Blowout preventer not tested to shear pipe
The blowout preventer that failed to stop last year’s Gulf of Mexico oil spill hadn’t been tested to see if it could cut through a bent drill pipe, said a senior official of the company that made the device.
By Gregory Hale; Source: ISS Source
The blowout preventer that failed to stop last year’s Gulf of Mexico oil spill hadn’t been tested to see if it could cut through a bent drill pipe, said a senior official of the company that made the device.
The firm hired by the government to examine the 300-ton device after they brought it up from the seafloor concluded the blind shear rams couldn’t pinch the well shut by cutting through the drill pipe. That’s because the pipe was off center. The firm faulted the design of the Cameron-made blowout preventer.
Cameron vice president David McWhorter told a federal investigative panel he couldn’t say if the company designed the device to cut through a bent drill pipe. He said it did not undergo testing for that possibility before the disaster.
“I am not going to hazard an opinion,” said McWhorter, who works in Cameron’s division that handles engineering and quality for drilling systems.
The testimony wrapped up the seventh series of hearings before the joint U.S. Coast Guard-Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Regulation and Enforcement panel, which is investigating the causes of the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion off Louisiana last April 20. The blast killed 11 workers and led to the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history.
The panel should release a preliminary statement within the next few weeks and will issues a full report in July.
In earlier testimony, Ralph Linenberger, a BP consultant hired to monitor the blowout preventer examination on behalf of the company, questioned the findings of testing firm Det Norske Veritas. Among other things, he said he did not see evidence the drill pipe had buckled, as DNV concluded it had.
“It looked fairly straight to me,” Linenberger said.
He also said DNV did not conduct any substantive testing that would look at the possibility of maintenance of the blowout preventer being a potential factor in the device’s failure.
Transocean owned the rig that exploded and was responsible for maintaining the blowout preventer. BP was leasing the rig from Transocean and owned the undersea well that blew out.
- Related News:
Firing up a burner system - 26.04.2011 09:07- Blowout preventer overhaul way off - 26.04.2011 09:06
- BP sues partners for Gulf disaster - 26.04.2011 09:06
- Fraud foray fools phishing filter - 26.04.2011 09:04
- Even firewalls have holes - 26.04.2011 09:03
- Water utility suffers cyber incident - 26.04.2011 09:02
Case Study Database
Get more exposure for your case study by uploading it to the Plant Engineering case study database, where end-users can identify relevant solutions and explore what the experts are doing to effectively implement a variety of technology and productivity related projects.
These case studies provide examples of how knowledgeable solution providers have used technology, processes and people to create effective and successful implementations in real-world situations. Case studies can be completed by filling out a simple online form where you can outline the project title, abstract, and full story in 1500 words or less; upload photos, videos and a logo.
Click here to visit the Case Study Database and upload your case study.
2012 Salary Survey
In a year when manufacturing continued to lead the economic rebound, it makes sense that plant manager bonuses rebounded. Plant Engineering’s annual Salary Survey shows both wages and bonuses rose in 2012 after a retreat the year before.
Average salary across all job titles for plant floor management rose 3.5% to $95,446, and bonus compensation jumped to $15,162, a 4.2% increase from the 2010 level and double the 2011 total, which showed a sharp drop in bonus.