Topsides Depressurisation & p p Repressurisation using OLGA

OLGA User Group Meeting

7th October, 2010 Simon Allison

INTRODUCTION

Modelling depressurisation and repressurisation of topsides piping on an offshore platform.

Initial work using HYSYS Dynamics (Repressurisation) and HYSYS Dynamic

Depressuring Utility (Depressurisation)

Check using OLGA v5 3 2 4 to assess assumption that HYSYS results are adequate for v5.3.2.4
Detailed Design (Compositional Tracking NOT used)

Scope of work prepared for Imperial College (London) using BLOWDOWN

Topsides piping consists of short run, small volume piping (50 200 m). Focus on minimum temperatures not multiphase flow flow. Comparison of results & possible explanations

PYRY POWERPOINT TEMPLATE 05.07.2010

SYSTEM SCHEMATIC

Gas/Condensate Field Offshore Platform Subsea Pipeline Relatively Large Pipeline Inventory
Topsides

Depressurisation 50 m3 (200m) Repressurisation 10 m3 (50m) Pipeline 4,700 m3 (30 km)

Pipeline ~4 700 m3 ~4,700

PYRY POWERPOINT TEMPLATE 05.07.2010

DEPRESSURISATION CASE
Flare Header

Piping Volume = 50 m3 Pi i V l Initial Pressure = 248 barg Initial Temperature = 15 C Final Pressure = 0 5 b Fi l P 0.5 barg

RO

BDV

Topsides Piping

PYRY POWERPOINT TEMPLATE 05.07.2010

DEPRESSURISATION RESULTS Mass Flow

PYRY POWERPOINT TEMPLATE 05.07.2010

DEPRESSURISATION RESULTS Fluid Temperature

PYRY POWERPOINT TEMPLATE 05.07.2010

DEPRESSURISATION RESULTS Wall Temperature

PYRY POWERPOINT TEMPLATE 05.07.2010

REPRESSURISATION CASE
Pipeline Pipeline Volume = 4,700 m3 Initial Pressure = 243 barg Initial Temperature = 15 C Final Pressure = 243 barg Topsides Piping Volume = 7 m3 Initial Pressure = 0 barg Initial Temperature = 15 C Final Pressure = 243 barg

RESDV Pipeline Topsides

Bypass RO

PYRY POWERPOINT TEMPLATE 05.07.2010

REPRESSURISATION RESULTS Mass Flow

PYRY POWERPOINT TEMPLATE 05.07.2010

REPRESSURISATION RESULTS Fluid Temperature

PYRY POWERPOINT TEMPLATE 05.07.2010

10

REPRESSURISATION RESULTS Wall Temperature

PYRY POWERPOINT TEMPLATE 05.07.2010

11

DIFFERENCES & OBSERVATIONS

Equations of State
HYSYS = PR OLGA = SRK (Peneloux) BLOWDOWN = Proprietary

HYSYS requires additional inputs

Depressuring Utility

OLGA not compositionally rigorous

( (Compositional Tracking NOT used) p g )

PV Work Term (isentropic efficiency) Recycle Efficiency (phase temp. equilibrium) Dynamics y Overall HTC

Discharge Co-efficients
HYSYS = Cv used OLGA = 0.84 (Miller) BLOWDOWN = 0.9 (IC)

PYRY POWERPOINT TEMPLATE 05.07.2010

12

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Depressurisation HYSYS Good fluid temps immediately D/S Grossly under estimated metal temps U/S, no results for D/S Unable to model U/S & D/S piping (FLARENET option not dynamic) Repressurisation HYSYS Good fluid & wall temps immediately D/S of RO Grossly under estimated metal temps further D/S t f th

OLGA OLGA
Less conservative than Blowdown Sh t term transient fluid t Short t t i t fl id temps Good match with Blowdown for D/S

fluid & wall temps Liquids through RO Compositional tracking? U/S fluid & wall temps highly variable BLOWDOWN As for Depressurisation

BLOWDOWN
Recognised as best in industry for

this application Benchmarked to +/- 3 C accuracy

PYRY POWERPOINT TEMPLATE 05.07.2010 13

THANK YOU!

CONTACT: Simon Allison Flow Assurance Team Leader simon.allison@poyry.com +61 8 9322 8080
PYRY POWERPOINT TEMPLATE 05.07.2010 14