roboticrepair could compete and beat conventional manual methods(based on clamp-on/weld-on sleeves emplaced through open-hole excavation methods). The repair data and cost estimatessummarized in Figure 8 for both external clamp-on and weld-on manual repair sleeves show the payback cross-over point.These were the conditions under which the team set out todevelop the GRISLEE system.

5. System Overview

In order to understand the system architecture and then relateto the technical details of each subsystem, it is best to beginthe description from the “top-side” location, from where therobotic repair operation was to be undertaken.

The deployment and “locomotion” unit for the repair sys-tem is based solely on a CT unit. (The CT system is a spooled-up steel pipe with internal cabling, used extensively in the off-shore oil industry for sensor deployment and well treatmentover thousands of feet in depth.) The CT system allows usto access live gas mains, insert GRISLEE through a welded-

on access fitting, and “push–pull” GRISLEE through the gasmain for distances of up to 1000 ft in either direction (limitedby CT buckling loads and the extent of pipe bends). GRI andGaz de France (GDF) had previously funded the developmentof the CT system (developed through MEI; Porter and Pittard1999) and the MFL flaw-detection sensor head (developedthrough TuboScope Vetco Pipeline Services, Inc.).

The team was tasked to develop a set of robotic/remotemodules, that would allow a repair crew to: (i) detect wallthinning and/or leaks in the pipe wall using the existing MFLsensor; (ii) clean the pipe to prepare the affected pipe area;and (iii) emplace an expandable metallized epoxy sleeve toreinforce and/or seal and plug the leak under live gas pressure(inches of water column to 60 psig), without affecting thecontinued gas flow inside the main line (Schempf et al. 2001).GRISLEE was designed to be modular and intended to includeseveral modules:

• a camera module to determine obstacles and joint loca-tions in the gas mains;

• a magnetic flux leakage module to locate and measureremaining steel pipe wall thickness (Porter and Pittard1999);

• a marker module for marking and locating identifiedpipe defects;

• a brush module for cleaning a localized area at the de-fect or joint location;

• an improved sleeve module to repair leaks in live pres-surized gas mains.

Depending on the task at hand, the proper arrangement ofmodules is attached to the flexible whiphose at the end of theCT, and then inserted through the access fitting and pushed tothe proper location utilizing the CT system. Once in place, thesystem is remotely controlled from above ground to performits task. Upon completion, the module train is retrieved, andreplaced with the proper arrangement of modules to performthe next operation. The proper arrangement of the systemarchitecture is depicted in Figure 7 in an iconic fashion.

Before deploying GRISLEE, the launching apparatusneeds to be put in place. This requires (i) the excavation of thepipe segment in question, (ii) exposing the pipe so as to allowhuman access to it, (iii) installation of the access fitting, and(iv) installation of the CT unit and the launching hardware.GRISLEE is then launched in a predefined sequence, includ-ing (i) attaching the video inspection train to inspect the pipefor obstructions, (ii) deploying the sensing and marking mod-ule train to utilize the MFL to locate flaws/leaks/joints andthen marking them with the marking module, (iii) insertion ofthe mechanical brushing system to remove loose scale aroundthe defect area, (iv) deployment of the spot repair sleeve, andfinally (v) re-insertion of the camera module to confirm the




proper installation of the sleeve. This process is repeated untilall detected and marked flaws are repaired. The same can bedone in the opposite direction with a reversed fitting weldedto the pipe.

The overall system is best described in terms of its mainelements, which are the (A) deployment and access sys-tem, and the operator interface, and (B) the robotic inspec-tion/mapping/marking/preparation/repair module trains. Therobotic modules are best broken down into their differenttrains, namely those used for (i) video inspection, (ii) MFLsensing and marking, (iii) surface preparation, and (iv) spotrepair. The electronics, software and user interface are alsobest described separately.

The access and deployment system developed by MEI un-der separate GRI and GDF co-funding, consists of a diesel-hydraulically powered CT cable spool, wound with mild-steelhollow piping, within which is seated a multi-conductor tetherin a pressurized inert nitrogen atmosphere (see Figure 9).

The CT piping is terminated at the spool-end through amulti-conductor slip-ring, that carries data, video and con-trol signals to and from the control panel; at the distal end, aflexible whiphose (reinforced fiber-rod coaxially wound withthe multi-conductor tether; see Figure 9) is terminated with astrain-relieved connector.

The access fitting, which is used to allow the CT to be de-ployed into the live pressurized main, is a two-part welded-onsteel clamp, that has an angled fitting with a valve mountedto it. A hydraulically-powered hole-saw drill is manually de-ployed to cut an elliptical hole into the top of the pipe to thefull diameter of the gas main, which is then retrieved. Afterdrilling, a launch chamber is attached to the fitting, whichwhen opened, allows for the attachment of modules and theirlaunch/retrieval without any release of natural gas (Figure 10).

Figure 11 depicts the tooling module trains intended forvisual camera inspection, flaw detection and marking, areapreparation and spot repair.

Figure 12 shows a perspective view of the resulting con-figurations, as well as a picture of a pre-prototype being test-launched in a test setup.

The base module contains the DC power supply, embeddedCPU and serial communication electronics on custom-builtcircular PCBs that control each module train, communicate tothe top-side controller and performin situ module detectionand safety checking. The hardware safety line and moduleID line of each module are tied to two separate pins, so thatthe base can perform a simple fault checking and moduleID before allowing any power application and control signalsending.

The video inspection train is simply a combination of thebase module with a rugged camera module.

The camera module consists of a high-resolution lensedcolor board-camera with an internally-mounted high-intensitywhite LED light-ring behind protective optical-quality glasswindows. The light intensity is varied and synched to the video

Fig. 9. CT deployment and connector system.

Fig. 10. Live gas main access and launch fitting.

Fig. 11. CAD view of module trains.

signal. A view of the combined video inspection train is shownin Figure 13.

There are several “non-contact” methods of flaw (cracks,corrosion, etc.) detection available for ferrous pipe materials.The most mature technology is that of MFL, where a mag-netic field is superimposed by a magnet on the ferrous parentmaterial, thereby saturating it. The principle behind the MFLsensing technique is shown in Figure 14. When a magnetic




PATCH SUPPLY & PATCHMARKER & MFL

BRUSH

CAMERA

GRISLEEPRE-PROTOTYPE MODULE TRAIN

PIPE

LAUNCHER

Fig. 12. Train configurations and pre-prototype test-launchexperiment.

BASE MODULE

CAMERA MODULE

Fig. 13. Video inspection train: base and camera.

field is applied to a steel plate (or pipe), magnetic flux linesgo through the conductive metal between the two poles ofthe magnet (Figure 14(A)). These flux lines are “deformed”if there is a loss of material in the metal surface (saturationeffect), causing a localized B-field “anomaly” (Figure 14(B)).

A

BAnomaly dueto section-loss

Fig. 14. MFL B-field saturation(-loss) technique.

This “anomaly” can be detected by Hall-effect sensors (cur-rent as a function of the magnetic field applied to the sensor)and mapped as a function of location and signal strength.

Specifically, a corrosive pipe material loss will manifest it-self as said reduction in the magnetic flux (or B-field strength).By properly arraying and positioning these Hall-effect sen-sors, and polling them, different readings can be obtained,which can be processed by computer to generate a physi-cally meaningful surface intensity map, which when coupledwith false coloring (C-Scan) can aid in visual identificationof cross-sectional material losses.

Figure 15 shows the signal received from Hall-effect sen-sors arrayed in a circular pattern, such as those on the pro-totype MFL unit, and the associated visual feedback for thecorrosional cross-sectional material loss flaw exhibited by atypical (buried) steel gas main.

The marker module uses internally-pressurized paintthrough a set of nozzles to mark the inside of the pipe with avisible paint ring. The goal is to leave a visible mark in the pipefor an optical sensor to detect said mark in later passes. Thisallows the preparation and repair modules to be accuratelypositioned without relying solely on odometry data from therobot or the CT spool. A view of the assembled marker/MFLtrain (with a mockup of the MFL module) is shown in a cut-upspray-marked pipe in Figure 16.




Pipe FlawPipe Flaw

Centralizers Hall-Effect Sensors

Magnets

MFL C-Scan

Fig. 15. MLF prototype sensor with graphic feedback oncorrosional metal loss.

The method utilized to mark the pipe is based on a timedrelease of properly-mixed water-based paint through a set of30◦ fan nozzles. The pneumatic schematic utilized allows alsofor purging and assuring unclogged lines at all times; seeFigure 17.

The pipe preparation train consists of the base, sensor andbrush modules. In order to use them, the operator goes backinto the pipe, locates and positions the train over the sprayed-on marker, and then brushes a selectable width of the insidesection of the pipe (located so as not to remove the markedpaint strip for later positioning of the repair module); ex-cessive scale is removed and improves adhesion of the re-pair patch. Feedback as to proper position is provided by an

MFL Module

MARKER Module

BASE Module

Centralizers

Fig. 16. Marker and MFL train in sprayed pipe piece.

Nitrogen Supply

Check Valve

Check Valve

Paint Supply

Paint Valve P urge Valve

Charge Port

Regulator

300 PSI In

20 PSI Out

Nitrogen Supply

Check Valve

Check Valve

Paint Supply

Paint Valve P

Charge Port

Regulator

300 PSI In

20 PSI Out

Purge Valve

Fig. 17. Pneumatic purging-circuit schematic.

integral camera mounted to the front of the brush module,allowing the operator to do coarse positioning by extend-ing/retracting the CT pipe. Fine positioning is aided by thesensor module which detects the paint strip, allowing posi-tioning to within ±1 cm. A view of the sensor and brushmodule train is shown in Figure 18.

The sensor module contains the electronics and opticalsensors necessary to detect the sprayed-on paint ring on thewalls of the pipe. The sensors are based on retro-reflective in-frared detectors giving a simple thresholded binary feedbackdepending on the intensity of the reflected signal. False pos-itives are avoided through a customized hardware setup andsoftware algorithm, which runs on the base module computer.

The brush module contains the electronics and drivers toactivate the motors that power the mechanical surface treat-ment brushes. The driven shaft is designed to allow operatorsto externally exchange brush module halves. An internally-




CAMERA Head

BRUSH Module

SENSOR Module

BASE Module

Fig. 18. Sensor and brush module train assembly.

mounted camera and light section allows viewing of the pre-pared area and repeated brushing if needed. The appropriatebrushing media depends on the conditions within the pipe.The elements used in impact, deformation and sanding oper-ations typical in other surface preparation industries are trans-ferable to this system with minimal effort, and used wheneverappropriate. Based on preliminary tests, the impact abrasionmethod utilized in star brushes has proven the most effectiveat removing rust and mill-scale with minimal effort, while ex-posing raw metal and providing good surface roughness forthe epoxy-based patch to take hold during the setting process.

The repair train consists of the base, sensor and patch mod-ule. The base module monitors the sensor trigger to alert theoperator to the proper position of the modules, and controlsthe valving to inflate and release small amounts of compressednitrogen into the setting bladder on the patch module. The sen-sor module is similar to that used on the preparation train. Thepatch module consists of a compressed-nitrogen chamber at300 psig, valved through a regulator to inflate an elastomericmembrane on a setting pipe. The setting pipe is hollow, toallow gas flow during the setting process. An image of therepair train is shown in Figure 19.

The prototype spot repair patch that was used for theGRISLEE system is a substantially modified version of theLinkPipe Gas-SleeveTM spot repair system developed for re-pair of out-of-service gas mains. A view of the commercially-available sleeve, prior to modification is shown in Figure 20.

Modifications to this existing sleeve, included changes tothe serration and locking system, as well as the addition of

Centralizers

PATCH Module

SENSOR Module

BASE Module

(bladder only w/o patch)

Fig. 19. Repair train module prototype.

INSTALLATION

DEPLOYMENT

PIPE

PATCH

SOILINSTALLATION

Fig. 20. LinkPipe’s Gas-SleeveTM spot repair patch.

an elastomeric tube to ensure pressure sealing during the set-ting period necessary for the epoxy to set so as to create animpermeable barrier. Figure 21 shows the prototype system,and the resulting patches in joints and pipes (used clear PVCpipe for better illustration only).

The intermodule connector is used throughout each trainto electrically/pneumatically interconnect each module. Theconnector was designed to withstand push and pull loads upto 3000 lb, while retaining flexibility and self-centering ca-pabilities. This was accomplished by combining an extensionspring and a metallic mesh sleeve, with end-attached sleevesand fittings. A pressure tolerant and sealed connector pair in-ternal to each mounting flange, provides for the necessaryinterconnectivity. An assembled view of this system is shownin Figure 22.

The user interface developed for the GRISLEE system wassplit from the hard controls used for the valve control of the CT




Installed Patch

PatchedLeak

Installed Patch

PatchedLeak

JuteBell

SpigotMetal

JuteBell

SpigotMetal

INSTALLED PATCH

PATCHED

LEAK

Bladder Patch

PIPE

Fig. 21. Sealing patch with modifications and pipe andcast-iron joint installation examples.

unit, allowing us to control the spool and the level wind. Themodule trains are all controlled from a single rack-mountedpanel box. The video signal is overlaid with the spool pay-outcounter value and displayed on a monitor as well as recordedvia a VCR.

The control box consists primarily of a custom-built CPUthat performs all communication tasks with the base modulevia serial communications, and all associated power regula-tion from AC to DC for the base unit. All buttons are readwith a digital I/O card, and status messages are displayed ona serial LCD display. Binary outputs control status lights andrelays for power, as well as video switching and safety shut-

SPRING

BRAID

HARNESS

CONNECTOR

Fig. 22. Intermodule connector prototype assembly.

Fig. 23. Control rack and control box for module trains.

offs. Both the control rack and the control box are shown inFigure 23.

The overall system architecture for the control ofGRISLEE is simple (refer to Figures 24 and 25).

The system is based on a tethered communications andpower backbone that goes through the CT piping and the sliprings, and splits signals for control, MFL data, video, overlayand control/data into separate conductor pairs (shielded andtwisted).

Signals are either processed top-side (counter video over-lay, operator inputs, base feedback) or in the base module(top-side commands), or as in the case of the MFL, passedstraight through to the dedicated MFL processing unit’s CPU(not shown in the figures).

The software architecture is based on an interrupt-drivenevents table scheme. The top-side (control box CPU) andbottom-side (base module CPU) controllers monitor local




GRISLEEControl

Rack

VideoInterface

Generator

GRISLEE RobotComposite Whip Service LoopCoiled Tubing

SpoolSlipringEncoder

MFLInterface

GRISLEEControl

Rack

VideoInterface

Generator



MFLInterface

GRISLEEControl

Rack

VideoInterface

Generator



MFLInterface

Fig. 24. GRISLEE block-diagram layout.

To RobotSlip Ring

Tether Spool

Tether Odometer

OdometryData

VideoSerialComm

Power

Remote Base Unit

PowerRegulation

Robot Operator Interface Existing MFL

MFLData

EmbeddedController

Operator Interface

&Strobe

From Generator

(RBU)

ControlsDisplays

To RobotSlip Ring

Tether Spool

Tether Odometer

OdometryData

VideoSerialComm

Power

Remote Base Unit

PowerRegulation

Robot Operator Interface Existing MFL

MFLData

EmbeddedController

Operator Interface

&Strobe

From Generator

(RBU)

ControlsDisplays

Fig. 25. Data, signal and power diagram.

events and trigger actions based on these processed readings.A simplified graphic of the architecture is seen in Figure 26.The base module CPU monitors module ID values, pressuresensor thresholds, diffuse light trigger values, and in return ex-ecutes digital and analog command sequences for the surfacecleaning motors, light controllers and valve on/off signals.The top-side control box CPU monitors the feedback comingfrom the bottom-side CPU, as well as buttons and switches,and updates outputs to the LCD screen, the video-overlayboard-set and all other button and status indicator lights.

6. Field Evaluations

The GRISLEE prototype modules/trains and the CT accessand deployment system were demonstrated to the sponsorsand utility industry review committee in an above-ground,100 ft long, pipe network set up inside a CMU testing high-bay (see Figure 27). The network consisted of several 20 ftsteel pipe sections coupled into a 100 ft test loop, which waspressurized and flow simulated using compressed air. Thedemonstration showcased the viability of the live access and




Robot Base ModuleMicrocontroller

Pressure Sensors

Diffuse Light Sensors

Brush/Mark/Patch Actuators

RS-422Serial

Interface

GRISLEEControl

EquipmentCPU

RS-422Serial

Interface

Status LCD Screen

Control Buttons/Switches

Status Indicator Lamps

Fig. 26. Software event input architecture.

CT-SPOOL

LAUNCHER

WHIP-HOSE

Fig. 27. Prototype-testing setup and deployment.

deployment system, the use of the camera and MFL sensorheads, the marking and locating modules, as well as the sur-face preparation and patch setting modules. Two patches wereset in pre-drilled leaking pipe sections and joints. These flawswere located, marked, prepared and patched by a minimally-trained operator.

The step-by-step repair sequence, the associated infras-tructure and logistics, throughput and timing have indicatedthat the claims of multiple repairs in a live gas main withoutflow interruption from a single excavation could be exploitedunder realistic field conditions. Based on these tests, a list of

improvements was drawn up and is being implemented priorto the planned outdoor utility field trials in late 2002.

7. Summary and Conclusions

The GRISLEE and CT systems that were developed for liveaccess of gas mains and in situ flaw detection and spot repairwere proven in the laboratory environment. The method oflive access and CT deployment were shown to be reliable,simple and of high throughput with an adequate safety mar-gin. The modular GRISLEE design and its ability to assemblededicated module trains was proven to be effective in terms ofallowing optimal design and achieving desirable performance,enabling piece-part improvements and future expansion. Theuse of MFL and paint marking and subsequent positioning viasensor-driven stripe detection was shown to be more than ad-equate. The system proved that mechanical cleaning workedbest for joints and pipes. The highly improved patching sys-tem, derived from an existing OEM system, was proven to befeasible in small piping under live conditions with potentiallyactive leak locations.

8. Future Work

The GRISLEE and CT systems are currently being readied fora sequence of utility-sponsored field trials at several diverselocations within the US. Detailed design documentation and




operating and maintenance manuals are also being readiedfor field training of utility crews. The system is expected tocomplete these trials by late 2002.

Acknowledgments

The GRISLEE system was jointly funded at CMU by NASA(under research grant no NCC5-223), and a contract from theGRI (no 5097-290-6029). We wish to further acknowledgethe prior development of the MFL sensing technology (byTuboScope Vetco Pipeline Services, Inc.) for distribution gasmains through a jointly-sponsored GRI/GDF project, as wellas separate funding of MEI by GRI, for the development of amodified and upgraded CT deployment system for accessingand deploying GRISLEE into a live gas main. The GRISLEEsystem and process have been submitted for national and in-ternational patent filings and have a patent-pending status.

References

Andrews, M. E. 2001. Large diameter sewer conditionassessment using combined sonar and CCTV equip-ment. In APWA International Public Works Congress,NRCC/CPWA Seminar Series Innovations in Urban In-frastructure, Montreal, Canada. http://www.nrc.ca/irc.

ARIES. 2003. GasCam System, Product Literature.http://www.ariesind.com/gascam.html.

Baker Hughes. 2003. VertiLine System, Product Litera-ture. http://www.bakerhughes.com/bakerhughes/pipeline_management/pmg_products.htm.

British Gas/Advantica. 1999. Pipeline Repair Robot Sys-tem. US Patent Specification 5,878,783. http://www.advanticatech.com.

Engineering Services, Inc. 2003. RISP Robot, Product Liter-ature. http://www.esit.com/automation/risp.html.

Everest VIT. 2003. Rovver, Product Literature. http://www.everestvit.com.

Ives Jr., G. Pipe Ruptures. PipeLine and Gas Industry Journal83(9), Houston, TX.

KA-TE. 2003. Lateral Main Repair Robot, Product Literature.http://www.safrdig.com.

Kolesnik, M., and Baratoff, G. 2000. A Hybrid Model-BasedVision System for Autonomous Navigation of a Sewer In-spection Robot. ERCIM News (42):S25–26.

LinkPipe, Inc. 2003. Ratchet Gas Sealer Sleeve, Product Lit-erature. http://www.linkpipe.com.

Pearpoint. 2003. Flexiprobe ELS, Product Literature.http://www.pearpoint.com.

Porter, C., and Pittard, G. October 1999. Magnetic Flux Leak-age Technology for Inspecting ‘Live’ Gas-DistributionMains. GTI Technical Report GRI-99/0199, Chicago, IL.

Research and Special Programs Administration. August 1997.Guidance Manual for Operators of Small Natural Gas Sys-tems, US Department of Transportation.

Schempf, H., et al. 2001. Robotic Repair System for Live Dis-tribution Gasmains. In Field and Service Robotics Confer-ence, FSR 2001, 11–13 June, Helsinki, Finland.

Staff Report. September 2000. New Optical methane detec-tor improves gas leak surveys. PipeLine and Gas IndustryJournal.



The International Journal of Robotics Research€¦ · Additional services and information for The...

Documents

Transcript of The International Journal of Robotics Research€¦ · Additional services and information for The...