2010 ST 31 Eng PDF

XIX International Gas Convention AVPG 2010, May 24th - 26th Caracas, Venezuela
REDESIGN OF FLARE SYSTEMS AT OFF-SHORE PLATFORMS

AS A WAY OF MINIMIZING PROCESS RISKS
PABLO GRAMAJO
Engineering Office Flargent S.A.
Page 1
SUMMARY
Offshore platforms are characterized by the compact design of its facilities of

reception and processing of oil and natural gas, in order to use as much of the limited
available space as possible. Also, it is fundamental to bear in mind the personnel and
facilities security.
Thus, any system of final disposition and flaring of residual gases should have
restrictions both of space and maximum allowed values for thermal radiation and
noise emission; the selection of models and correlations for calculation must be very
careful, in order to obtain a safe design that does not imply a great amount of
overdesign that could result in an uneconomical investment; at the same time it
should allow a maximization of production.
This work is focused in the verification of 6 existing platforms, in which due to an

increase in production it was necessary to analyze the maximum caudal of gas that
can be flared.
The analyzed facilities include high pressure flare systems (sonic flares), low
pressure flare systems (subsonic flares), multiple stages of simultaneous flaring with
stacks in parallel, effect of watershields, etc. Also, it has been considered continuous
and emergency gas emissions.
From the obtained results, recommendations have been made in order to, if
necessary, adapt the flare system in order to fulfill the limit values recommended by
regulations and accepted industry practice for thermal radiation, noise, pressure drop
and exit gas velocity.
Page 2
INTRODUCTION
Amongst process units, the platforms offshore for gas extraction and treatment stand
out because there must be performed a high economic investment in a limited space
(in comparison with other units of equivalent production); as a result its components,
being these a part of gas extraction installations at submarine bed or one of different
skids for processing the raw gas, must be confined in an area of few square meters
(distributed in one or several levels).
On the other hand the installations must be able to face adverse climatological and
marine conditions, and that must be taken into account for any structure to be
mounted in its interior; the isolation respect to other facilities, being it far away from
the coast, implies very strict accident control measures to be followed.
In resume, the principal characteristics of these installations are the following ones:
High production in limited space
Need to resist adverse climatological and marine conditions
Isolation and need to adopt strict accident control measures
Page 3
Figure 1 P-52 Platform (Petrobras)
As in any process unit, the operation in offshore platforms is associated with the need
to eliminate gaseous vents, being these continuous or from an emergency event.
The elimination of gaseous effluent must take into account the following restrictions:
Minimization of the risk for the personnel and the facilities
Minimization of environmental impact
Use of the available space in the facilities
Economic considerations: the elimination process should not be onerous from

an economic point of view, simultaneously it must be compatible with a
maximization of the production.
Page 4
From the previous paragraphs it can be seen that the design of a flare system for an
offshore platform should be performed as much precise as possible, for avoiding
great overdesigns and at the same time for guaranteeing the safety of personnel and
facilities.
FLARE SYSTEMS IN OFFSHORE PLATFORMS
Roughly, a flare system consists of the following elements:
Flare collectors: pipes that receives the gas from the primary discharge
element (safety or relief valve, blowdown valve, etc.) and extends up to the
elements of final disposal.
Knock-out drum: vessel for the separation from the gaseous flow of any liquid
that could be retained.
Flare: final element of the system; on its end the flaring gas is burned, in order
to liberate to the environment carbon dioxide and water as final products; its
length and total height must be enough to minimize the effects of thermal
radiation and noise at the process facility level.
According to the gas pressure in the flare collector, flare systems classifies in:
High pressure flare systems: the gas arrives to the flare base with a pressure
between 5 and 10 kg/cm2g, in the top it reaches sonic flow (Ma = 1, being Ma the
Mach number, ratio between gas velocity and sound velocity at the same pressure
and temperature conditions.
Page 5
Low pressure flare systems: the gas arrives to the flare base with a pressure
between 0 and 1 kg/cm2g; the flare operates at subsonic gas velocity (Ma <1, this
value generally varies between 0,2 and 0,8).
An offshore platform typically possesses both flare systems (having separated

collectors, manifolds and flares for high or low pressure discharges), being these able
to operate simultaneously.
The high or low pressure flare can have one or several stages in parallel (generally
up to four stages). As gas flow increases, stages are successively enabled, up to
design flow (maximum flow), in which all stages are operatives.
Figure 2 Scheme of a multistage flare control system
Page 6
DESIGN AND VERIFICATION OF A FLARE SYSTEM
The conceptual design of a flare system implies determining or establishing, for the
maximum flaring flow, the following:
Diameter of the flare stack and the tip (in parallel multistage flares, it is
necessary to determine the diameter of each stage), so that flaring is
performed in a suitable hydrodynamic condition.
Flare length / total height, for guaranteeing maximum values of thermal

radiation and noise in the facilities, below the permissible levels.
Dimensions (diameter and length) of knockout drum (if there is more than one
flare system, it should be dimensioned a high pressure and a low pressure
knockout drum)
Flare collector diameter (high and low pressure system), in order to being
compatible with available pressure drops given by the resulting backpressures
at safety or blowdown valves.
Materials to be used (according to the characteristics of flared gas and the

pressure and temperature conditions)
Ignition system (direct or front flame system ignition)
Other characteristics (air or water vapor assistance against smoke formation,

water shields, etc.)
Page 7
The verification of an existing flare system implies to determine if its dimensions are
appropriate for the treatment of the maximum discharge flow (design flow). This work
is focused in the verification of existing flares.
Both in design and verification there must be taken into accout the restrictions related
to the gas discharge process and to the safety of personnel and facilities:
Maximum thermal radiation level: maximum value attainable at process facilities

grade and in any place where there could be continuous or eventual human
presence; this value determines the flare length and its minimum height.
Maximum pressure drop: this value depends on the available backpressure at flare
collector, which determines collector and flare diameter.
Mach number: the API Standard 521 recommends maximum and minimum values
for the Mach number in subsonic flares, in order to mantain a stable flame on the flare
top end.
Maximum noise level: maximum value of the attainable sonorous pressure level in
any place where there could be continuous or eventual human presence.
SCOPE AND DESCRIPTION OF THE PERFORMED WORK
To a greater platform production correspond a greater need for flaring; the scope of
the performed work has been to determine, for existing platforms, the maximum gas
flow that could be flared taking into account restrictions of thermal radiation and noise
level, pressure drop and gas velocity; the more suitable physical models and
calculation software have been selected in order to obtain values with a reasonable
precision level.
Page 8
This study has been made for 6 platforms (FPSO MLS, P-35, P-40, P-52, P-53 and P-
54), with different flare system characteristics (diameter, height, stage quantity, etc.).
The thermal radiation and noise level calculations have been made for 10 receptor
points on each platform; each point was selected by its closeness to the flare, its
personnel occupation level or its importance in the gas extraction and treatment
process.
The following premises have been taken into account:
The flare system simulation software Flaresim, version 2.1, distributed by the
company Softbits, have been used for calculation procedure
Events of continuous and emergency discharge have been taken into account
The possibility of simultaneous flaring of both the high and the low pressure
flare system has been considered
In calculations of thermal radiation level, the contribution of solar radiation has

been considered
Both the presence and absence of watershield has been considered
Calculations have been performed for different meteorological conditions (wind

speeds and directions)
Air or water vapour assistance against smoke formation has not been
considered
The sequence for the work development is the following:
Page 9
Selection of a thermal radiation emission model
Establishment of the most suitable correlation for calculation of F parameter

(fraction of the total heat that is emited from the flare by radiation)
Selection of the noise emission model
Establishment of limit values to be considered in the verification
Selection of the receptor points to be analyzed in each platform
Establishment of the meteorological conditions to be considered
Input of the necessary information in the flare simulator
Performing of the calculation runs for different flaring events and conditions; if
it would be necessary, to realize several determinations using a trial and error
process up to obtain the final thermal radiation or noise level value
Presentation of results
Conclusions and recommendations
MODEL FOR THERMAL RADIATION EMISSION
The different available models varies in complexity, according to how conservative

would be the obtained result; each model proposes a determinate hypothesis about
flame behavior and shape, resulting from the gas combustion.
Page 10
The models that were considered are the following ones:
Models of thermal radiation punctual source
Model of Integrated Punctual Source (IPS)
Model of Integrated Diffuse Source (IDS)
Model of Integrated Mixed Source (IMS)
a) Models of thermal radiation punctual source
The simplest and more commonly used model is that proposed in the API Standard
521 (Pressure-relieving and Depressure Systems), which considers that all heat is
emited from a punctual source (the flame average point).
The calculation is based on the Hajek and Ludwig equation; considering the minimal
distance ( D ) from the flame emission point up to the object where thermal radiation
level ( K , energy for unit of time and area) is calculated:
.F .Q
K= (1)
4. .D 2
Where:
Q : Total heat resulting from gas combustion
Page 11
This value depends on the gas flow ( W ) and on its low heating value ( LHV ):
Q = LHV .W (2)
F : Fraction of total energy emited from the flare that is transmitted by radiation;
0 < F < 1.
This is an empirical parameter that depends principally on the flared gas composition,
its flow, the used tip design (subsonic or sonic) and the smoke presence.
: Fraction of total energy transmitted by radiation not absorbed by environment

(transmisivity); 0 < < 1
This parameter takes into account the heat absorption capacity of surrounding air. For
conservative calculations it is considered = 1 .
In its basic form, this model considers that the emisor point is on the flame base. A
more realistic approach considers that this point is on the flame half; to apply this
hypothesis it is necessary to complement the model with a method that makes
possible the determination of the flame length. To accomplish that, the API Standard
521 presents graphs that correlate information of flame length obtained from field
tests.
The Brzustowski and Sommer method (1973) constitutes a variant of the API method
that takes into account the angle between the normal line to the surface on which the
thermal radiation level is estimated, and the straight vision line to the flame center;
this method is mentioned in the API Standard 521 as an alternative to determine the
flame center location.
Page 12
b) Integrated Punctual Source Model (IPS)
In this model the flame is splitted into elements, each one being a punctual source;
the thermal radiation emited by the flame is the summation of each punctual source
contribution.
.F .Q n li
K= . (3)
4. .L i =1 Di2
Where:
i = 1,2,K n : Flame element (element 1, element 2, and so on up to element n )
L : Total flame lenght
n
li : Lenght of flame element i ; L = l i
i =1
Di : Distance from the flame element up to the object where thermal radiation level is
calculated
K : Thermal radiation level (energy for unit of time and area)
Q : Total heat resulting from combustion of flared gas (formula (2))
F : Fraction of total heat emited by the flare that is transmitted by radiation

Page 13
To apply this method, the following hypotheses should be fulfilled:
The flame emits radiation uniformly in all its extension
The flame is long in comparison to its width, so it can be considered a linear

source
From these hypotheses can be seen that the flame is transparent to thermal radiation
and that a flame element does not interfere with each other.
c) Model of Integrated Diffuse Source (IDS)
This model assumes that flame is opaque, so thermal radiation emission is entirely
from its surface.
.F .Q n li .sen( i )
K = 2 . (4)
.L i =1 Di2
Where:
i = 1,2,K n : Flame element (element 1, element 2, and so on up to element n )
L : Total flame lenght
n
li : Lenght of flame element i ; L = l i
i =1
i : Angle between the tangent to the flame element i , and the straight vision line
from the flame center for element i up to the object where the thermal radiation
level is calculated
Page 14
Di : Distance from the flame element i up to the object where thermal radiation level
is calculated
K : Thermal radiation level (energy for unit of time and area)
Q : Total heat resulting from combustion of flared gas (formula (2))
F : Fraction of total heat emited by the flare that is transmitted by radiation

d) Integrated Mixed Source Model (IMS)
In this model it is applied a linear combination of results from IPS and IDS models
previously depicted.
K IMS = a.K IPS + (1 a).K IDS (5)
Where:
K IMS : Thermal radiation level resulting from applying the Integrated Mixed Source
method
K IPS : Thermal radiation level from Integrated Punctual Source Method
K IDS : Thermal radiation level from Integrated Diffuse Source Method
Page 15
a : Constant ( 0 < a < 1 ), whose value is obtained from correlating results obtained with
the IPS and IDS methods
e) Comparison between presented methods
The punctual source methods (of which the API and Brzustowski and Sommer
methods have been presented) has demonstrated to provide reasonable results at
relatively big distances from the flare; for this and for its simplicity they are extensively
used in the design of flare systems on onshore facilities.
On the other hand, for distances near to flare base these methods do not
appropriately predict radiation levels; therefore, they are not the best option to apply
on offshore platforms, as one of they characteristics is the little availability of space
and the closeness of process facilities to the area for final disposition of residual
gases.
For results obtained with multiple source models, field experience has demonstrated
that these methods provide reasonable values of thermal radiation levels of, with the
following features:
Integrated Punctual Source (IPS) and Integrated Diffuse Source (IDS) models
predict similar values for thermal radiation levels at great distances from flare
The Integrated Punctual Source (IPS) model tends to overestimate thermal

radiation levels nearby the flare
The Integrated Diffuse Source (IDS) model tends to underestimate thermal

radiation levels nearby the flare
Page 16
The target of the Integrated Mixed Source (IMS) model is to combine the two previous
methods, IPS and IDS, in order to obtain a better prediction in areas nearby to the
flare base.
From the previous paragraphs, the Integrated Mixed Source (IMS) model results the
most attractive, amongst the presented models, for developing the study at the 6
offshore platforms.
The calculation software determines the parameter according to the distance from
the flame center up to the object where thermal radiation level is calculated, and to
the relative ambient humidity. For the used correlation, the parameter value usually
varies between 0,8 and 0,9.
Taking into account the absence of additional information that could allow a more
precise modeling, for simulating how a watershield (waterfall for blocking and
diminishing the amount of radiated heat from the flare) mitigates thermal radiation
levels it has been established a value of 0,3 for the parameter.
The n value has been fixed in 20 flame elements, since using major values would
increase calculation time without any significant improvement in the calculated value.
The flame inclination is calculated solving exit gas velocity, wind velocity and flame
buoyancy vectors, while its length is calculated considering the total amount of heat
resulting from the combustion of the flared gas and of the tip type used.
Page 17
CORRELATION FOR CALCULATING THE F PARAMETER
The F value depends on the properties of the flared gas, on the gas flow regime in
the flare and on the tip constructive characteristics. Its estimation is fundamental for
obtaining reasonable values of thermal radiation levels.
a) Gas natural correlation
This correlation was developed specially for a natural gas flow of molecular weight
equal to 19; the F value depends on the exit gas velocity an the flare top end.
b) Kent method
This method, proposed in 1964, relates the F values to the gas low heating value;
the used formula is:
LHV
F = 0,2. (13)
900
Where:
PCI : Gas low heating value in BTU/Sm3 (standard conditions being at 14,7 psia
and 60 F)
The gas low heating value (for hydrocarbons) is correlated with its molecular weight:
LHV = 50.MW + 100 (14)
For a gas mixture:
Page 18
n
LHV = yi .LHVi (15)
i =1
Where:
MW : Gas molecular weight
LHVi : Gas low heating value of i component i in a gas mixture
y i : Gas molar fraction of i component in a gas mixture
,
The F values obtained varies from 0,2 for methane; 0,33 for propane; up to 0,55
for other hydrocarbons. The author provides neither experimental validation for
this method nor its interval of application; nevertheless, other authors report its
satisfactory application for flare systems design.
c) Tan method
This method, proposed in 1967, relates the F parameter to the flared gas
molecular weight:
F = 0,048. MW (16)
Where:
MW : Gas molecular weight
Page 19
This coterrelation throws the following F values: 0,2 for methane; 0,33 for
propane and 0,4 for major molecular weight hydrocarbons. The author provides
neither experimental validation for this method nor its interval of application.
d) Recommended values from API Standard 521
The API Standard 521 presents a table with F values for hydrogen, methane,
butane and natural gas (95 % of methane), obtained experimentally for different
burner diameters.
e) Cook method
In 1987 Cook proposed a method based in the assumption that the flame emit
radiation uniformly from its surface. The used equations are the following:
P
F= (17)
Q
P = E. A f (18)
Q = m.H (19)
From (17, (18) and (19) is obtained:
E. A f
F= (20)
m.H
Where:
Page 20
P : Total energy transmitted by radiation from the flame (W)
Q : Total heat liberated by gas combustion (W)
E : Emissive power (W/m2)
A f : Flame area (m2)
m : Gas mass flow (kg/s)
H : Heat of combustion (J/kg)
From adjustment with experimental data an average value of the emmisive power
( E ) of 239000 W/m2 has been obtained. Using this method the F values obtained
varies from 0,017 to 0,344.
f) General Pipe method
This method is based on the adjustment of results obtained with the Kent, Tan, Cook
and Natural Gas correlations, in a range of exit gas velocity and gas molecular
weight.
g) High Efficiency method
This method uses a proprietary interrelation of Flaresim software, which takes into
account the tip type (subsonic, sonic, etc.), the exit gas velocity, its molecular weight
and the component hydrocarbons grade of saturation.
Page 21
h) Comparison between methods to obtain the F value
Amongst the presented methods, the High Efficiencymethod obtains the less
conservating values for the F parameter, while the Natural Gas method proposes the
highest values.
For the purposes of this work, the High Efficiencymethod has been selected, since:
The tips used in the platforms are of recent installation and a correct design
has been considered for the different cases of flaring
The flared gases are in most cases paraffinic hydrocarbons with low molecular
weight, therefore its burning do not generate smoke.
MODEL OF NOISE EMISSION
The noise generated in a flare during the gas flowing and burning can be subdivided
in two components:
Combustion Noise: produced by combustion of gases in the flare top end
Jet noise: produced by the gas discharge
Each noise component will have a major influence in the total noise level value
depending on the flare type: in the low pressure flares (subsonics) the noise from gas
combustion prevails; in the high pressure flares (sonics) the jet noise prevails.
The following methods have been considered for noise level calculations:
Page 22
a) API method
This method is the simplest one; it is exposed in the API Standard 521 (Pressure-
relieving and Depressure Systems). It takes into account only the contribution of the
jet noise.
It is based on the following equation, in which the noise level is calculated as the
sound pressure level in decibels at a distance of 30 m from the gas discharge point to
the ambient:
L30 = L + 10. log(0,5.Wm .c 2 ) (6)
Where:
L30 : Sound pressure level at 30 m from the atmospheric discharge point, in decibels
L : Sound pressure level (in decibels), obtained from a graph of the norm API 521,
which correlates this value of L with the quotient between the pressure up-stream
from the end of the flare and the atmospheric pressure
Wm : Mass flow of gas (kg/s)
c : Sound velocity in the flared gas (m/s)
For other distances, in addition to the 30 m considered in the equation (6), the sound
pressure level is calculated this way:
L p = L30 20. log( r / 30) (7)
Where:
Page 23
L p : sound pressure level (in decibels) at a distance r
r : Distance from the source of noise (flare top end) (m)
b) Spectrum method
This method takes into account both combustion and jet contribution noise level. The
noise level is expressed as sound pressure level ( SPL ), in the following way:
P2
SPL = 10. log 2 (8)
P0
Where:
P : Sound pressure
P0 : Reference sound pressure (2.10-6 N/m2)
The sound pressure level can be expressed in decibels A (dB (A)), this is a weighted
scale that take into account the difference in sensibility of human audition at different
sound frequencies (in the range of human audible frequencies, the contribution of
average frequencies to the weighted total value is grater than in the case of lower or
higher frequencies). The noise frequency spectrum is divided in several bands of
octaves, from 63 Hz to 8000 Hz.
Combustion noise: it depends principally on the total heat emission in the flare tip
and on the tip design. The calculation is based on typical curves, depending on the tip
type (subsonic, sonic, etc.).
Page 24
For example, the following typical curve can be used:
Figura 1 Typical curve to determine the combustion contribution to sound pressure

level (Spectrum method)
Figure 1 establishes combustion sound pressure levels at a distance of 20 ft from the

sound source and for a total emited heat of 81 MMBTU/h
At other distances and for other values of emited heat, the sound pressure level is
corrected applying the following equation:
Page 25
Q 20
SPL = SPL1 + 10. log + 20 . log SPL A (9)
D
7
8,1 . 10
Where:
SPL1 : Sound pressure level obtained from Figure 1 (dB(A))
SPL A : Sound pressure level substracted from the total value due to atmospheric
attenuation (dB(A))
Q : Total heat emited by combustion of the flared gas (MMBTU/h)
D : Distance from the flame average point up to the position where the sound
pressure level is calculated (ft)
In the flare simulation software it is necessary to select a standard curve for

determining the combustion component of noise, or to input values of total heat
emited from flare versus sound pressure levels, for each used band of frequency.
Jet noise: it arises from the expansion of the gas flow at the flare end; its value
depends on the expanded gas kinetic energy and on its acoustic efficiency. The
following equation applies:
.u 2
PWL = .V . (10)
2
SPL = PWL 20. log D 0,49 SPLA (11)
where:
Page 26
PWL : Sound power level of the noise source
: Acoustic efficiency
V : Volumetric flow of flared gas
: Density of flared gas, downstream from the flare top end
u : Velocity of flared gas, downstream from the flare top end
D : Distance from the flame average point up to the position where the sound
pressure level is calculated (ft)
SPL A : Sound pressure level substracted from the total value due to atmospheric
attenuation (dB (A))
To determine the acoustic efficiency it is necessary to take into account the expanded
gas velocity and its flow regime (subsonic or sonic).
For subsonic flow, the acoustic efficiency is obtained from Figure 2, where it is
correlated with the ratio between gas velocity and sound velocity, both measured
downstream from the flare top end.
Page 27
Figura 2 Acoustic efficiency for subsonic flow
The adimensional parameter B is obtained from the following equation:
2
T
B= .
T
(12)
Where:
: Flared gas density, downstream from the flare top end
Page 28
: Flared gas density at athmosferical conditions
T : Flared gas temperature, downstream from the flare top end
T : Flared gas temperature at atmospherical conditions
For sonic flow, the acoustic efficiency is obtained from Figure 3, where it is correlated
with the ratio between the pressures upstream and downstream from the flare top
end:
Figure 3 Acoustic efficiency for sonic flow
Page 29
VALUES LIMIT FOR PARAMETERS
The limit values for each parameter involved in the calculation are the following:
a) Limits of thermal radiation
Emergency flaring (maximum): 4737 W/m2 (1500 BTU/h.ft2)
Continuous flaring (maximum): 1577 W/m2 (500 BTU/h.ft2)
Solar radiation level: 790 W/m2 (250 BTU/h.ft2)
The proposed limits are based on values from the API Standard 521, where the
thermal radiation levels that incide in human skin are related to times estimated for
reaching the pain threshold.
At a radiation level of as much as 1500 BTU/h.ft2 it is considered as factible to attend

to an emergency situation during two to three minutes, with personnel that does not
possess any special protection but that is provided with suitable work clothes and
basic safety elements. At a level of as much as 500 BTU/h.ft2 it is possible the
permanent presence of personnel without any special protection from thermal
radiation but with suitable work clothes and basic safety elements.
The given solar radiation level is also based on values proposed by the API Standard
521.
b) Limits of Mach number (subsonic flares)
The following values have been adopted:
Page 30
Emergency flaring (maximum): 0,7
Continuous flaring (maximum): 0,3
The API Standard 521 recommends, for low pressure systems design, to use a Mach
number of 0,5; nevertheless, it also mentions that major values could be acceptable if
the flare tip has a suitable design.
For continuous flarings, it is mentioned for the Mach number a value of 0,2; however
a value of 0,3 has been adopted as it is satisfactory according to the industrial
practice.
c) Limits of pressure drop in the flare
These values depend on the available backpressure downstream from safety or

blowdown valves, therefore they have been taken from the design specifications of
each platform. In most cases, the available pressure values in the stack base are the
following:
High pressure flare systems (maximum): 490 kPaabs (5 kg/cm2abs)
Low pressure flare systems (maximum): 115 kPaabs (1,17 kg/cm2abs)
d) Limits of sound pressure level
Emergency flaring (maximum): 100 dB(A)
Continuous flaring (maximum): 90 dB(A)
Page 31
Environmental sound pressure level: 60 dB(A)
The extreme values have been established from the flare system design
specifications of the platforms.
METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS TO BE CONSIDERED
The following meteorological conditions have been taken into account:
a) Wind speed
No wind presence
8,2 m/s
b) Wind direction
The flare flame approaches the process
The flare flame moves away from the process
Another wind direction, according to the considered platform
ANALYZED RECEPTOR POINTS ON EACH PLATFORM
The points of interest for observing thermal radiation and noise levels during a gas
flaring event can be different according to the platform that is considered, but in
general the following ones have been selected:
Page 32
Flare boom base
Operation modules: skids or equipment nearer to the flare base
Operation modules: skids or equipment nearer to the flare top end (top end of
towers, etc.)
Operation modules: other points of interest (for example, chemicals product

deposits)
Perforation tower platform
Top of perforation tower
Crane operation cabins
Platform extreme points, on the area where the flare system is located
Page 33
9
N
3
4
6 7 2 1 8 10
6
E
4
5
7
2,
8
1,
Figura 4 Observation points for thermal radiation and noise levels (P-53 Platform -
Petrobras)
Page 34
CALCULATION PROCEDURE
First of all the necessary system specifications must be loaded in the simulator, for
each defined case (continous or emergency emissions, different meteorological
conditions, etc.):
Flared gas information: gas composition or its bulk properties (molecular

weight, low heating value, Cp/Cv), gas temperature
Meteorological data: wind speed and direction, ambient temperature, ambient

relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, solar radiation level, background
sound pressure level, ambient transmisivity ( )
Information of each flare stack: ubication, length, angle with horizontal line
Information of each flare tip: type (subsonic, sonic, etc.), burner number, seal
type (fluidic or molecular), calculation method for the factor F , calculation
method for flame length, standard curve for calculation of sound pressure level
due to combustion (for the Spectrum method), length, angle with horizontal
line, exit diameter, stack diameter, flared gas flow
Receptor points information: coordinates of each point where the thermal

radiation and noise level is to be calculated
Calculation options: selection of the calculation method for thermal radiation

levels, selection of the position of the average point in each flame element and
number of these elements (for multiple source models), options for including
major detail in calculations (inclusion of solar radiation, inclusion of cooling due
to wind, etc.), selection of the calculation method for the sound pressure level.
Page 35
As soon as all the necessary information is loaded the calculation runs can proceed.
Since the flares can be of parallel multiple stages, the entire gas flow must be
distributed between the stages; it should be taken into account that, after the calculus
of the pressure drop on each stage, upstream the distribution manifold it is necessary
to obtain the same pressure value.
P1
P1 Stage 1
P2
P P2 Stage 2
P3
Flared gas P3
Stage 3
P4
P4
Stage 4
P1 = P2 = P3 = P4 = P
Therefore, different flow combinations must be proved in the stages up to obtain, with
a trial and error process, the same pressure at every stage beginning.
PRESENTATION OF RESULTS
The results can appear in a table or graphically in isopleths of thermal radiation and
sound pressure level, presented on a platform layout.
Page 36
3
4
6 7 2 1 8 1
Case 6 - Emergency
Watershield Yes
Wind speed 8.2 m/s

Approaching
Wind direction
flame
Figure 5 Example of thermal radiation level isopleths Plant view (P-53 Platform -
Petrobras)
Page 37
4
5
7 2,
8
1,
Case 6 - Emergency
Watershield Yes
Wind speed 8.2 m/s

Approaching
Wind direction
flame
Figura 6 Example of thermal radiation level isopleths Elevation view (P-53 Platform -
Petrobras)
Page 38
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
For each flaring event it was analyzed which is the limitant parameter for maximum
flow: thermal radiation or sound pressure level in the observed platform points, Mach
number (for subsonic flares) or flare pressure drop.
If the analyzed platform operates at present with a maximum flaring flow greater than
the maximum permissible obtained as a calculation result, it is recommended to
implement any of the following actions, according to economical or operative
possibilities:
To diminish the maximum flaring flow, modifying the process in order to achieve
this goal without compromising the production level
To adopt a system of watershield in order to diminish radiation levels
To replace flare tip by another that is suitable for the present levels of operation
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ANSI/API Standard 521 Pressure-relieving and Depressuring Systems - Fifth

Edition, January 2007
Flaresim User Manual
Heat radiation from flares Guigard, Kindzierski & Harper May 2000
Flare Radiation Estimated - McMurray, R. - Hydrocarbon Processing, Nov.

1982, pp. 175-181
Page 39

2010 ST 31 Eng PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2010 ST 31 Eng PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

XIX International Gas Convention AVPG 2010, May 24th - 26th Caracas, Venezuela

REDESIGN OF FLARE SYSTEMS AT OFF-SHORE PLATFORMS

Offshore platforms are characterized by the compact design of its facilities of

This work is focused in the verification of 6 existing platforms, in which due to an

High production in limited space

Need to resist adverse climatological and marine conditions

Isolation and need to adopt strict accident control measures

Figure 1 P-52 Platform (Petrobras)

Minimization of the risk for the personnel and the facilities

Minimization of environmental impact

Use of the available space in the facilities

Economic considerations: the elimination process should not be onerous from

FLARE SYSTEMS IN OFFSHORE PLATFORMS

Roughly, a flare system consists of the following elements:

An offshore platform typically possesses both flare systems (having separated

Figure 2 Scheme of a multistage flare control system

DESIGN AND VERIFICATION OF A FLARE SYSTEM

Flare length / total height, for guaranteeing maximum values of thermal

Materials to be used (according to the characteristics of flared gas and the

Ignition system (direct or front flame system ignition)

Other characteristics (air or water vapor assistance against smoke formation,

Maximum thermal radiation level: maximum value attainable at process facilities

SCOPE AND DESCRIPTION OF THE PERFORMED WORK

The following premises have been taken into account:

In calculations of thermal radiation level, the contribution of solar radiation has

Both the presence and absence of watershield has been considered

Calculations have been performed for different meteorological conditions (wind

The sequence for the work development is the following:

Selection of a thermal radiation emission model

Establishment of the most suitable correlation for calculation of F parameter

Selection of the noise emission model

Establishment of limit values to be considered in the verification

Selection of the receptor points to be analyzed in each platform

Establishment of the meteorological conditions to be considered

Input of the necessary information in the flare simulator

Conclusions and recommendations

MODEL FOR THERMAL RADIATION EMISSION

The different available models varies in complexity, according to how conservative

The models that were considered are the following ones:

Models of thermal radiation punctual source

Model of Integrated Punctual Source (IPS)

Model of Integrated Diffuse Source (IDS)

Model of Integrated Mixed Source (IMS)

a) Models of thermal radiation punctual source

Q : Total heat resulting from gas combustion

: Fraction of total energy transmitted by radiation not absorbed by environment

b) Integrated Punctual Source Model (IPS)

i = 1,2,K n : Flame element (element 1, element 2, and so on up to element n )

L : Total flame lenght

K : Thermal radiation level (energy for unit of time and area)

Q : Total heat resulting from combustion of flared gas (formula (2))

F : Fraction of total heat emited by the flare that is transmitted by radiation

: Fraction of total energy transmitted by radiation not absorbed by environment

To apply this method, the following hypotheses should be fulfilled:

The flame emits radiation uniformly in all its extension

The flame is long in comparison to its width, so it can be considered a linear

c) Model of Integrated Diffuse Source (IDS)

i = 1,2,K n : Flame element (element 1, element 2, and so on up to element n )

L : Total flame lenght

K : Thermal radiation level (energy for unit of time and area)

Q : Total heat resulting from combustion of flared gas (formula (2))

F : Fraction of total heat emited by the flare that is transmitted by radiation

: Fraction of total energy transmitted by radiation not absorbed by environment