Preferred partner

Pressure Protection of Inlet A Case Study

Stavanger, 23.10.2012
Kim Henry Kristiansen| Process Specialist Engineer
Advanced Process Control and Safety, Bergen

2012 Aker Solutions

Preferred partner

Background info
Reservoir pressure reduced

Maximize choke valve capacity to increase gas production

Limiting factor Overpressure Protection

Mal-operation of Riser ESV

Pipeline - 12 inch, 15 km long

Gas production (Fluid GOR: 8000-9000 Sm3/Sm3)

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 2

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

System drawing
Mal operation
Maximize capacity

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 3

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Modelling
Model choice:
Existing training simulator
K-Spice (software from Kongsberg Oil & Gas Technologies)

Verification of model (significant part of the job)

Piping and equipment
Important valves: PSV, choke, PV (Pressure valves)
Tuning of pipeline roughness
Tuning of pressure drop in flare system

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 4

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Accept critera Allowable overpressure

Design code BS 5500 (all vessels)
MAAP Design pressure + 10 %

EN13445 can be used for Exceptional load cases

FEM analysis
Can allow for pressures up to test pressure

Inlet Separator
MAAP = 80 + 8 = 88 barg
Test Pressure = 1.5 x Design Pressure = 120 barg

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 5

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Test Pressures
Test Pressure =
1.25 x Design Pressure =
100 barg
Test Pressure =
1.5 x Design Pressure =
120 barg

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 6

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Accept criteria Allowable overpressure

Inlet Separator and Pressure Vessels downstream
MAAP chosen due to time constraints in the project
To allow for pressures above MAAP FEM analysis on 8 vessels

needed.
HP KOD
EN13445 already applied
Test Pressure: 9.6 barg
Piping on outlet nozzle only tested to 9.2 barg.

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 7

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Analysis performed (through Dynamic Simulations)

Primary overpressure protection

Secondary overpressure protection (PSV capacity)

Highest flare load

Reaction Forces (Rho*v2) Evaluation of pipe supports

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 8

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Analysis - summary
Secondary Barrier Test
Single Source Scenario (Separator not in operation, outlets closed)
Cv = 2x108
Results very sensitive to PSV characteristic
Additional Source Scenario (Separator in operation)
Cv = 2x108 with limited gas production (background production)
Decision to apply administrative control: Operational procedures and
messages on operator screens in CCR
NB: If administrative control fails Pressure should not exceed Test
Pressures

Max Flare Load

2012 Aker Solutions

Cv = 2x90
Turns out to be limiting for choke capacity!!!
Results very sensitive to control parameters for Pressure Valves (PV)
Continue with existing control parameters
Control parameters must not be changed without performing new analysis

Slide 9

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Secondary Barrier Test Single Source Scenario

No primary pressure barrier

No background production
No Additional flaring
No compressor trip

Closed

In-active

Closed
2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 10

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Single source scenario

According to existing design documentation Single source

scenario probably limiting for choke valve capacity Our starting

point for the analysis
Pressure in separator Very sensitive to PSV characteristic

No exact characteristic available from manufacturer

Pop action at 2-3 % overpressure
Full flow capacity at 10 % overpressure
Blow down 15% - 25% (Percentage below set point pressure. Valve

closes at this pressure)

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 11

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Possible PSV characteristics

Characteristic A, B og C
100

Chosen characteristic
(in agreement with customer)

90

Cv=2x113

80

Percentage Lift [%]

70

Cv=2x90

60
50

Kar. A - Opening

Cv=2x108

Kar. B - Opening

40

Kar. C - Opening

30
20
10
0
90

2012 Aker Solutions

95

100
105
110
Pressure (percentage of set point) [%]

Slide 12

6 November, 2012

115

120

Preferred partner

Chosen PSV characteristic

PSV Characteristic
100
90
80

Designed for liquid and vapour.

Typical when in gas service:
- Pop action
- Large blow down percentage

Pop to 90 % only.
Conservative for pressure

Percentage Lift [%]

70
60
50

Opening
Closing

40
30

25 % Blowdown
Conservative for flare load

20
10
0
70

2012 Aker Solutions

75

80

Slide 13

85
90
95
100
Pressure (percentage of set point) [%]

6 November, 2012

105

110

115

Preferred partner

Secondary Barrier Test Additional Source Scenario

No primary pressure barrier

Background production
Compressor trip
Additional flaring
No help from control system

In-active

Freeze

In-active

Trip
compressors

Background
Production

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 14

In-active
Freeze

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Additional Source Scenario

The Additional Source Scenario gives higher pressure build-up than

the Single Source Scenario

Reduction of gas production before start-up of pipeline would help

Solution:
Use administrative control to limit gas production before start-up.
BUT! Pressure should not exceed test pressure if administrative control

fails.
No reduction of calculated choke Cv compared to the single source

scenario

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 15

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Max Flare Load

No primary pressure barrier

Background production
Compressor trip
Additional flaring
Control System working

active

active

active

Trip
compressors

Background
Production

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 16

active
active

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Max Flare Load

Assumes that administrative control have failed High gas

production before incident

Pressure build-up in the HP Flare system is limiting the choke valve

capacity !! Cv = 2x90
Evaluation of valve capacity PV on Inlet Separator
30-40 % more capacity than needed
If PV goes fully open in short time capacity reduction is a good idea
With slow control parameters the extra 30-40% is not utilized.

Conclusion: Control parameters more important than valve capacity

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 17

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Max Flare Load

Evaluation of control parameters PVs
Keep existing slow control parameters
Choosing wrong parameters could give too high pressures in HP Flare
Change of PV control parameters should not be done without performing

new analysis.
Some examples are shown on the next 3 slides
Example 1: Using existing control parameters for all 3 PVs.
Example 2: The Inlet Separator PV has got fast parameters.

Example 3: The 2 PVs on the glycol contactors have got fast control

parameters.

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 18

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Ex. 1: All 3 PVs have slow contr. par. (Existing)

106

Acceptable
overpressure

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 19

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Ex. 2: PV on Inlet Separator has fast contr. par.

Could help
reducing PV
capacity

106

Unacceptable
overpressure!

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 20

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Ex. 3: PVs on Contactors have fast contr. par.

106

Unacceptable
overpressure!

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 21

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Main conclusions / Lessons learned

Achievement: Choke capacity increased by 50%

Initial assumption was wrong: The limiting scenario was not the

single source scenario.

Thorough evaluation of the accept criteria and design basis are of

high importance.
Perform sensitivity studies. Surprising dynamic effects are often

revealed.
PV Control Parameters and the PSV characteristic are important

factors and should not be underestimated.

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 22

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner

Copyright and disclaimer

Copyright
Copyright of all published material including photographs, drawings and images in this document remains vested in Aker Solutions and
third party contributors as appropriate. Accordingly, neither the whole nor any part of this document shall be reproduced in any form nor
used in any manner without express prior permission and applicable acknowledgements. No trademark, copyright or other notice shall
be altered or removed from any reproduction.

Disclaimer
This Presentation includes and is based, inter alia, on forward-looking information and statements that are subject to risks and
uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ. These statements and this Presentation are based on current expectations,
estimates and projections about global economic conditions, the economic conditions of the regions and industries that are major
markets for Aker Solutions ASA and Aker Solutions ASAs (including subsidiaries and affiliates) lines of business. These expectations,
estimates and projections are generally identifiable by statements containing words such as expects, believes, estimates or similar
expressions. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expectations include, among others,
economic and market conditions in the geographic areas and industries that are or will be major markets for Aker Solutions businesses,
oil prices, market acceptance of new products and services, changes in governmental regulations, interest rates, fluctuations in currency
exchange rates and such other factors as may be discussed from time to time in the Presentation. Although Aker Solutions ASA believes
that its expectations and the Presentation are based upon reasonable assumptions, it can give no assurance that those expectations will
be achieved or that the actual results will be as set out in the Presentation. Aker Solutions ASA is making no representation or warranty,
expressed or implied, as to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the Presentation, and neither Aker Solutions ASA nor any of its
directors, officers or employees will have any liability to you or any other persons resulting from your use.
Aker Solutions consists of many legally independent entities, constituting their own separate identities. Aker Solutions is used as the
common brand or trade mark for most of these entities. In this presentation we may sometimes use Aker Solutions, we or us when
we refer to Aker Solutions companies in general or where no useful purpose is served by identifying any particular Aker Solutions
company.

2012 Aker Solutions

Slide 23

6 November, 2012

Preferred partner