In this month’s edition of the Pipeline Technology Podcast sponsored by Pipeline & Gas Journal, Casey Whalen of ClockSpring|NRI discusses his recent article, “Choosing, Using Composite Repair Systems.”

In this episode, you will learn about the ideal use of composites in pipeline repair, the versatility of composites, the goal of a composite to reduce stress and reduce the amount of load on the pipe throughout the life of the repair, the various considerations that go into a “permanent” composite repair, how aerospace technology is being brought over to pipelining to support composite repair, and much more.

Pipeline Composite Repair: Show Notes, Links, and Insider Terms

• Casey Whalen is the Global Engineering Manager for CSNRI, a division of ClockSpring|NRI. Connect with Casey on LinkedIn.
  • ClockSpring|NRI delivers multiple asset integrity solutions to customers across the globe to support the repair, maintenance, and rehabilitation of critical infrastructure. ClockSpring|NRI delivers valves, composites, and concrete products designed to minimize downtime and environmental hazards while maximizing cost-effectiveness and safety.
• Pipeline & Gas Journal is the essential resource for technology, industry information, and analytical trends in the midstream oil and gas industry.  For more information on how to become a subscriber, visit pgjonline.com/subscribe.
  • Read Casey’s January 2021 PGJ article, “Choosing, Using Composite Repair Systems.”
• Composites are a blend of two or more dissimilar components to create a stronger, bonded material that supports a specific need, such as repairing damage in a pipeline. Composites are preferred in pipeline repair because of their strength, resistance to corrosion, versatility, and low coefficient of expansion.
  • Resin is a type of component that is typically used to interact with another component (e.g. fiber) to create a new, better material that is used in composites.
• Composite Repair is a non-metallic repair used for pipelines. When designed and installed correctly, the repair can restore a pipeline’s structural integrity to a performance level that is oftentimes equal to the original condition of the pipe.
• Defects are defined by PHMSA as a deviation from the original configuration of the pipeline. This could be a change in wall thickness due to metal loss, a deformation of the pipe wall, or a crack.
  • Corrosion in pipeline inspection refers to a type of metal loss anomaly that could indicate the deterioration of a pipe. Inline inspection techniques are used to evaluate the severity of corrosion.
  • Cracks in pipeline inspection refer to breaks, splits, flaws, or deformities in the surface of a pipe. Inline inspection tools are often used to evaluate the severity of the crack.
  • Dents are caused by heavy objects striking the surface of a pipe wall. Dents or deformations of the pipeline can be found through the use of inline inspection tools.
  • Wrinkles are a localized deformation of the pipeline wall, usually observed as a large outward bulge.
• Integrity Management (Pipeline Integrity Management) is a systematic approach to operate and manage pipelines in a safe manner that complies with PHMSA regulations.
  • 49 CFR 192 provides regulatory guidance on the pipeline transport of natural gas.
  • 49 CFR 195 provides regulatory guidance on the transportation of hazardous liquid by pipeline.
• ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) develops codes and standards for industrial use to create a safer world. ASME has been defining piping safety since 1922.
  • ASME B31.4 prescribes requirements for the design, materials, construction, assembly, inspection, testing, operation, and maintenance of liquid pipeline systems.
  • ASME B31.8 covers gas transmission and distribution piping systems, including gas pipelines, gas compressor stations, gas metering and regulation stations, gas mains, and service lines up to the outlet of the customer’s meter set assembly. 
  • ASME PCC-2 (Repair of Pressure Equipment and Piping) provides methods for repair of equipment, piping, pipelines and associated ancillary equipment within the scope of ASME Pressure Technology Codes and Standards after it has been placed in service.
• ISO (International Organization for Standardization) develops and publishes international standards for commercial and industrial use.
  • ISO 24817 (ISO 24817:2015) provides requirements and recommendations for the qualification and design, installation, testing, and inspection for the external application of composite repair systems to corroded or damaged pipework, pipelines, tanks, and vessels used in the petroleum, petrochemical, and natural gas industries.

Pipeline Composite Repair: Full Episode Transcript

Russel Treat:  Welcome to the Pipeline Technology Podcast, episode 8. On this episode, our guest is Casey Whalen, global engineering manager with CSNRI. We’re going to talk to Casey about his article that was revised and published in the January 2021 edition of Pipeline and Gas Journal titled “Choosing, Using Composite Repair Systems.”

[background music]

Announcer:  The Pipeline Technology Podcast, brought to you by Pipeline & Gas Journal, the decision-making resource for pipeline and midstream professionals. Now your host, Russel Treat.

Russel:  Casey, welcome to the Pipeline Technology Podcast.

Casey Whalen:  Thank you, Russel, for having me.

Russel:  Great to have you on. Before we dive in, do you mind, give the listeners a little bit of your background and what you do and how you got into it, maybe.

Casey:  Absolutely. I’m Casey Whalen. I’m the global engineering manager with CSNRI. I’ve been doing this for a little bit over nine years now. I actually graduated from Texas A&M with an aerospace engineering degree. I actually got my master’s there, too. I did a lot of research on composites in grad school.

That got me interested in doing composite repairs here as well. That’s a very novel application of a technology that’s been around for a while. Most of my time here with CSNRI now I spend it doing advanced designs, testing on composites, and really just exploring what the limits of a composite can do in this industry.

Russel:  How does a background in aerospace prepare you for composites engineering?

Casey:  That’s a great question. Aerospace breaks down to three things. You want to make sure how things fly, make sure you’re getting to where you get to, but you also have to do a lot of study on the materials themselves. Composites are leading the way for airplanes, space shuttles. They’ve been used in aerospace for over 70 years now. It just seems relatively new for oil and gas.

Russel:  A lot of the real advancements in composites are coming out of aerospace, particularly military aerospace and the black projects. Because they’re trying to make things that are lighter, harder, stronger, all that kind of stuff.

Casey:  Absolutely. I would just say the struggle they don’t have to deal with is making composites in a ditch. It’s a little bit different.

Russel:  [laughs] No, they’re probably doing them in a cleanroom. A whole different environment. That’s a really good point. I brought you on to talk about the article in the January 2021 edition of Pipeline and Gas Journal. It was entitled Choosing, Using Composite Repair Systems.

Diving right into that subject matter, the first question I want to ask is, what do you need to be thinking about when you’re thinking about a composite repair system?

Casey:  That’s a great question. There’s hundreds of different things to consider for composite repairs. It’s difficult to start with just one thing. Hopefully what you’ll get out of this discussion is it’s my job to take care of a lot of those considerations. You may not have to worry about it. But it is important to know what kind of things go into this.

First and foremost, it’s the kind of defect we’re repairing. External corrosion repair is a lot different than a dent or a crack-like feature. Corrosion, dents, cracks, wrinkles — they’re all different. They’re all treated differently. They make a big impact in the final composite repair design.

If we’re talking about just the composite itself, there are a lot of different choices. In the article you mentioned, I spend most of that article talking about the fabric architecture. You can have unidirectional fabric, bidirectional woven. There’s hundreds if not thousands of different orientations and fabric types that you can choose from. You want to make sure you’re using the correct material with the right architecture for those types of defects.

Beyond that, you also have a lot of different resins to choose. You have to consider chemical compatibility, temperature. There’s hundreds of different resins that you can use and now you’re combining that resin with that fabric. It’s almost limitless in what you can design and what you can build.

Maybe most importantly, if you’re considering a composite repair, you want to make sure that the designer, the provider, the manufacturer has the engineering capability to take those choices and design accordingly.

Russel:  One of the things you didn’t mention and I want to talk about it is, to what degree is the field environment a factor in this? If you’re in a ditch versus you’re underwater. How does that play a factor? Rocky soil, clay soil, all that kind of stuff.

Casey:  It definitely can make a big impact. Generally, if you’re talking buried lines, it’s pretty uncommon for the environment to make such a big impact that it changes your resin types. But if you’re doing things that are in wet zones, underwater, doing risers, you definitely need a system that can be installed and cured underwater. That creates its own completely different challenge.

If you’re looking at things — salt flats in Saudi Arabia, for example — it’s a completely different chemical need there. In the U.S., there’s different territories. You can have soft soil. You have to make sure that it can be buried deep and still handle loads.

Or, if you’re installing in a really rocky environment, can that composite resist abrasion and being scratched? Some of those considerations are definitely important, but you’re right. They’re not talked about very often.

Russel:  You made a good point. We’re teeing this up in that the difference between doing this in the aircraft world and doing this in the pipeline world is that in the aircraft world, you’re doing it in the hanger. Here, you’re doing it in a ditch.

If you’re doing it in a hanger, about the only thing you have to worry about is heat and humidity. If you’re doing it in a ditch, it’s heat, humidity, soil, water content, and just your physical ability to make the repair or affect the repair, right?

Casey:  Yeah, I’ve definitely stood in sinking mud trying to put a composite on a pipe before and I don’t think my aerospace brothers have ever done that before.

Russel:  [laughs] They don’t know what’s fun, right?

Casey:  Absolutely not. How many trucks can you lose in a single day?

Russel:  You mentioned that you want to do the upfront engineering. What kind of qualifications are you looking for? If you’re trying to pick someone to help you with doing your composite repair, what kind of qualifications are you looking for?

Casey:  Great question again. Engineering is really about analyzing the system and making smart choices. That’s what engineering comes down to. You want to have a company that has that kind of engineering experience.

Right along with that, you have to make sure they have good R&D capabilities. You want to make sure you have good quality control as well. But, maybe most importantly, a lot of testing that goes behind those products.

I would also argue that you probably want to work with a company that is creating that educational content. It shows that not only do they know their own stuff, but they believe in transparency. They want to show, they want to educate. They’re not trying to hide anything from the end-users, the people putting it on.

Maybe the best way to determine that engineering capability is just by talking to the engineers that they have. How do they answer your questions? What kind of questions do they ask you?

Russel:  What kind of questions should a good composites engineer be asking?

Casey:  I would say if we’re talking about specific repair scenarios, what’s the defect? What’s the cause of the defect? You can have wall loss from a lot of different reasons and doing a repair on it may or may not address it. They need to be asking that question.

Russel:  I want to dig into that a little bit. How would the nature of the defect and particularly what’s causing the defect impact the composite design?

Casey:  I could see a very simple situation. Someone comes up and says, “Hey, I’ve got 50 percent wall loss external here. Can you put something on for it?” If it’s external corrosion, it’s almost no problem. That’s an easy repair.

If that wall loss came from abrasion from the outside, you put a composite repair on not knowing that, that abrasion is just going to eat away that composite and you’re not going to end up in a good situation.

Knowing what’s causing the defects can make a pretty big impact. Is that crack coming from a manufacturer defect or is that something that’s happening due to thermal cycling?

Russel:  What I hear you saying there, Casey, is it’s not just the repair of the pipe. It’s really the mitigation of the root cause, whatever that root cause is.

Casey:  Yeah, that’s a great problem. If you want to have a permanent repair, you definitely have to stop the defect growth that’s occurring.

Russel:  Exactly. What other questions should the engineer be asking other than the nature of the defect and what’s causing it?

Casey:  Something I don’t think is necessarily talked a lot about would be the operating conditions, pressure, temperature. Composites are not like metal in the sense that they have very high temperature limits.

There are temperature limitations in the resins you have to use, you have to talk about those design temperatures. What’s your minimum and maximum temperature that repair is going to see? You have to design accordingly.

Also, you talked about this earlier, what is the site condition? How does that influence your installation? There’s a lot of different ways to put a composite repair on the pipe. Part of that engineering design choice is making sure that what is designed can be easily installed by the guys that are in the ditch.

Russel:  How would pressure range and temperature range affect your composite design?

Casey:  Temperature is maybe a little bit easier. The coefficient of thermal expansion, how much something expands when you heat it up, is going to be different between the pipe and the composite. If you have a pretty big mismatch or you’re having large temperature changes, you get into this serious possibility of having the composite debond or something from the pipe.

You have to take into account what those thermal swings are. In terms of pressure, what we’re really trying to do as a composite repair system is reduce what the stress is, what the pressure capacity is of that pipe within the pipe underneath the repair.

You have to know what are those max pressures, what’s the minimum pressure. It’s going to cycle over its lifetime. The whole goal of a composite is to reduce the amount of stress, how much load that pipe is carrying throughout the life of the repair. By reducing that stress in the pipe, we’re increasing the remaining life of that pipe system, which is ultimately our goal.

Russel:  You’re transitioning the work that the steel is performing into work that the ceramic or the composite is performing.

Casey:  Exactly. We’re creating a load-sharing system instead of relying on just the steel.

Russel:  The critical consideration in all of this is that those pressure cycles relate to movement and temperature change relates to movement. You don’t want debonding to occur so that you lose that load transition. Because then you have a repair that’s not doing you any good.

Casey:  Exactly. If it’s not installed well, if it’s not bonded well, that composite is just a really expensive coating.

Russel:  That relates to the next question I wanted to ask you, Casey, which was, are these kinds of repairs permanent?

Casey:  Generally, yes. If you look at the regulations, there is a call-out that any kind of repairs on these transmission pipelines have to be permanent. For us to do any composite repairs at all, we have to build a case for it to be a permanent repair.

If you look at 49 CFR Part 192 and 195, they basically state that repairs have to have reliable engineering testing and analysis that shows permanent restoration on the pipe. But they don’t actually tell you what permanent is.

You could go down a level and look at ASME B31.4 or B31.8, which is a construction code. Again, here they don’t tell you what it is, but they do say that repairs have to have reliable engineering, tests, and analysis, and that the designs and installation methods are proven.

This gets kind of vague. How do you know it’s permanent or not? You may think you can go down one more level and look at ASME PCC-2 or ISO 24817, which are repair guidelines for composite repairs. It’s not exactly clear there, either.

Generally, what we do with our engineering team, we’re looking at two different things. The first would be material creep. Essentially how long can it hold a specific load before that material fails? We use that kind of testing to determine our design strength, but we also have to look at cyclic fatigue. If you have lines that have very aggressive cycling, how many cycles can that composite last? How many cycles can that defective pipe continue to last?

It’s a combination between your static loads and your cycling loads. We make that engineering assessment to determine for the whole system, not just the composite, is it permanent or not? What’s a reasonable time frame?

If I do these calculations and I say it’s going to fail in 10 years, that’s not permanent. But if I give you a piece of paper that says 500 years from now, I think we have good justification for the word permanent.

Russel:  That’s interesting. I guess the question that comes up for me, you said 10 years is probably not permanent and 500 years probably is. Where is the line in between those two numbers where you cross from temporary to permanent?

Casey:  That’s definitely a great question. I’ve had that conversation with just about everyone in the industry. Generally speaking, I think people were comfortable with 20 years, but it’s been more than 20 years since composites have been used so that question has been coming up again recently. A lot of people are moving to a 50-year design being considered permanence.

I really think that’s the wrong approach because after 20 years or 50 years is up, are you going to dig up that pipe and replace a perfectly fine system or repair that’s working? Most people don’t want to do that.

To me, it really comes down to having a maintenance program. That pipeline that we’re repairing, it, too, was “permanence,” but now it’s being repaired. It’s kind of a play-on-words, but what needs to be done is you’re looking for it and you’re making sure that that composite repair — that system that’s been repaired now — it’s really underneath a standard maintenance program. And, as long as that defect isn’t growing, it’s not getting worse, and you see no signs of decay or anything, then maybe it’s good for another 20 years after that last inspection.

Having that routine maintenance, having the proper documentation, and that testing analysis that goes behind the designs — it doesn’t become a hard cutoff after 20 or 50 years. It just gets rolled into your standard maintenance plan. At least that’s what I’m working toward. I’ve gotten pretty far with discussions here with end-users on having this kind of approach to define the word permanence.

Russel:  I think it’s interesting because what I hear you saying, Casey, is it’s not really about the life of the repair as much as it is what is the O&M of the repair? How am I going to maintain the repair? Just like I’ve got to maintain the pipe.

The pipe is permanent if it’s properly operated and maintained. I’ve got good cathodic protection. I’ve got an integrity management program. I can call that pipe permanent. But, if I just take bare pipe and put it in the ground, it’s not going to last any time at all.

It’s an equivalent thing here. It’s not just what’s the life of the repair, but how am I going to maintain it?

Casey:  You hit it spot-on. That’s exactly right. It becomes part of the system you’re maintaining. It doesn’t just magically fix it for now and forever.

Russel:  That actually creates a whole different kind of challenge. The question that comes up for me and as we talked at the start of this conversation about how there’s lots of different kinds of composites and resins and fabrics and ways to place them.

How difficult does it get to maintain all this stuff if those choices are widely varied throughout my pipeline? Versus I’m making just a handful of different choices within my pipeline. How important is the consistency of the repairs being done the same way to the maintenance aspect of this versus everyone’s custom design?

Casey:  I’d say it’s maybe not as diverse as I made it sound initially. Once you have a system, you have the testing that goes behind it, it goes with the owner, the operator, you get approval. For most cases, corrosion, dents, and those standard repairs can be used over and over again.

With every design, though, we do typically provide a design package that tells you how many layers you have to do, what the repair length is going to be. All of those variables. They get stored in documents and that just gets filed away in the standard operating procedure is the documentation that everyone has.

For the most part, you’re not changing the system that much. The only real change comes in how thick it is being put on and that’s being taken care of in the design documents. If we are moving defects that are more unique and custom-based, I would say a very common practice is to have a specific design for it. We typically end up having testing that supports that specific kind of defect scenario.

If we’re looking at something like geohazards, we will have specific testing available for that pipe, those situations. That document and testing report just gets filed away separately. But for the majority of composite repairs out there, you’re really tending to use the same types of materials, the same kind of documents over and over again. It doesn’t become too varied, but it is definitely maintained on a case-by-case basis.

Russel:  I think certainly the details of each individual application are going to be different. To the extent I could maintain consistency in my materials for a particular segment of pipe, that becomes important. It’s interesting to me when we have these kinds of conversations because there’s a lot of power in the fact that we’re constantly advancing the technology and coming up with better things.

Yet, to operate the pipelines, I need to have a good, solid understanding of what I’m doing. That understanding has to exist in my team. That is in conflict, if you will, to innovation and change. That’s a good thing because change is risk, but the flip side of it is we need to change. We need to use what’s better.

I don’t know. That’s probably a whole other conversation for another day. One of the things about composites is I think that the technology moves pretty quickly compared to some of the other things that we do.

Casey:  You’re absolutely right. It’s definitely something we struggle with. I’m not going to say daily, but a lot. There’s going to be a lag between possibilities, what testing we have, and what’s printed in the standards, what’s acceptable.

The nice thing about the B31 standards and even the CFR codes that I mentioned earlier is they don’t prescribe and dictate. They allow a lot of owner-operators to make choices that are based on sound engineering, testing, and analysis.

When we’re talking case-by-case, it’s not too complicated to go forward and have a concept, do the testing for a specific line — a specific defect — and provide the documentation support behind it. We do that fairly frequently. Turning that into a mainstream tool in your toolbox, something you can do over and over again, that’s definitely a challenge.

We do have individuals that represent us in the ASME B31 standards. I myself am on the ASME PCC-2 committee. We are working daily trying to keep up the most recent testing in our breakthroughs with what’s actually printed out there. It’s definitely that’s taken seriously here. It can be a big hurdle.

What we benefit from is taking those test programs and sharing the knowledge we have. We do a lot of things online, on our website where we’re promoting the different research possibilities we have, the different theories that go behind the designs.

What I really like is having cooperative test programs where it’s not just me with one specific owner or an operator doing a specific test, but having joint industry programs testing where we as an industry get together and test something out and publish it. When you get that kind of support behind something it can really take it far and fast-track it into mainstream use.

Russel:  I think that’s one of the things just overall as an industry we do quite well.

Casey:  Yup, I would agree.

Russel:  We do a pretty good job of evaluating new technologies through formalized test programs before we broadly commercialize them. There’s a lot of good organizations out there doing that kind of work. I think you said the ASME PCC-2…

Casey:  Yeah, PCC-2.

Russel:  I’m sorry, could you say that slower and explain to me what that committee is?

Casey:  [laughs] Absolutely. The ASME PCC-2, it’s the post-construction code. Specifically, part 401 has a whole section dedicated to the use of non-metallic repairs for pipelines. This standard isn’t necessarily referenced or required by the B31 codes, but it’s essentially what’s your minimum allowable repair thickness for composite. It tells you what kind of testing you have to do.

It tells you what kind of design scenarios to consider. It doesn’t encompass everything, but it does do a very good job of having the initial testing, the qualification of certain materials, and providing a basic design scenario such as corrosion defects.

That’s a standard we’re continuously trying to improve to incorporate more of. I’ll say a fair amount of owners and operators are familiar with it enough that it’s become definitely a go-to guide. The ISO standard I mentioned earlier, the same concept. It’s just an international version.

Russel:  Thanks. [laughs] One of the things about pipelining, particularly when you start getting into some of these really technical disciplines is we’re an acronym minefield.

You have to decode that so that people know what you’re talking about. If you’re in the domain you understand it, but if you’re not you don’t. I often say that in pipelining we often use the same words to mean different things.

Casey:  That’s understandable.

Russel:  It becomes tied to my particular discipline or perspective.

Casey:  That’s a fair point. I definitely try to go out of my way to keep things simple here, but PCC-2 kind of rolls off the tongue.

Russel:  [laughs] We all have those. Are there any types of defects that are particularly well-suited for composite repair or particularly not suited for composite repair?

Casey:  Absolutely. As I may have mentioned, corrosion, dent repairs, we’ve been doing those for 20, 30 years now. They’ve become standard practice. It works very well for dents and mechanical damage such as wrinkle bends. Because when you put most composites on a pipe, they actually form to the shape of the pipe. If you have an odd geometry, if you have very severe dents, you use some filler material, shape it out, and then you can apply it on there.

Whereas if you’re using a steel sleeve, you either have to do a custom fabrication job to make it match or you’re using a much larger sleeve to encompass it all. Composite is put on and it can meld into that shape it’s wrapping over.

Those unique situations where a steel sleeve just may not make sense — those are ideal candidates for composites. They can be designed with simple math, if you will, and they can be fit well to those pipes. But they can just as easily be used for your straight pipe, standard corrosion defects as well. Composites it’s a very versatile tool in people’s toolbox.

Russel:  What does not lend itself very well to composite?

Casey:  That’s a great question.

Russel:  I’m talking to a composites guy, so we’ve got to be careful about that answer. It’s no fair to say all things work for composites.

Casey:  Given enough time and money, we could fix everything, but that’s probably the thing — if you’re looking to replace 500 feet of pipe with composites or something, it’s probably easier to just cut and replace the pipe. It comes down to economics. It comes down to practicality.

Russel:  If I were to paraphrase for you, Casey, sorry for interrupting. Those things where it makes sense to do a sleeve or just cut out a piece of pipe and replace it, those are not the kind of things that are well-suited to composites just because of economic considerations. That’s easy to do, well-understood kind of stuff. Is that a fair way to say that?

Casey:  That definitely is. There are a lot of cases where composites can go toe-to-toe with a lot of these more traditional methods. That really comes down to the user preference, if you will. There are definitely situations where a composite repair doesn’t make sense and we take it as a point of pride. If it is a bad design, we’re going to say no. We’re not going to recommend a composite repair. It is not a magical bullet, if you will. There are certain situations — I don’t want to put anything off-limits at the moment; you put me on the spot here — but we’ve definitely turned down a fair amount of jobs.

Russel:  Where I’m coming from when I’m doing this kind of podcast is there are a lot of people listening that are not necessarily in your domain and they just want to have a general understanding of what are the guidelines or what are the ways to think about this. I think you framed it up.

I’ll try and summarize it. Those things that are small or those things that have strange shapes tend to lend themselves well to composites. Those things that are easily addressed with just cutting out a piece of pipe and replacing it or by putting in a sleeve probably are not well-suited for composite. It may not be that the composite couldn’t do the repair. It might just be that that’s what’s easier for the operator to affect as a repair.

Casey:  You stated that perfectly. I think that’s good.

Russel:  I think a lot of times the considerations are, what can I get done within my current capacity and budget?

Casey:  Absolutely.

Russel:  Versus what I really need to do to fix the problem. You’ve got to do both of those things, but oftentimes if there’s five solutions the question is, what will get the job done and is best for the money?

Casey:  Absolutely.

Russel:  What would you want all pipeliners to know about composites? If you’re going to try and summarize that in a sentence or two, what would you say all pipeliners ought to know?

Casey:  I suppose if there’s one thing I could tell to all the pipeliners out there is simply that composites almost by definition they are versatile and can be designed to address a lot of things — even things we haven’t thought of yet. We’re always looking for new opportunities. From routine corrosion, cracks, geohazards — composites can do a lot. But I do want to stress that they definitely are not a magical bullet.

You have to have the proper engineering behind the composites. You have to have the testing and documentation to support it for whatever repair you do. But as long as you do your due diligence, you take your time choosing out the right system and installing it correctly, composites are a wonderful tool for your toolbox.

Russel:  Casey, I really appreciate you coming on the podcast. This has been awesome. We’ll see you around the trade shows back when we get to the point we can actually start going to the trade shows again.

Casey:  I’m looking forward to it. Thank you again for having me, Russel.

Russel:  I hope you enjoyed this month’s episode of the Pipeline Technology Podcast and our conversation with Casey. If you would like to support this podcast, the best thing to do is to leave us a review on Apple Podcast, Google Play, or on your smart device podcast app. You could find instructions at pipelinepodcastnetwork.com.

If there is a Pipeline & Gas Journal article where you’d like to hear from the author, please let me know either on the Contact Us page of pipelinepodcastnetwork.com or reach out to me on LinkedIn. Thanks for listening. I’ll talk to you next month.

[music]

Transcription by CastingWords