Regulators - Blog (no longer active)

Wirelessly Monitoring Tank Thief Hatches to Avoid Regulatory Fines

Jim Cahill — Thu, 05 Sep 2019 20:44:34 GMT

I shared a great case study from the oil patch yesterday with time savings with wireless pressure monitoring at the well head. Today, let’s continue with another great case study from the oil patch with a Control magazine article, Use wireless to monitor thief hatches.

The article’s author opens describing what a thief hatch is. These devices are:

…installed on the top of low-pressure and atmospheric tanks in the oil & gas, chemical, pharmaceutical, biogas, water treatment and other industries to allow access to the tank. They can be used to take samples of the tank’s contents and determine the level of the tank, and they protect the tank from overpressure and excessive vacuum.

When an overpressure or excessive vacuum event occurs:

…the hinged hatch cover will break its seal, lift and allow the pressure to escape to the atmosphere. When the pressure or vacuum is reduced to the setpoint, the seal is reseated by either spring, sealing the tank.

The challenge which may lead to regulatory fines?

When a thief hatch closes—either from gravity or from a worker closing it—the hatch may not seal unless it is firmly latched. This allows vapors in the tank to leak into the atmosphere, which can violate regulations.

For the oil & gas producer operating in the U.S. State of Colorado, the regulations require:

…monitoring of thief hatches on oil and water tanks to prevent release of methane and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) to the atmosphere.

State inspectors:

…document any open thief hatches, and compare their records to the producer’s by time and location. If the producer can confirm the thief hatch was open—perhaps for maintenance or sampling—at the same time as the inspector found it open, then there’s no problem and no penalty. If the producer cannot confirm from its records as to why the hatch was open, penalties and fines are assessed.

Here was the solution this oil & gas producer used to monitor their thief hatches [hyperlink added by me]:

Rosemount 702 discrete WirelessHART transmitters…can be installed on existing thief hatches and tank batteries to effectively ensure the hatches are closed and latched. The concept is fairly simple: A switch at the latch…detects when the latch is closed.

Read the article for more on the inner workings of the thief hatch and switch monitoring for proper closing as well as the wireless architecture applied, and the business results achieved by fine avoidance. It’s yet another example of using Industrial Internet of Things sensing technologies to improve business performance.

Visit the Industrial Wireless Technology and Tank Vents and Hatches sections on Emerson.com for more on the application of these technologies. You can also connect and interact with wireless sensor and tank vent/hatches experts in the IIoT & Digital Transformation and Valves, Actuators & Regulators groups in the Emerson Exchange 365 community and/or at the September 23-27 Emerson Exchange conference in Nashville.

The post Wirelessly Monitoring Tank Thief Hatches to Avoid Regulatory Fines appeared first on the Emerson Automation Experts blog.

Stabilizing Pressure Regulator Performance

Jim Cahill — Tue, 16 Oct 2018 19:46:08 GMT

In many areas of the industrialized world, natural gas transmission and distribution companies provide gas to commercial and industrial users, as well as many of us in our residences. For commercial users, such as apartment complexes, and industrial users, stable pressure is critical for operations.

A 6-page whitepaper, Solving Instability Issues in Commercial and Industrial Natural Gas System Applications, explores some of the causes of instability and ways effective pressure regulation technology can address these challenges. Once challenge is resonance. Pressure regulators have moving parts which can oscillate at resonant frequencies causing noise and wear.

Resonance occurs when the set of a vibrating system’s characteristics cause it to oscillate at much higher amplitudes in a specific frequency range.

The most common mode of instability is harmonic instability. It:

…is caused by a collection of system characteristics during normal operation which results in a “humming” or “buzzing” sound emitting from the regulator due to the vibration of the diaphragm or other parts.

Changes in flow rate or piping & regulator system components may:

…also change the frequency required to excite the regulator to a resonance condition.

Another condition leading to instability is hunting. It:

…is a condition in which a regulator’s outlet pressure slowly fluctuates on either side of the set point. In this condition, the regulator will “hunt” for a desired pressure but certain factors may prevent it from quickly reaching equilibrium.

Turbulent flow can lead to hunting conditions. In gas systems this turbulent flow can be caused by:

…elbows, swages, valves and meters.

Other causes include piping characteristics, effective flow area, flow characteristics, and regulator size. Flow meters in the line can have operating frequencies near the pressure regulators inducing instability from feedback. Effective spacing between these elements in the flow stream can eliminate this feedback condition.

Some ways to address these pressure regulator instability issues include proper sizing and selection of the pressure regulator, properly sized vent piping, proper placement of control lines, and use of regulators with internal or dual registration instead of those with external registration.

A Fisher CS800 Series regulator stabilizer cartridge can increase:

…system stability with no piping and/or minimal specification changes and can be installed quickly in the existing installation and without using any special tools. Ultimately, it eliminates most instances of regulator noise from system instability and minimizes end user complaints.

Read the whitepaper for specific recommendations in each of these ways to reduce instability. The best pressure regulator installation is the one the quietly performs its duties without disturbing everyone around it.

Visit the Regulators catalog area on Emerson.com for more types of pressure regulators best suited for your applications. You can also connect and interact with pressure regulation experts in the Valves, Actuators & Regulators group in the Emerson Exchange 365 community.

The post Stabilizing Pressure Regulator Performance appeared first on the Emerson Automation Experts blog.

Stabilizing Pressure Regulator Performance

Jim Cahill — Tue, 16 Oct 2018 19:46:08 GMT

Resonance occurs when the set of a vibrating system’s characteristics cause it to oscillate at much higher amplitudes in a specific frequency range.

The most common mode of instability is harmonic instability. It:

…is caused by a collection of system characteristics during normal operation which results in a “humming” or “buzzing” sound emitting from the regulator due to the vibration of the diaphragm or other parts.

Changes in flow rate or piping & regulator system components may:

…also change the frequency required to excite the regulator to a resonance condition.

Another condition leading to instability is hunting. It:

…is a condition in which a regulator’s outlet pressure slowly fluctuates on either side of the set point. In this condition, the regulator will “hunt” for a desired pressure but certain factors may prevent it from quickly reaching equilibrium.

Turbulent flow can lead to hunting conditions. In gas systems this turbulent flow can be caused by:

…elbows, swages, valves and meters.

A Fisher CS800 Series regulator stabilizer cartridge can increase:

…system stability with no piping and/or minimal specification changes and can be installed quickly in the existing installation and without using any special tools. Ultimately, it eliminates most instances of regulator noise from system instability and minimizes end user complaints.

The post Stabilizing Pressure Regulator Performance appeared first on the Emerson Automation Experts blog.

Optimizing Pressure Relief Valve Lifecycle Management

Jim Cahill — Fri, 21 Sep 2018 20:19:43 GMT

Pressure relief valves (PRVs) are critical safety and equipment protection devices to prevent overpressure conditions. They need ongoing maintenance to assure that they operate as designed for their intended applications.

In a Valve magazine article, Lifecycle Management of Pressure Relief Valves, Emerson’s Kevin Simmons and Marcelo Dultra describe considerations for effective and efficient PRV sizing, selection, installation and maintenance across their useful lives.

" srcset="https://www.emersonautomationexperts.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Valve-Magazine-PRV-Lifecycle-Management.png 650w, https://www.emersonautomationexperts.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Valve-Magazine-PRV-Lifecycle-Management-236x300.png 236w" sizes="(max-width: 650px) 100vw, 650px" />Kevin and Marcelo open noting:

Effective lifecycle management of PRVs can significantly improve operational efficiency ensuring safety, reducing maintenance costs, and increasing plant reliability.

PRVs come in many types:

Weight-Loaded PRV

Conventional Direct Spring-Loaded PRV (ASME recognized)

Balanced Direct Spring-Loaded PRV (ASME recognized)

Pilot Operated PRV (ASME recognized)

Unlike other safety devices connected with safety instrumented systems or other control systems:

PRVs are mostly self-operated mechanical equipment that do not depend on any control system or electrical instrumented system to function.

This standalone nature precludes them from sending diagnostic information to control or safety systems. They require:

Preventive maintenance with pre-scheduled inspection and testing…

Design and specification is a critical activity and requires experienced engineers to make sure the PRV is sized to properly alleviate the overpressure condition in a safe manner.

PRVs are designed, sized, selected and manufactured to meet requirements of specific codes and standards and are of special interest to the many jurisdictions charged with enforcement of local laws and regulations.

The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) have codes and standards for the PRVs based on their application, such as in direct-fired boilers and unfired vessels. Organizations such as the National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors (NBBI) provide:

…certification for and operated their own certified lab for capacity certification of new PRV products. In addition, these labs are used for the re-certification of ASME manufacturers and assemblers as well as VR [Valve Repair] repair certificate holders.

The total cost of ownership for PRVs is much greater than the initial purchase and installation costs. Lifecycle costs also include:

…direct PRV repair labor, PRV repair parts, administrative, record keeping and other transactional activities, transportation, inventory administration, rigging/scaffolding/pipefitting, etc. Deeper yet is the cost of non-conformance such as unplanned outages, late delivery of repair valves, misapplication of PRVs, emissions, inventory utilization and incorrect maintenance intervals.

Kevin and Marcelo note that PRV suppliers play an important role across the lifecycle—design & selection, commissioning, operation & maintenance, optimization and decommissioning by:

…providing the correct product support at every stage in the cycle can costs be minimized while still maintaining the integrity of the PRV program. By optimizing and coordinating these activities, total lifecycle costs can be reduced.

Read the article for more on proper sizing, impacts of improper installation and benefits of effective valve asset management.

Also, join us at the October 1-5 Emerson Exchange conference in San Antonio, Texas for pressure relief valve focused sessions including:

The post Optimizing Pressure Relief Valve Lifecycle Management appeared first on the Emerson Automation Experts blog.

Optimizing Pressure Relief Valve Lifecycle Management

Jim Cahill — Fri, 21 Sep 2018 20:19:43 GMT

" srcset="http://2ae7us20z1th3cu2bkjoza11.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Valve-Magazine-PRV-Lifecycle-Management.png 650w, http://2ae7us20z1th3cu2bkjoza11.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Valve-Magazine-PRV-Lifecycle-Management-236x300.png 236w" sizes="(max-width: 650px) 100vw, 650px" />Kevin and Marcelo open noting:

Effective lifecycle management of PRVs can significantly improve operational efficiency ensuring safety, reducing maintenance costs, and increasing plant reliability.

PRVs come in many types:

Weight-Loaded PRV

Conventional Direct Spring-Loaded PRV (ASME recognized)

Balanced Direct Spring-Loaded PRV (ASME recognized)

Pilot Operated PRV (ASME recognized)

Unlike other safety devices connected with safety instrumented systems or other control systems:

PRVs are mostly self-operated mechanical equipment that do not depend on any control system or electrical instrumented system to function.

This standalone nature precludes them from sending diagnostic information to control or safety systems. They require:

Preventive maintenance with pre-scheduled inspection and testing…

Design and specification is a critical activity and requires experienced engineers to make sure the PRV is sized to properly alleviate the overpressure condition in a safe manner.

PRVs are designed, sized, selected and manufactured to meet requirements of specific codes and standards and are of special interest to the many jurisdictions charged with enforcement of local laws and regulations.

…certification for and operated their own certified lab for capacity certification of new PRV products. In addition, these labs are used for the re-certification of ASME manufacturers and assemblers as well as VR [Valve Repair] repair certificate holders.

The total cost of ownership for PRVs is much greater than the initial purchase and installation costs. Lifecycle costs also include:

…direct PRV repair labor, PRV repair parts, administrative, record keeping and other transactional activities, transportation, inventory administration, rigging/scaffolding/pipefitting, etc. Deeper yet is the cost of non-conformance such as unplanned outages, late delivery of repair valves, misapplication of PRVs, emissions, inventory utilization and incorrect maintenance intervals.

Kevin and Marcelo note that PRV suppliers play an important role across the lifecycle—design & selection, commissioning, operation & maintenance, optimization and decommissioning by:

…providing the correct product support at every stage in the cycle can costs be minimized while still maintaining the integrity of the PRV program. By optimizing and coordinating these activities, total lifecycle costs can be reduced.

Read the article for more on proper sizing, impacts of improper installation and benefits of effective valve asset management.

Also, join us at the October 1-5 Emerson Exchange conference in San Antonio, Texas for pressure relief valve focused sessions including:

The post Optimizing Pressure Relief Valve Lifecycle Management appeared first on the Emerson Automation Experts blog.

Tank Blanketing Pressure Regulation Calculations

Jim Cahill — Fri, 05 Jan 2018 20:30:26 GMT

In an earlier post, Sizing Tank Blanketing Regulators, we described changes in the API Standard 2000 – Venting Atmosphere and Low-Pressure Storage Tanks with the release of the 7^th edition. Emerson’s Steve Attri highlighted the changes from the prior versions of the standard and how these changes affected the sizing requirements of tank blanketing pressure regulators.

I received an email with some questions about the post. I wanted to share a genericized version of the questions and Steve’s response in the hopes that it may help if you have similar questions. Here are the questions:

What is unclear to me is a few things in the comparison table:

The second column in the table suggests there is a focus on alcohols in the 6th edition, but I have not been able to determine what specifically this refers to. Would you be able to point out, or copy me what specifically about alcohols warrants special attention?

In it the third column states that volatile liquids one just doubles the outbreathing volumetric displacement. This does not state whether this also accounts for streams that are at the bubble point at a higher pressure, which will flash entering the lower pressure tank. Am I correct that I add the flashing load to the total if it would occur concurrently? And if those were mutually exclusive displacements, one would size based on the greater of the two conditions?

Steve responded:

The reference to alcohols in the table was meant to simply point out that the original standard was created primarily around petroleum tank contents. By extending the focus to alcohols, other markets applications are also addressed, including chemical.

Regarding outbreathing due to Filling, here’s how the standard specifically addresses it:

Nonvolatile Liquids – products with vapor pressure equal to or less than 5.0 kPa (0.73 psi)

The outbreathing volumetric flow rate (Vop) is:

Vop = 8.02 x Vpf

where Vpf is the maximum volumetric filling rate of nonvolatile liquid, expressed in US gallons per minute

Volatile Liquids – products with vapor pressure greater than 5.0 kPa (0.73 psi). The flow of volatile liquids into a tank will result in higher outbreathing flow (compared to the same inflow with a nonvolatile liquid) due to changes in liquid-vapor equilibrium.
The outbreathing volumetric flow rate Vop is:

Vop = 16.04 x Vpf

where Vpf is the maximum volumetric filling rate of volatile liquid, expressed in US gallons per minute

Flashing Liquids – can cause the venting requirement to be many times greater than the volumetric inflow of the liquid. Flashing will occur when the vapor pressure of the entering stream is greater than the operating pressure of the tank. For products that can flash due to high temperature or because of dissolved gases (e.g. oil spiked with methane), perform an equilibrium flash calculation and increase the outbreathing venting requirements accordingly.

In addition to Filling, there is also the Thermal component. Thermal outbreathing (Vot) is:

Vot = 1.51 x Y x Vtk^0.9 x Ri

where Y is a factor for latitude (0.32 if below 42 deg latitude; 0.25 if between 42 and 58 deg latitude; 0.2 if above 58 deg latitude)

Vtk is the tank volume, expressed in cubic feet

Ri is the reduction factor for insulation (Ri = 1 if no insulation)

You can learn more about pressure regulators in tank blanking applications and connect and interact with other pressure regulator experts in the Regulators group in the Emerson Exchange 365 community.

The post Tank Blanketing Pressure Regulation Calculations appeared first on the Emerson Automation Experts blog.

Tank Blanketing Pressure Regulation Calculations

Jim Cahill — Fri, 05 Jan 2018 20:30:26 GMT

What is unclear to me is a few things in the comparison table:

The second column in the table suggests there is a focus on alcohols in the 6th edition, but I have not been able to determine what specifically this refers to. Would you be able to point out, or copy me what specifically about alcohols warrants special attention?

In it the third column states that volatile liquids one just doubles the outbreathing volumetric displacement. This does not state whether this also accounts for streams that are at the bubble point at a higher pressure, which will flash entering the lower pressure tank. Am I correct that I add the flashing load to the total if it would occur concurrently? And if those were mutually exclusive displacements, one would size based on the greater of the two conditions?

Steve responded:

The reference to alcohols in the table was meant to simply point out that the original standard was created primarily around petroleum tank contents. By extending the focus to alcohols, other markets applications are also addressed, including chemical.

Regarding outbreathing due to Filling, here’s how the standard specifically addresses it:

Nonvolatile Liquids – products with vapor pressure equal to or less than 5.0 kPa (0.73 psi)

The outbreathing volumetric flow rate (Vop) is:

Vop = 8.02 x Vpf

where Vpf is the maximum volumetric filling rate of nonvolatile liquid, expressed in US gallons per minute

Volatile Liquids – products with vapor pressure greater than 5.0 kPa (0.73 psi). The flow of volatile liquids into a tank will result in higher outbreathing flow (compared to the same inflow with a nonvolatile liquid) due to changes in liquid-vapor equilibrium.
The outbreathing volumetric flow rate Vop is:

Vop = 16.04 x Vpf

where Vpf is the maximum volumetric filling rate of volatile liquid, expressed in US gallons per minute

Flashing Liquids – can cause the venting requirement to be many times greater than the volumetric inflow of the liquid. Flashing will occur when the vapor pressure of the entering stream is greater than the operating pressure of the tank. For products that can flash due to high temperature or because of dissolved gases (e.g. oil spiked with methane), perform an equilibrium flash calculation and increase the outbreathing venting requirements accordingly.

In addition to Filling, there is also the Thermal component. Thermal outbreathing (Vot) is:

Vot = 1.51 x Y x Vtk^0.9 x Ri

where Y is a factor for latitude (0.32 if below 42 deg latitude; 0.25 if between 42 and 58 deg latitude; 0.2 if above 58 deg latitude)

Vtk is the tank volume, expressed in cubic feet

Ri is the reduction factor for insulation (Ri = 1 if no insulation)

The post Tank Blanketing Pressure Regulation Calculations appeared first on the Emerson Automation Experts blog.

Tank Blanketing Pressure Regulation Calculations

Jim Cahill — Fri, 05 Jan 2018 19:30:00 GMT

What is unclear to me is a few things in the comparison table:

The second column in the table suggests there is a focus on alcohols in the 6th edition, but I have not been able to determine what specifically this refers to. Would you be able to point out, or copy me what specifically about alcohols warrants special attention?

In it the third column states that volatile liquids one just doubles the outbreathing volumetric displacement. This does not state whether this also accounts for streams that are at the bubble point at a higher pressure, which will flash entering the lower pressure tank. Am I correct that I add the flashing load to the total if it would occur concurrently? And if those were mutually exclusive displacements, one would size based on the greater of the two conditions?

Steve responded:

The reference to alcohols in the table was meant to simply point out that the original standard was created primarily around petroleum tank contents. By extending the focus to alcohols, other markets applications are also addressed, including chemical.

Regarding outbreathing due to Filling, here’s how the standard specifically addresses it:

Nonvolatile Liquids – products with vapor pressure equal to or less than 5.0 kPa (0.73 psi)

The outbreathing volumetric flow rate (Vop) is:

Vop = 8.02 x Vpf

where Vpf is the maximum volumetric filling rate of nonvolatile liquid, expressed in US gallons per minute

Volatile Liquids – products with vapor pressure greater than 5.0 kPa (0.73 psi). The flow of volatile liquids into a tank will result in higher outbreathing flow (compared to the same inflow with a nonvolatile liquid) due to changes in liquid-vapor equilibrium.
The outbreathing volumetric flow rate Vop is:

Vop = 16.04 x Vpf

where Vpf is the maximum volumetric filling rate of volatile liquid, expressed in US gallons per minute

Flashing Liquids – can cause the venting requirement to be many times greater than the volumetric inflow of the liquid. Flashing will occur when the vapor pressure of the entering stream is greater than the operating pressure of the tank. For products that can flash due to high temperature or because of dissolved gases (e.g. oil spiked with methane), perform an equilibrium flash calculation and increase the outbreathing venting requirements accordingly.

In addition to Filling, there is also the Thermal component. Thermal outbreathing (Vot) is:

Vot = 1.51 x Y x Vtk^0.9 x Ri

where Y is a factor for latitude (0.32 if below 42 deg latitude; 0.25 if between 42 and 58 deg latitude; 0.2 if above 58 deg latitude)

Vtk is the tank volume, expressed in cubic feet

Ri is the reduction factor for insulation (Ri = 1 if no insulation)

The post Tank Blanketing Pressure Regulation Calculations appeared first on the Emerson Process Experts blog.

Bulk Liquids Storage Pressure Control and Overfill Prevention

Jim Cahill — Wed, 06 Sep 2017 19:54:53 GMT

You only have to watch accident investigation videos such as the U.S. Chemical Safety Board’s Filling Blind video to understand the importance of pressure control and overfill prevention strategies for storage tanks in oil & gas liquids production, refining and distribution of petroleum products.

This is precisely the subject of the next webinar in the Bulk Liquids Storage Terminals webinar series which will take place on Thursday, September 14 at 1pm CDT. The webinar, Tank Pressure Control and Overfill Prevention will be hosted by Emerson’s Michael Calaway and Magnus Johansson.

Michael will open and describe conditions occurring during product storage and movement in which tanks increase or decrease pressure levels. These conditions can create increased risk for explosion or implosion. Tank in-breathing is when the vapor space cools down and/or when liquid is pumped out. This lowers the tank pressure – and the tank needs to breathe in. Out-breathing is when the vapor space heats up and/or when liquid is pumped in. This raises the tanks pressure – and the tank needs to breathe out.

Tank blanketing and vapor recovery regulators with flame arrestors, pressure-vacuum relief valves (PVRVs), emergency vents and tank hatches help to provide solutions for reliability, protection and in accordance with pressure venting guidelines such as API 2000 and ISO 28300. Poor pressure control also can lead to excessive nitrogen gas tank blanketing usage, excessive tank maintenance activity, and oxygen ingress potentially affecting product quality.

Overfill conditions, as highlighted in the USCSB video, are a risk which must be mitigated. Magnus will share how modern tank gauging and overfill prevention solutions help to minimize this risk. Having accurate and continuous control of the contents within the tanks enables faster transfers, better tank utilization, fewer visual inspections, and longer intervals between proof tests.

Per the industrial insurance broker, Marsh, tank overfills occur once every 3,300 filling operations. Level measurement technology as evolved from manual to continuous radar-based measurements. The API 2350 overfill prevention guidelines describe the minimum requirements required to comply with modern best practices. It complements safety practices such as using safety instrumented systems (SIS) designed in accordance with the IEC 61511 global safety standard.

Join the webinar and bring your questions for Michael and Magnus to learn more about pressure control and the different options for reducing overfill risk including level switches, radar gauges and 2-in-1 radar gauges for tanks with only one opening and requirements for SIL 2 and SIL 3 safety risk reduction applications.

Other webinars in this series include:

Terminal Automation Solutions – Recording Available
Presenter: Mike Stappert
Management and Information Processing for Terminals – Recording Available
Presenters: Ramon Badell and Gerry Snow
Reduce Uncertainty in Product Transfer – Recording Available
Presenter: Marc Buttler
Optimize Product Movement and Logistics – September 21
Presenter: Dan Myers
Improve Inventory Management – September 28
Presenter: Lance Berry

You can connect and interact with other pressure management and tank gauging experts in the Regulators and Tank Gauging groups in the Emerson Exchange 365 community.

The post Bulk Liquids Storage Pressure Control and Overfill Prevention appeared first on the Emerson Automation Experts blog.

Bulk Liquids Storage Pressure Control and Overfill Prevention

Jim Cahill — Wed, 06 Sep 2017 19:54:53 GMT

Other webinars in this series include:

Terminal Automation Solutions – Recording Available
Presenter: Mike Stappert
Management and Information Processing for Terminals – Recording Available
Presenters: Ramon Badell and Gerry Snow
Reduce Uncertainty in Product Transfer – Recording Available
Presenter: Marc Buttler
Optimize Product Movement and Logistics – September 21
Presenter: Dan Myers
Improve Inventory Management – September 28
Presenter: Lance Berry

You can connect and interact with other pressure management and tank gauging experts in the Regulators and Tank Gauging groups in the Emerson Exchange 365 community.

The post Bulk Liquids Storage Pressure Control and Overfill Prevention appeared first on the Emerson Automation Experts blog.

Bulk Liquids Storage Pressure Control and Overfill Prevention

Jim Cahill — Wed, 06 Sep 2017 19:54:53 GMT

Other webinars in this series include:

Terminal Automation Solutions – Recording Available
Presenter: Mike Stappert
Management and Information Processing for Terminals – Recording Available
Presenters: Ramon Badell and Gerry Snow
Reduce Uncertainty in Product Transfer – Recording Available
Presenter: Marc Buttler
Optimize Product Movement and Logistics – September 21
Presenter: Dan Myers
Improve Inventory Management – September 28
Presenter: Lance Berry

You can connect and interact with other pressure management and tank gauging experts in the Regulators and Tank Gauging groups in the Emerson Exchange 365 community.

The post Bulk Liquids Storage Pressure Control and Overfill Prevention appeared first on the Emerson Process Experts blog.

Managing Natural Gas Distribution Networks Pressure and Flow Rates

Jim Cahill — Wed, 05 Jul 2017 20:25:46 GMT

The role of natural gas in the global energy mix continues to expand as it displaces coal and nuclear power as a baseload source of energy for electrical power generation. It is also an energy source for heating and cooking in many homes.

Emerson’s Sergio Pasquali describes the role of smart skids in the natural gas distribution network in this 3:32 YouTube video, The Solution for Tomorrow Energy Systems. It is distributed through pipelines through pressure reducing and metering stations along its path from producer to consumer.

The supply and distribution chain for natural gas and other forms of energy grows more complex as other sources of renewable energy is added into the energy supply mix. Smart skids help to address this changing mix by performing real-time pressure and flow profiling and allow operators to make changes remotely to handle changing conditions along the pipeline network.

Predictive capabilities in the instrumentation help to spot issues early to allow them to be addressed before they lead to safety- or reliability-related issues. Distribution pressure levels can also be optimized to minimize greenhouse gas emissions along the pipeline network. Precise odorant injection helps add the smell necessary to detect leak conditions.

Watch the video and visit the Emerson website to learn more about pressure management and odorant systems. You can also connect and interact with other pressure regulation and management experts in the Regulators group in the Emerson Exchange 365 community.

The post Managing Natural Gas Distribution Networks Pressure and Flow Rates appeared first on the Emerson Automation Experts blog.

Managing Natural Gas Distribution Networks Pressure and Flow Rates

Jim Cahill — Wed, 05 Jul 2017 20:25:46 GMT

The post Managing Natural Gas Distribution Networks Pressure and Flow Rates appeared first on the Emerson Automation Experts blog.

Managing Natural Gas Distribution Networks Pressure and Flow Rates

Jim Cahill — Wed, 05 Jul 2017 20:25:46 GMT

The post Managing Natural Gas Distribution Networks Pressure and Flow Rates appeared first on the Emerson Process Experts blog.

Pressure Relief Valve Fugitive Emissions Testing

Jim Cahill — Fri, 23 Jun 2017 21:14:00 GMT

Earlier this week, the Valve World Americas Expo & Conference convened in Houston, Texas. This gathering provides an opportunity for flow control industry professionals to share experiences, insights and to collaborate to resolve common challenges.

Emerson’s Dr. Amr Gado, D. Emile Tezzo, and Calvin Deng prepared a presentation, Pressure Relief Valves Fugitive Emissions Testing which was given by Amr at this conference.

As defined by Wikipedia, “Fugitive emissions are emissions of gases or vapors from pressurized equipment due to leaks and other unintended or irregular releases of gases, mostly from industrial activities.”

Amr opened the presentation speaking about the importance of effectively reducing and managing fugitive emissions. Globally, more and stricter regulations are being released and enforced. Companies want to comply not only to meet these regulations but to build their Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reputations.

Valves are one of the sources of these fugitive emissions and an important place to look for improvements. There are many industry standards and specification to help meet the regulations. Some include:

ISO 15848-1 & 15848-2
Industrial valves – Measurement, Test and Qualification Procedures for Fugitive Emissions
Shell MESC 77-300 and 77-312
Procedure and Technical Specification for Type Acceptance Testing of Industrial Valves Fugitive Emissions Production Testing
API 622 and 624
Type Testing of Process Valve Packing for Fugitive Emissions Type Testing of Rising Stem Valves Equipped with Graphite Packing for Fugitive Emissions

Amr noted that the function, geometry and inherent design of pressure relief valves (PRVs) are different from inline valves in that they are self-contained (no stem) and self-actuated. The challenge is how to apply fugitive emissions concepts to these devices, since no widely-adopted standards exist.

He highlighted an initiative to start with existing standards for manual valves and adapt them to suit the unique nature of PRVs. This involved creating new test procedures. The scope of this effort was to develop these test procedures for direct spring valves (conventional and thermal relief) and pilot-operated valves.

The original test procedure for inline valves involved pressure cycling and temperature cycling between minimum and maximum design limits and actuating the valve at the end of a specified cycle.

PRV thermal signature testing was performed and helped determine that not the whole valve is subject to the same temperature. The modified test procedure to perform PRV fugitive emission testing involved apply heat and cold only the inlet which was most affected by temperature changes. Temperature cycling was performed between the upper limit design range to cryogenic ranges and back to room temperature. Pressure was applied at the outlet of the spring valves. The valves are not actuated but one mechanical adjustment at room temperature and pressure was allowed as it was with the in-line valves.

Measurements were taken to identify any leak paths with a mass spectrometer leak detector. Acceptance criteria were:

Class A: 1.78 E-9 x gasket OD (mm)
Class B: 1.78 E-8 x gasket OD (mm)
Leakage above Class B is unacceptable

Amr noted the design elements that make a PRV fugitive emission compliance. These included proper O-ring/groove design, proper bolt torque, and gasket seals and material porosity and density.

From a design process standpoint, the workmanship to assure threaded connections with proper cleaning and taping. This workmanship required processes for tight control and repeatability.

You can connect and interact with other pressure regulation specialists in the Regulators group in the Emerson Exchange 365 community.

The post Pressure Relief Valve Fugitive Emissions Testing appeared first on the Emerson Automation Experts blog.

Regulators - Blog (no longer active)

Wirelessly Monitoring Tank Thief Hatches to Avoid Regulatory Fines

Stabilizing Pressure Regulator Performance

Stabilizing Pressure Regulator Performance

Optimizing Pressure Relief Valve Lifecycle Management

Optimizing Pressure Relief Valve Lifecycle Management

Tank Blanketing Pressure Regulation Calculations

Tank Blanketing Pressure Regulation Calculations

Related Posts

Tank Blanketing Pressure Regulation Calculations

Related Posts

Bulk Liquids Storage Pressure Control and Overfill Prevention

Bulk Liquids Storage Pressure Control and Overfill Prevention

Bulk Liquids Storage Pressure Control and Overfill Prevention

Managing Natural Gas Distribution Networks Pressure and Flow Rates

Managing Natural Gas Distribution Networks Pressure and Flow Rates

Related Posts

Managing Natural Gas Distribution Networks Pressure and Flow Rates

Related Posts

Pressure Relief Valve Fugitive Emissions Testing