VECO

ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 1 of 22

Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering

Process Philosophies for Process Department

FLARE, RELIEF AND BLOWDOWN DESIGN PHILOSOPHY

Document Number: 00003

0 ISSUED FOR COMMENTS

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 2 of 22

REV. DESCRIPTION DATE BY CHECKED APPROV. CLIENT

Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 GENERAL........................................................................................................................................... 3
1.2 ABBREVIATIONS/DEFINITIONS................................................................................................................ 4
2.0 FLARE AND VENT SYSTEM DETAILS................................................................................4
2.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND...................................................................................................................... 4
2.2 HP FLARE SYSTEM INPUTS.................................................................................................................. 4
2.3 LP FLARE SYSTEM INPUTS................................................................................................................... 5
3.0 DEPRESSURING SECTION.................................................................................................5
3.1 REQUIREMENT FOR A DEPRESSURING SYSTEM.......................................................................................5
3.2 SYSTEM ARRANGEMENT....................................................................................................................... 6
3.3 BASIS FOR DETERMINATION OF DEPRESSURING RATES...........................................................................7
3.4 MAINTENANCE DEPRESSURING............................................................................................................. 8
4.0 PRESSURE RELIEF SECTION.............................................................................................8
4.1 GENERAL........................................................................................................................................... 8
4.2 POSSIBLE CAUSES OF PRESSURE RELIEF.............................................................................................. 8
4.3 CO-INCIDENT PRESSURE RELIEF CASES.............................................................................................. 11
4.4 RELIEF VALVE TYPES/BACKPRESSURES............................................................................................... 11
5.0 CONTINUOUS FLARING SECTION...................................................................................11
5.1 DESIGN APPROACH........................................................................................................................... 11
6.0 RADIATION SECTION........................................................................................................13
6.1 PERMISSIBLE RADIATION LEVELS........................................................................................................ 13
6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL............................................................................................................................... 13
7.0 FLARE SYSTEM DESIGN DETAILS..................................................................................14
7.1 HP AND LP FLARE TIPS.................................................................................................................... 14
7.2 HP AND LP FLARE KO DRUMS.......................................................................................................... 14
7.3 FLARE PIPEWORK SIZING BASIS......................................................................................................... 15
7.4 RELIEF VALVE SUCTION LINE SIZING BASIS......................................................................................... 15
7.5 PURGE GAS..................................................................................................................................... 15
7.6 MINIMUM TEMPERATURES.................................................................................................................. 16
7.7 FLARE GAS METERING...................................................................................................................... 17
7.8 FLARE SUPPORT STRUCTURE............................................................................................................. 17
7.9 PRESSURE CONTROL SPILL-OFF VALVES............................................................................................. 17
8.0 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS...............................................................................................17
8.1 METAL SURFACE TEMPERATURES....................................................................................................... 17
8.2 NOISE.............................................................................................................................................. 19
8.3 FLARE TIP THRUST LOADS................................................................................................................. 19
9.0 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................... 20

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 3 of 22

Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 4 of 22

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
1.1 GENERAL

The purpose of this document is to define the Design Basis and Philosophy to be used for the
design of the Flare, Relief and Blowdown Facilities.

The Philosophy will define:

 The type of Flare and Vent Systems to be utilised.

 The basis for determination of inputs to the respective flare and vent systems.

 The basis for determination of relief, blowdown and continuous flaring loads.

 The basis for purging the flare system and the philosophy regarding continuous
flaring.

 The allowable radiation limits and design environmental conditions.

 The basis for determination of the flare radiation, metal surface temperature and
noise.

 The proposed basis for flare tip selection.

 The basis for determination of the flare support structure height.

 The Flare Equipment and Piping sizing basis.

 The basis for determination of minimum temperatures within the flare system and
upstream Process equipment.

 The General Data and Assumptions used.

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 5 of 22

1.2 ABBREVIATIONS/DEFINITIONS
Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
BDV - Blowdown Valve
ESD - Emergency Shutdown
ESDV - Emergency Shutdown Valve
F&ERA- Fire and Explosion Risk Analysis
FPSO - Floating Production, Storage and Offloading
HIPPS - High Integrity Pressure Protection System
HP - High Pressure
JT - Joule Thomson
KO - Knock Out
LP - Low Pressure
LLP - Low Low Pressure
LSHH - Level Switch High High
LSLL - Level Switch Low Low
NRV - Non-Return Valve
PSHH - Pressure Switch High High
PSV - Pressure Safety Valve (Relief Valve)
RO - Restriction Orifice

2.0 FLARE AND VENT SYSTEM DETAILS

2.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND

It is considered that the Flare and Vent Facilities will comprise:

I. An HP Flare System to collect high pressure flare inputs. The HP Flare System will
comprise HP Flare Headers (Warm and Cold), HP Flare KO Drum, HP Flare KO Drum
Heater, HP Flare KO Drum Pumps and HP Flare Tip.

II. An LP Flare System to collect low pressure flare inputs. The LP Flare System will
comprise an LP Flare Header, LP Flare KO Drum, LP Flare KO Drum Heater, LP Flare
KO Drum Pumps and LP Flare Tip.

III. Local atmospheric vents will be utilised, as required (i.e. a common atmospheric
collection system and vent tip will not be provided)

2.2 HP FLARE SYSTEM INPUTS

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 6 of 22

In general, the HP relief system is to receive inputs from PSV’s with relief set pressures of 2000
kPag and above. The HP Flare System also handles blowdown and pressure/flow control
releases from systems which have a
Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
sufficiently high normal operating pressures or final required blowdown pressures to be able to
discharge into it. The maximum HP Flare Tip pressure drop is 350 kPa and the maximum
expected built-up back pressure within the HP Flare headers/laterals is 750 to 1000 kPag (Hold -
To be determined by detailed Network Analysis).

The HP Flare System will have two independent header collection systems, which will segregate
warm and cold HP Flare inputs up to the HP Flare KO Drum. The aim of the segregation is to
avoid the contact of coincident cold dry HP Flare inputs from warm wet HP Flare inputs which
could lead to potential hydrate/ice formation problems within the flare header. An additional
benefit of segregation is that the warm flare header arrangement will not have to be designed for
the very low temperatures which could be experienced within the cold flare headers, and should
therefore require less exotic materials. Each header system (warm and cold) will have a separate
inlet nozzle connection to the HP Flare KO Drum. A common outlet line will run from the HP
Flare KO Drum up to the HP Flare Tip.

The HP Flare System will utilise a proprietary sonic, low emissivity type flare tip in order to
achieve efficient combustion of the HP flare gas and minimise platform radiation levels. However,
consideration will be given to the use of a combined HP/LP Flare Tip assembly.

2.3 LP FLARE SYSTEM INPUTS

The LP relief system is to receive inputs from PSV’s with relief set pressures of less than 2000
kPag. The LP Flare System also handles blowdown and pressure/flow control releases from
systems which have an insufficiently high normal operating pressure to discharge to the HP Flare
System or low final required blowdown pressures. The LP Flare System will also accommodate
the vent gas from the gas compressor primary seals.

The built-up back pressure within the LP Flare headers/laterals will be limited to allow the
pressure spill-off of gas from the LP Separator, which will operate at approximately 80 kPag to
discharge into it (Note: higher pressures may be realised further upstream of this tie-in point).
This approach will eliminate the need for an LLP Flare System to accommodate the very low
pressure inputs. The maximum expected backpressure within the LP Flare headers/laterals is 50
to 100 kPag. Due to the low pressure, a conventional pipe type LP Flare Tip will have to be
used. However, consideration will be given to the use of a combined HP/LP Flare Tip assembly.

3.0 DEPRESSURING SECTION

3.1 REQUIREMENT FOR A DEPRESSURING SYSTEM

A Depressuring System is required in order to reduce the pressure of hydrocarbon containing

pressure vessels, equipment and piping by rapid venting of the inventory to the flare system.

Depressuring has the following important safety related effects:

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 7 of 22

I. It minimises the risk of equipment and piping rupturing in a fire situation.

Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
II.
It reduces the quantity of fuel which may feed a fire.

Total Platform Blowdown is initiated via the Platform Shutdown Systems in the event of detection
of a dangerous situation which could include confirmed fire or gas detection in critical areas,
manual shutdown initiation or critical Process/Utility Trips. It shall also be possible to initiate
blowdown of any individual blowdown section manually.

Blowdown facilities will also be provided on each production riser to allow manual
depressurisation of each subsea flowline from the various clusters. However, blowdown of the
subsea lines will not be automatically initiated via the Platform Shutdown System (i.e. manual
initiation only, as required).

The piping configuration will be such that the turret production and test manifolds and some of
the piping upstream of the manifolds, will be depressurised through the 1st Stage and Test
Separator Blowdown Facilities. No other automatic blowdown of small enclosed piping
assemblies is envisaged at this stage, although it is considered that a F&ERA will be undertaken
to determine the acceptability of this approach.

3.2 SYSTEM ARRANGEMENT

The Process is divided into a number of discrete contained “Blowdown Section”. Each Blowdown
Section is bounded by a number of ESDV’s and includes Blowdown Facilities.

Blowdown Facilities, generally comprising a BDV, RO and isolating full bore maintenance ball
valve are provided on sections of Process equipment which contain hydrocarbon vapour and
have design pressures of greater than 700 kPag. Sections containing stabilised crude will not be
provided with automated blowdown facilities.

Blowdown Sections will include but not be limited to the following:

 1st Stage Production Separator

 2nd Stage Production Separator

 Test Separator

 LP1 Compressor

 LP2 Compressor Train A

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 8 of 22

 LP2 Compressor Train B

 HP1 Compressor
Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
Train A

 HP1 Compressor Train B

 HP2 Compressor Train A

 HP2 Compressor Train B

 Glycol Contactor

 Gas Injection Manifold

 HP Fuel Gas

3.3 BASIS FOR DETERMINATION OF DEPRESSURING RATES

Depressuring rates will be determined to comply with the following philosophy requirements:

I. Blowdown Sections will be depressurised from their PSHH trip conditions to 690 kPag
(100 psig) or 50% of their design pressure, whichever is the lower, within a 15 minute
period. Compressor vendors will be consulted to determine the acceptability of this
approach for the gas compressor Blowdown Sections (i.e. to ensure the blowdown
design criteria does not cause dry gas seal damage).

Note: Subject to a review of the magnitude of the depressuring loads, consideration

may be given to only blowing down to 50% of design pressure for HP Blowdown
Sections (sections including vessels with wall thicknesses of 1 inch or more). This
approach is still compliant with API RP 521 guidelines.

II. Individual blowdown flowrates will be determined to comply with the requirements
detailed in i) above, while also for liquid containing systems, considering the worst
case scenario of fire heat input to the blowdown section based on the normal
operating liquid level (calculated in accordance with the API RP 521 formulae). No
credit will be taken for insulation or water sprays when determining the fire heat input.

III. The method that will be utilised for determination of blowdown section volumes is as
follows:

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 9 of 22

 For Blowdown Sections whose volume is predominantly governed by equipment

volumes (e.g. Production Separators), the equipment volumes will be calculated
based on the best
Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
available data and a 15% factor will be applied to this volume to make allowance
for piping within the Section.

 For Blowdown Sections whose volume is strongly influenced by piping volumes

(e.g. manifolds and compressor sections), both equipment and piping volumes
will be calculated based on the best available data. In the early stages of the
Project the piping details will not be defined to an acceptable level (i.e. isometrics
will not be available and the lines will not have had stress analysis). Therefore, a
reasonable design contingency of 25% will be applied to the total calculated
system volumes to allow for possible piping volume increases. This design
contingency will be progressively reduced as the quality of feed information
regarding piping improves throughout the detailed design period.

3.4 MAINTENANCE DEPRESSURING

All equipment will be provided with facilities to enable manual depressurisation to the LP Flare
System prior to maintenance activities.

4.0 PRESSURE RELIEF SECTION

4.1 GENERAL

The topsides oil processing systems will be specified with equipment and piping design pressures
below Wellhead Shut-in Pressure. This will necessitate analysis of the various possibilities for
over-pressurisation and of the cases for full flow relief.

In line with applicable codes and regulations referenced in Section 9.0, it is concluded that:

· Two levels of protection, primary and secondary, shall be provided against any
possible cause of overpressure (Ref 3).

· Two or more simultaneous unrelated failures, commonly called double jeopardy,

shall not generally be considered.

In general, primary protection will be a PSHH which will initiate actions to eliminate the high
pressure source, and secondary protection will be a mechanical relief device on the low pressure
component or system. In special circumstances, where the required relief facilities lead to an
uneconomic design, the use of a HIPPS may also be considered. The use of HIPPS will,
however, be kept to a minimum.

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 10of 22

4.2 POSSIBLE CAUSES OF PRESSURE RELIEF

Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering

4.2.1 Blocked Outlet

If an item of equipment is not designed for the maximum upstream pressure, then a blocked
outlet will normally result in a full flow relief load.

Consideration is currently being given to the use of full flow relief valves on individual production
flowlines within the turret assembly to allow the manifolds and swivel assemblies to be downrated
from the wellhead shut-in pressure rating. However, it should be noted that by using interlocked
valve assemblies a low pressure swivel could be utilised without the need for PSV’s. Each PSV
should protect the flowline against the maximum production potential from the subsea cluster
which feeds it.

For purposes of sizing the liquid hold-up within the HP Flare KO Drum it should be considered
that the full production relief flowrate (i.e. gas, oil and water) could occur for up to 90 seconds.
An alternate design case considering the full production relief of one maximum well, plus one
average well for up to 10 minutes should also be considered. This design approach will be
critically reviewed in the HAZOP.

4.2.2 Fire

Equipment items that can be isolated will be provided with relief valves to protect against fire.

Fire heat input for both wetted surface and unwetted surface cases will be calculated in
accordance with the API RP 520 and API RP 521 equations (Refs 1 & 2). No credit will be taken
for insulation or water sprays when determining the fire heat input. Fire heat input will be
calculated based on the LSHH liquid level for wetted surface fire calculations.

Sections of process piping without a heat source that could be blocked in will not be provided
with thermal or fire PSV’s, unless Safety reviews indicate unacceptable consequences if no such
provision is made.

4.2.3 Control Valve Failure

A control valve failure to the fully opened position will be considered as a source of overpressure.
For control valves which include a manual bypass, the bypass shall be taken into consideration in
determining the relief rate in accordance with the following basis:

The control valve bypass is assumed to have the same installed CV as the control valve (this can
be achieved by strategic selection of the bypass valve size, or if necessary trim). It is assumed
that the control valve bypass is fully open while the control valve maintains its controlling position.

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 11of 22

A specific control valve failure case which can lead to high relief flowrates is gas blow-by. Gas
blow-by from a high pressure separator to a lower pressure separator (e.g. 1st Stage Separator
to LP Separator) can occur after the
Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
following series of failures:

1. The liquid level control valve fails in the fully open position via transmitter, controller
or control valve failure.

2. The ESDV on the liquid outlet line fails to operate due to a valve malfunction or
failure of the low low liquid level trip.
In this event on complete loss of liquid level within the oil section of the higher pressure
separator, it is possible to get high pressure gas passing through the liquid circuit. Although the
nature of this relief scenario means that the gas blow-by duration will be short, high flowrates are
achievable due to the large liquid control valve and lines sizes, combined with the high pressure
driving force.

For this Project it will be the design intent to minimise the gas blow-by relief case where possible.
This can be achieved by strategic setting of the separation train operating, trip and design
pressures to reduce, or if possible, eliminate the pressure driving force for the gas blow-by
scenario. Also careful consideration should be given to the need for control valve bypasses.
Hand jacks may be preferred in areas which give rise to large gas blow-by cases.

4.2.4 Exchanger Tube Rupture

In accordance with API RP 521 an internal failure within an exchanger where a sharp break
occurs in one tube is considered as a relief case.

For relatively low pressure equipment, complete tube rupture is considered when the design
pressure of the low pressure side of the exchanger is less than two-thirds of the design pressure
of the high pressure side. However, if the high pressure side of the exchanger operates at 6895
kPag (1000 psig), or more, and contains a vapour or liquid that can flash or result in vaporisation
of liquid on the low pressure side, complete tube failure is considered regardless of the pressure
differential.

A tube rupture is considered to be a sharp break in one tube. The high pressure fluid is assumed
to flow through openings that are equal to twice the cross sectional area of one tube. For
calculation purposes this is taken as the flowrate through two square edged orifices.

In determining the flowrate, allowance is made for any liquid that will flash to vapour as a result of
the pressure reduction, or in the case of certain volatile fluids being heated because of the
combined effects of pressure reduction and vaporisation as the fluid is intimately contacted with
the hotter fluid on the low pressure side.

After tube rupture in one of the coolers or heaters, some liquid phase (e.g. heating medium or
seawater/cooling medium) will be released to the Flare System, where it will be collected in the
Flare KO Drum. This will be followed by a flow of hydrocarbon gas.

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 12of 22

Equipment which has the potential to experience a tube rupture relief case will be protected by
bursting disk assemblies to ease liquid slug handling problems and due to their fast response
characteristics.
Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering

4.2.5 Backflow

Process equipment with a potential for a backflow from a higher pressure source will utilise two
Non-Return Valves in series to minimise the backflow. The reason for this is that an individual
NRV would be assumed to have stuck in the fully open position and therefore provide no
resistance to backflow for the purpose of relief valve sizing. However, some benefit can be taken
for the second NRV.

To avoid the risk of common mode failure the two NRV’s will be of different design. Also testing
facilities will be provided for each NRV for each two NRV application.

For this Project the following basis will be adopted for backflow calculations:

1. The first NRV is assumed to have stuck in the fully open position.

2. The second NRV is assumed to failed to fully reseat leaving an annular gap of 1mm.

3. Any control valves in the circuit are assumed to stick at their normal controlling
positions.

4. Resistance can be considered for back flow through off-line pumps and
compressors, if appropriate.

4.3 CO-INCIDENT PRESSURE RELIEF CASES

Process will review in conjunction with Safety and Piping the potential fire zone areas to assess
equipment/systems which could be affected by a common fire. Co-incident fire relief loads will be
considered for affected items.

The current proposed configuration for the LP2, HP1 and HP2 gas compressors is 2 x 50%
trains. It is considered that the gas piping configuration will be such that is possible to
simultaneously block the outlet of both trains. Therefore, full coincident relief from both trains will
be designed for.

4.4 RELIEF VALVE TYPES/BACKPRESSURES

Wherever possible, consistent with the desire to minimise the size of flare pipework, the
maximum relief valve back pressure shall be limited to 10% of the PSV’s set pressure so as to
maximise the use of conventional PSV’s. Due to the nature of the layout of the FPSO, it is
anticipated that most relief piping will flow directly into the main header. Therefore, the scope for
segregating equipment into sub-headers with varying design conditions is limited. Balanced
bellows PSV’s will be used for cases where the PSV back pressure exceeds 10% of its set
pressure (balanced bellows valves may be used for up to 50% back pressures, relative to PSV
set pressure). Pilot operated valves may also be considered. However, due to the waxy nature

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 13of 22

of the crude and potential for low ambient conditions, it is recommended that these type of PSV’s
are not used where PSV’s are in contact or have a potential to come into contact with crude oil.

5.0 Flare, Relief and

CONTINUOUS Blowdown
FLARING Design Philosophy
SECTION Process Philosophies for Process Engineering

5.1 DESIGN APPROACH

The Processing Systems will be designed such that there is no normal or routine flaring of
hydrocarbon gas. However, it is recognised that under certain operating circumstances that it
may be necessary to flare gas for limited periods to avoid a total production shutdown.

It is the design intent not to allow any potential continuous flaring scenarios to size the flare
tower. The flare tower will be sized based on Emergency/Process upset relieving conditions and
hence allowable emergency radiation levels. Once the tower height is fixed evaluations as to
what potential short term continuous flaring cases could be accommodated with this tower height
will be undertaken (i.e. define what percentage of full production is possible with all gas being
flared).

Potential short term continuous cases that could be considered are listed below. For each of
these production cases we will define whether it is possible to continuously flare the full
production potential or whether production must be cut-back to a certain percentage of its
maximum potential.

I. Total loss of gas compression facilities (i.e. all gas to the facility must be flared). This
scenario will result in consideration of two flaring cases:

a) Full gas production including returned lift gas.

b) Full gas production excluding returned lift gas (i.e. the situation after a certain
time period when the impact of loss of lift gas is seen in the fluids arriving at
the facility, both in terms of the loss of the returning lift gas and the reduced
well productivity effects).

II. The loss of the LP1 Compression Train.

III. The loss of one of the LP2 or HP1/HP2 Compressor Trains.

IV. The loss of both LP2 or HP1/HP2 Compressors Trains. This is effectively the same
case as i).

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 14of 22

6.0 RADIATION SECTION

Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
6.1 PERMISSIBLE RADIATION LEVELS

In accordance with the Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Installation Regulations (Ref 4) the
following radiation limits will apply:

Radiation Flux Limits Excluding Solar Radiation

Btu/ft2h kW/m2 Conditions

2000 6.30 Heat intensity on personnel areas where the

period of exposure will not be greater than 1
minute.

1500 4.72 Heat intensity on personnel areas where the

period of exposure will be greater than 1
minute but not greater than 1 hour (Note:
according to API RP 521, Ref 2, this is the
allowed value for several minutes exposure).

600 1.90 Heat intensity on personnel areas where the

period of exposure will be greater than 1 hour.
Assumed limit for continuous exposure.

Ultimately radiation analysis will be undertaken by the selected flare vendor. However,
preliminary analysis will be undertaken using “FLARESIM” Software.

The use of radiation shielding may be considered to reduce radiation levels in strategic/exposed
locations.

6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL

6.2.1 Windspeed

The flare will be located at the aft end of the FPSO vessel. Windspeeds for flare radiation
analysis have been determined for both the wind blowing to the aft and the wind blowing from the
aft. Details are given below:

I. The wind blowing to the aft (i.e. blowing the flare flame away from the FPSO vessel,
but towards any potential Oil Loading Tanker which may be hooked-up). For this
scenario it has been established that the Oil Loading Tanker will not remain hooked
beyond a 5.1m significant wave height. This equates to a 18 m/s windspeed (35

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 15of 22

knots, 40.3 mph). Therefore, radiation calculations need not consider a higher
windspeed than this.

Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy II.

Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
The wind blowing from the aft (i.e. blowing the flare flame on to the FPSO vessel). As the
FPSO vessel will normally be directed into the weather, the windspeed where the
flame will be blown back on to the vessel will be low. An windspeed analysis has been
undertaken and it is considered that a 7.7 m/s windspeed (15 knots, 17.3 mph) is the
maximum that could occur in this case. To allow for subsequent behaviour where the
ship is swung across the current but not entirely round, the same speed should used
over a sector 90 deg either side of the fore and aft direction (i.e. 90 deg either side of
the FPSO’s centre-line). For wind directions outside of this range the 18 m/s
windspeed defined in i) above will be considered.

7.0 FLARE SYSTEM DESIGN DETAILS

7.1 HP AND LP FLARE TIPS

A proprietary low emissivity, sonic type tip is to be used for the HP Flare Tip. Sonic tips have a
number of advantages over other available flare tips, such as:

1. The efficient combustion associated with sonic type flare tips gives reduced flame
emissivity levels and a shorter, smokeless, more directional flame, which gives rise
to reduced platform radiation levels.

2. As the flare tip operates at high pressure (maximum tip pressure drop will be set at
approximately 350 kPa) the HP header and KO Drum sizes can be minimised.

However, it should be noted that sonic type flare tips can give rise to higher noise levels than
conventional flare tips due to increased jet noise.

It is possible to incline certain sonic flare tips to direct the flame away from the facility. This
approach can often offer advantages with respect to reduced radiation levels and hence reduced
flare structure heights. However, at this stage of the Project initial radiation analysis will be
undertaken on the basis of a vertical HP Flare Tip. This approach ensures that certain flare tip
vendors (who cannot offer inclined tips) are not directly precluded from the bidding process.

Due to the low available pressure drop a conventional pipe type tip is recommended for the LP
Flare System.

It is possible that a combination HP/LP Flare tip may be selected if this offers technical
advantages. However, at this stage of the Project initial radiation analysis will be undertaken on
the basis of independent HP and LP Flare Tips.

7.2 HP AND LP FLARE KO DRUMS

Each flare KO drum will be sized to remove liquid particles of 400 microns and greater from the
flare gas streams.

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 16of 22

The HP Flare KO Drum will be sized to accommodate the liquid relief cases defined in Section
4.2.1. Consideration shall also be given to liquid associated with subsea flowline blowdown case.

The Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
LP Flare KO Drum will be sized to accommodate the liquid associated with tube rupture relief
cases and other miscellaneous inputs.

Each KO Drum will be fitted with an internal electric heater and will have external heat tracing and
insulation.

KO Drums will be designed to withstand the maximum built up backpressure under the worst
relief scenario. However, as a minimum the design pressure will be set to withstand the
maximum hydrostatic head of a completely full flare riser (e.g. for an 80m flare tower the design
pressure must exceed 7.85 barg).

7.3 FLARE PIPEWORK SIZING BASIS

For individual discharge lines to the main flare headers, the maximum fluid velocity shall be
limited to 80% of sonic velocity.

For main flare headers, the maximum fluid velocity shall be limited to 50% of sonic velocity.

For Process upsets involving continuous spill-off flow to the flare system, the maximum fluid
velocity shall be limited to 35% of sonic velocity.

The above velocity guidelines will be considered in conjunction with appropriate pressure drop
considerations for the HP & LP Flare Systems.

Due to the long line runs involved and the FPSO motions it is not practical to ensure that the flare
lines will be sloped continuously from the flare inputs to the KO Drums, but lines should not be
pocketed. Slopes will be provided where possible (definitely on all flare inputs to the main flare
header tie-in) and if practical the flare header may be stepped down in stages, however it will be
acceptable for much of the header to be run at a constant elevation. Flare laterals shall enter
main flare headers from the top.

From the flare KO Drums onwards, the main flare headers/risers shall continuously rise up to the
flare tips

7.4 RELIEF VALVE SUCTION LINE SIZING BASIS

The inlet line losses to a relief valve will be limited to 3% of the valve set pressure on a gauge
basis, as recommended by API RP 520 (Ref 1).

7.5 PURGE GAS

To minimise the quantity of gas flared, nitrogen will be utilised as the primary purge gas source.
Nitrogen purge connections will be located at the end of the main flare headers. The requirement
for dedicated purge connections on flare sub-headers will be considered on a case by case

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 17of 22

basis. However, as a minimum all sub-headers will have valved connections to allow for the
manual hook-up of nitrogen via utility stations.

These Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
headers will be continuously swept with nitrogen to maintain a typical velocity of 0.03 to 0.06 m/s
(0.1 to 0.2 ft/s) in the main flare risers (Note: higher purge rates will be used for either the initial
flare system sweep or following a prolonged shutdown). After the primary system sweep it is not
necessary to purge via all of the purge connections, as long as the defined purge velocity and
positive system pressure is maintained. In addition to the base nitrogen purge supply, provisions
will be made to utilise LP fuel gas as a back-up/alternate purge medium.

7.6 MINIMUM TEMPERATURES

7.6.1 Minimum Temperatures within the Flare System

The release of gas from the higher pressure sections of the Process facilities is generally
accompanied by a significant drop in temperature due to the JT effect.

Following a Platform Shutdown, if Process Sections remain at pressure the hydrocarbon contents
will ultimately cool down to the prevailing ambient conditions, this will be associated with a
corresponding pressure reduction in the blowdown section (see Reference 7 for calculation
procedure). Then on initiation of blowdown the JT temperature drop will give rise to some low
temperature releases, particularly from subsea lines, gas lift and injection manifolds, HP
Compressors and the Glycol Contactor.

The base philosophy will be to design the flare header system to accommodate the worst case
scenario cold gas releases (i.e. minimum design temperatures will be set to accommodate
blowdown from pressure and minimum ambient conditions). However, if this approach leads to
unacceptably low temperatures, operational philosophies and instrumentation will be considered
to ensure that cooldown to minimum ambient of a fully pressurised critical HP Process Blowdown
Section is not possible. The flare system minimum design temperatures will then be revisited in-
line with the agreed basis for progression.

Blowdown sections which are identified as having a capacity for hydrate formation on low
temperature blowdown will be provided with methanol injection points upstream of the BDV
(generally an injection point with a valved and blinded connection).

7.6.2 Minimum Temperatures within the Upstream Process System

Minimum temperatures within the Process System will be evaluated in accordance with the
guidelines of Reference 7.

The blowdown will be modelled as an isentropic expansion with an efficiency of 100% taking
credit for heat pick-up from the vessel and piping walls.

As per 7.6.1 the starting point for the analysis will be based on a section cooldown to minimum
ambient conditions.

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 18of 22

Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering

7.7 FLARE GAS METERING

Flare gas metering facilities will be provided on the HP and LP flare gas lines downstream of their
respective KO drums. The metering facilities will be a non-intrusive type and hence give
negligible pressure drop.

7.8 FLARE SUPPORT STRUCTURE

Preliminary indications are that a considerable flare structure height is required. It is considered
that the flare support structure will be a vertical tower type configuration, as it is considered that a
long inclined boom would be inappropriate for the FPSO facility.

7.9 PRESSURE CONTROL SPILL-OFF VALVES

To minimise the quantity of gas flared, pressure control spill-off valves to the flare system will be
specified as tight shut-off (Class V).

8.0 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

8.1 METAL SURFACE TEMPERATURES

Knowledge of metal surface temperatures is required for structural design purposes of the flare
boom and other affected structures and for consideration of exposed instrumentation, electrical
and mechanical items.

Although metal surface temperatures at various locations will ultimately be supplied by the
selected flare vendor, the method defined below will be used to make preliminary estimates.

The calculation method has been developed using equations defined in References 5 and 6.
The basis of the model is that heat transfer is to/from a flat metal plate in full view of the flares
radiation and that the plate absorbs heat from one surface and rejects heat via convection and
re-radiation from both surfaces. The metal surface temperature must be such that equilibrium is
achieved between the heat absorbed and heat rejected in accordance with the following heat
balance:

QfEm = 2Qc + 2Qr

This heat balance is diagrammatically represented in the sketch below:

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 19of 22

Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering

Qc
Qc

Qf

Qr

Qr

Heat loss by convection is calculated by the following equations:

i) For natural convection (zero wind):

Qc = 0.38 (Tm - Ta)1.25

ii) For wind velocity less than 15ft/s (4.6 m/s):

Qc = (0.8 + 0.22v) (Tm - Ta)

iii) For wind velocity greater than 15ft/s (4.6 m/s):

Qc = (0.56v0.75) (Tm - Ta)

Heat loss by radiation is calculated by the following equation:

Qr = Em  (Tm4 - Ta4)

Legend:

Qf = Radiation from flare at metal location (Btu/ft2h)

Qc = Convective heat transfer from metal (Btu/ft2h)
Qr = Radiative heat transfer from metal (Btu/ft2h)
v = Wind velocity (ft/s)
Tm = Metal surface temperature (R)
Ta = Ambient Air temperature (R)
 = Stephan Boltzman constant (0.173 x 10-8 Btu/ft2hR4)
Em = Emissivity of metal

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 20of 22

For the purposes of calculation a metal emissivity of 0.7 will be used. Various ambient
temperature cases will be considered including the maximum ambient case of 24.5C. Various
wind speeds will be considered including
zero Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
wind, 2.6 m/s (5 knots) and 7.7 m/s (15 knots).

When metal surface temperatures are analysed it should be noted that in practice the defined
values for emergency relieving scenarios are unlikely to actually be realised as the flaring cases
will be short term (typically a few minutes). Therefore, thermal equilibrium of the system is
unlikely to be achieved due to thermal inertia effects.

8.2 NOISE

Preliminary flare noise levels will be investigated using the “FLARESIM” Software package.
However, ultimately noise levels will be supplied by the selected flare vendor.

8.3 FLARE TIP THRUST LOADS

Flare tip thrust loads will be supplied by the selected flare vendor.

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 21of 22

9.0 REFERENCES

Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering
1. API RP 520, 6th Edition, March 1993.
Sizing, Selection and Installation of Pressure-Relieving Devices In Refineries,
Parts 1 and 2.

2. API RP 521, 3rd Edition, November 1990.

Guide for Pressure-Relieving and Depressuring Systems

3. API RP 14C, 5th Edition, March 1994.

Recommended Practice for Analysis, Design, Installation and Testing of Basic
Surface Safety Systems on Offshore Production Platforms

4. Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum - Installation Regulations, February 1995.

5. Process Heat Transfer, Kern.

6. Mechanical Engineers Handbook, Kent.

7. Brown & Root Blowdown Temperature Calculation Procedure

(Doc. No.: 308-7021-ST-31-001-1).

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc
 VECO
ENGINEERING
REV. 0 REV. DATE: 08.06.2004 PAGE 22of 22

Flare, Relief and Blowdown Design Philosophy Process Philosophies for Process Engineering

/conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/731808381.doc