Best Practices in the Allocation, Commissioning, and Maintenance of Ultrasonic Gas-Leak Detectors
- Edward Naranjo (General Monitors) | Gregory Neethling (Gassonic A/S)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Projects, Facilities & Construction
- Publication Date
- December 2011
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 205 - 210
- 2011. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 4.3.4 Scale
- Detector coverage, Leak rate, Leak simulation, Ultrasonic gas leak detection
- 1 in the last 30 days
- 232 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 10.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 30.00|
Ultrasonic gas-leak detection (UGLD) is gaining broader acceptance in the oil and gas industry as a means for detecting combustible-gas leaks. UGLD responds to high-pressure leaks by measuring the airborne ultrasound emitted, which when detected by the sensor provides a measure that is proportional to the leak rate. Principal advantages of the technology are that it does not require gas to be transported to the detector and it provides coverage for a relatively large area, up to 20 m in radius, suggesting that UGLD is suitable for detecting gas releases in open, well-ventilated sections of offshore platforms.
Despite such advantages, the location criteria and commissioning and routine-maintenance procedures for UGLD are not as well understood as those for conventional gas detectors. A reason might be that UGLD requires the establishment of an ambient ultrasonic background-noise level to decide the alarm level and assist with selection of optimal location, a requirement that has no parallel with point IR or catalytic sensors. Location of ultrasonic gas-leak detectors is also based on identifying the potential sources of leaks and taking into account acoustic reflections and interferences caused by continuous or short-time-scale background ultrasonic noise.
Such newness might be enough to give some would-be users pause. They may believe that UGLD is for people with high technical competence or that mapping, commissioning, and maintenance are best left to UGLD-equipment manufacturers. Experience by one of the authors of this monograph suggests the contrary. UGLD, for its reliance on ultrasound as a proxy for a gas leak, is a simple concept to understand. Over the course of more than 3,000 installations during the last 10 years, offshore-platform personnel have developed best practices that reduce the time and cost required for installing and commissioning ultrasonic gas monitors and that ease the burden on maintenance. In this report, we examine several of these procedures and highlight the simplicity of installation and maintenance of this method of gas detection.
|File Size||2 MB||Number of Pages||6|
ANSI/ISA-84.00.01-2004 - Part 1 (IEC 61511-1 Mod), Functional Safety:Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industry Sector - Part 1:Framework, Definitions, System, Hardware and Software Requirements. 2004.Research Triangle Park, North Carolina: ISA.
Attenborough, K. 2007. Sound Propagation in the Atmosphere. In SpringerHandbook of Acoustics, ed. T.D. Rossing, Chap. 4, 113-147. New York:Springer.
DEP 184.108.40.206:2002--Fire, Gas and Smoke Detection Systems. 2002.The Hague, The Netherlands: Shell GSI.
Gruhn, P. and Cheddie, H.L. 2006. Safety Instrumented Systems: Design,Analysis, and Justification, second edition. Research Triangle Park, NorthCarolina: ISA.
Hazardous Installations Directorate, Offshore Division (HID-OSD). 2004.Fire and Explosion Strategy, Issue 1. London, UK: Health & SafetyExecutive (HSE).
Hazardous Installations Directorate, Offshore Division (HID-OSD). 2007.Acoustic leak detection. HID Semi Permanent Circular SPC/TECH/OSD/05, Health& Safety Executive (HSE), London.
Hohn, J. 2010. Safety System Design Considerations. Oral presentation givenat the ISA Instrumentation 2010 Expo, Carson, California, USA, 18 February.
ISA-TR84.00.07-2010, Guidance on the Evaluation of Fire, Combustible Gasand Toxic Gas System Effectiveness. 2010. Research Triangle Park, NorthCarolina: ISA.
Marszal, E.M. and Scharpf, E.W. 2002. Safety Integrity LevelSelection--Systematic Methods Including Layer of Protection Analysis.Research Triangle Park, North Carolina: ISA.
Naranjo, E. 2008. Selection and Use of Ultrasonic Gas Leak Detectors.Proc., ISA 54th International Instrumentation Symposium, PensacolaBeach, Florida, 5-8 May, 287-296.
Naranjo, E. 2009. Hydrogen Gas Detection: Combining Detection SystemsImproves Safety. Hydrocarbon Processing 88 (3): 45-47.
Naranjo, E. and Baliga, S. 2009. Expanding the Use of Ultrasonic Gas LeakDetectors: A Review of Gas Release Characteristics for Adequate Detection.International Gases & Instrumentation 3 (6): 24-29.
Naranjo, E. and Neethling, G. 2008. Safety in Diversity: The Advantages ofTechnology Diversification in Gas Monitoring Safety. Hydrocarbon Engineering13 (5): 102-108.
Naranjo, E., Neethling, G.A., Baliga, S., and Plummer C.D. 2011.Estimating Ultrasonic Gas Leak Detection Coverage for Significant Leaks.Hydrocarbon Processing 90 (1): 57-60.
Raichel, D.R. 2006. The Science and Applications of Acoustics, secondedition. New York: AIP Series in Modern Acoustics and Signal Processing,Springer-Verlag.