Services · Asset Integrity and Engineering Consulting
Plant Structural Integrity
Your process units have been revamped many times. The concrete underneath them has not.
Request a Quote
In brief
TCR Engineering, a NABL ISO/IEC 17025:2017 accredited laboratory (NABLT0726MH18640) in Navi Mumbai, runs Risk-Based Inspection and Remaining Life Assessment programmes over the civil assets of Indian and GCC process plants: foundations, pipe racks, cooling towers, dyke walls, jetties and steel structures. The programme starts with a gap analysis of the inspection record the plant already holds.
The problem, in Indian numbers
Refinery count and installed capacity: Petroleum Planning and Analysis Cell, Installed Refinery Capacity, as on 1 April 2026. Commissioning years: Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, refinery-wise Refining Capacity table, which carries each refinery’s commissioning year; fourteen of the twenty-three were commissioned in 1996 or earlier and thirteen of those fourteen carry nameplate capacity today. Form 1-A: Rule 3A, Maharashtra Factories Rules 1963.
The problem is data, not testing capacity
Risk-Based Inspection and Remaining Life Assessment for the foundations, pipe racks, cooling towers, dyke walls, jetties and steel structures your plant runs on. We start with a gap analysis of the inspection data you already hold, and we test only what is missing.
Most plants already hold a great deal of inspection data on their civil assets. Reports from a structural audit five years ago, drawings from commissioning, a repair record somewhere in maintenance, a survey commissioned after an incident. What almost no plant holds is a single view of whether that data is complete enough, current enough and traceable enough to carry a remaining-life conclusion.
That is where a structural integrity programme succeeds or fails, and it is where ours starts. Before any crew mobilises, we normalise your existing record into one dataset keyed to your own asset tags, and we score every source:
- was the issuing agency accredited at the date of test;
- was the technician certified;
- was the equipment calibrated;
- was the standard edition stated;
- is the raw element-level data there, or only a summary.
What comes out is a gap register that tells you exactly which assets have a usable record, which have a weak one, and which have none at all. The gap register then scopes the field campaign. On one recent fertiliser-plant block, that meant 41 per cent of the tests a standing menu would have called for, with concrete coring down 59 per cent, and 1,850 metres of buried drain survey added that the standard menu would not have touched at all. The drain reach turned out to carry the highest-risk finding on the site.
The ten civil asset classes
Almost every operating plant in India holds all ten. Each gets its own checklist, its own defined test set, its own deliverable and its own RBI segment.
- RCC foundations: equipment, vessel, column and pump foundations, pile caps and pedestals
- Pipe racks and cable tray supports: RCC and structural steel
- Process buildings, substations and control rooms
- Cooling tower structures: RCC, timber and FRP
- Storage tank dykes and bund walls
- Retaining walls and boundary structures
- Underground drainage and culverts
- Jetty and marine structures
- Roads, pavements and storm water channels
- Steel supports, accessways, platforms and technological structures
The five phases
The programme runs in five phases, from the record you already hold to a signed remaining-life number and a risk-ranked inspection interval per segment.
- Phase 1: Ingest and baseline inspection. Documentary record and baseline survey run together, so the survey crew is in the plant while the drawings are being read.
- Phase 2: Gap analysis. Every source scored into one of three traceability tiers. The tier decides what that source is allowed to carry: a Tier 3 source produces an observation, never a number in a remaining-life extrapolation.
- Phase 3: Gap closure. Six gap classifications, six defined responses. Where an existing report is sound and traceable, we use it. We do not repeat work you have already paid for.
- Phase 4: Assessment. Remaining Life Assessment first, then Risk-Based Inspection on top of it. The remaining-life method is stated before the number, and the number is a range with its confidence band.
- Phase 5: Verification. Five sequential gates: data integrity, independent technical peer review, structural engineer of record, quality release under ISO/IEC 17025:2017, and clearance from the office of the President.
The codes we work to
Every result on a structural integrity report carries the standard, part, section and year actually applied. The register below is the whole of it, by family.
| Family | Standards applied |
|---|---|
| Concrete and durability | IS 456:2000, IS 516, IS 516 (Part 5 / Sec 1) for ultrasonic pulse velocity, IS 516 (Part 5 / Sec 4) for rebound hammer, IS 14959, ASTM C876, ASTM C1218, ASTM C1556, ASTM C856, ACI 201.1R, ACI 224.1R, ACI 364.1R |
| Structural steel and coatings | IS 800:2007, IS 822, IS 4000, ASTM E797/E797M, ISO 16809, ISO 4628, ISO 8501-1, ISO 9223, ISO 12944, ISO 2808, ASTM D3359, API RP 2218, OISD-STD-164 |
| Loads and geotechnical | IS 875, IS 1893, IS 1904, IS 8009, IS 1892, IS 2720, IS 2974, IS 14458, ISO 10816, ISO 4866 |
| Marine and buried | IS 4651 Parts 1 to 4, BS 6349 Parts 1-1 to 2, PIANC WG 33, NACE SP0169, DNV-RP-B401, IS 15736, ACI 546.2R, OISD-STD-170 (Inspection, Maintenance, Repairs and Rehabilitation of foundations and structures) |
| Roads and drainage | IRC:6, IRC:37, IRC:58, IRC:81, IRC:82, IRC:115, IRC:SP:42, IRC:SP:50, MoRTH Specifications, ASTM D6433, ASTM D4694, IS 1742 |
| Risk and quality | API RP 580 and 581 as the adapted risk-ranking basis, API 579-1/ASME FFS-1, ISO 13822, ISO 31000, ISO/IEC 17025:2017, JCGM 100 GUM, ISO 9712 |
A note on editions
IS 13311 (Part 1) has been withdrawn by the Bureau of Indian Standards and superseded by IS 516 (Part 5 / Sec 1) for ultrasonic pulse velocity; IS 13311 (Part 2) is superseded by IS 516 (Part 5 / Sec 4) for rebound hammer. A great many plant inspection specifications in India still call the withdrawn parts up. Where a client specification names a withdrawn standard, we test to the standard in force, state both on the report, and tell the client. We do not silently substitute, and we do not silently comply.
What this programme is not
Two limits, stated here and in every output, because a reader evaluating a structural integrity supplier should not have to find them in a proposal.
- Not an API RP 580 compliant programme. The framework is adapted from API RP 580 and 581 risk-ranking logic, which is written for pressure equipment and piping rather than for civil structures. We say so in every output.
- Not a structural certificate. The report is a technical data synthesis for the structural engineer of record. It performs no structural capacity calculation.
The evidence base
As at September 2026. Every figure is held in the site fact base at data/facts.json and is stated identically wherever it appears.
Related services and industries
- Structural Audit (Clause 77)
- Structural Stability Assessment
- Remaining Life Assessment
- Risk-Based Inspection
- Fitness-for-Service
- Cathodic Protection
- In-Situ Metallography
- AiOM
- GPR, UPV and Subsurface Imaging
- Concrete, Cement and Aggregates
- Pavement Evaluation
- Bridge Inspection
- ROV Underwater Inspection
- Thermography and Drone Survey
- Turnaround Manpower
- Refining and Petrochemicals
- Fertilisers
- Power Generation
Documents
Download the reference documents for this page. Every file is hosted on this domain and is also listed in the site document library.
The method, on video
The full method walkthrough, fifty-three minutes: the five phases, the ten civil asset classes, the damage-mechanism atlas, the standards register and the five verification gates. The same material is in the seventy-slide deck above.
Related insights
4 published insights on this site bear directly on Plant Structural Integrity. They are below; the full index carries all 91 Asset Integrity insights.
-
Ammonia Tank Integrity Using Risk-Based Inspection (RBI)
Optimise ammonia tank integrity with TCR's Risk-Based Inspection (RBI). Enhance safety, reduce downtime, and improve operational efficiency
-
Paresh Haribhakti - Plant Integrity Solution workshop
Plant Integrity Solution workshop hosted by KNPC
-
Ammonia tanks Integrity management and inspection challenges
Providing insights to damage mechanisms associated with Ammonia tank and RBI to improve integrity
-
TCR’s strong experience in conducting Remaining Life Assessments
Noteworthy RLA projects undertaken by TCR
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between a structural audit and a structural integrity programme?
A structural audit assesses condition at a point in time, usually against a statutory trigger. A structural integrity programme establishes the governing deterioration mechanism, estimates remaining life with a stated method and confidence band, ranks every asset by risk on one scale, and sets a recurring inspection interval per segment. The audit is an input to the programme.
Do you need to test everything?
No. We score the inspection data you already hold, and the resulting gap register scopes the field campaign. Where an existing report is traceable and current, it is used rather than repeated.
Is this an API RP 580 programme?
No, and we will not claim it is. The framework is adapted from API RP 580 and API RP 581 risk-ranking logic. Those standards are written for pressure equipment and piping. We state the adaptation in every output.
Who signs the report?
The report clears five gates: data integrity, independent technical peer review, the structural engineer of record, quality release under ISO/IEC 17025:2017 by our Head of Quality Assurance, and clearance from the office of the President. Chartered engineer counter-signature is provided where the statutory position requires one.
How quickly can you mobilise?
First crew on site within 24 hours of permit clearance, and full campaign strength inside three weeks, with 100 to 200 personnel at peak. The constraint is permit clearance and site induction, not our resourcing.
Which standards do you test concrete to?
IS 456:2000 for the design basis; IS 516 for strength; IS 516 (Part 5 / Sec 1) for ultrasonic pulse velocity and IS 516 (Part 5 / Sec 4) for rebound hammer, both of which supersede the older IS 13311 parts; ASTM C876 for half-cell potential; IS 14959 and ASTM C1218 for chloride. Every result carries the standard, part, section and year actually applied.