Oil & gas


TÜV SÜD National Engineering Laboratory is a world-class provider of


technical consultancy, research, testing and programme management services. Part of the TÜV SÜD Group, the organisation is also a global centre of excellence for flow measurement and fluid flow systems and is the UK’s Designated Institute for Flow Measurement. In this article, Gordon Lindsay, technical lead at TÜV SÜD NEL, discusses the power of condition- based monitoring in the oil and gas industry


The power of condition-based monitoring P


rimary and secondary instrumentation, which use smart transmitter technologies, are becoming increasingly popular in the oil and gas industry. Such devices can transmit big data sets over industrial networks relating to process values of the device’s primary function (fluid flow measurement), as well as diagnostic information that could potentially be used to assess device performance or gain useful secondary information on the process stream. Historically, this data has been used by


metering technicians and commissioning engineers for maintenance and quick checks, to ensure that the device is performing as expected before integration into a facility SCADA system. Many facilities also use the diagnostic values for simple range checking and alarming to indicate when a given parameter has moved out of acceptable conditions. Such information can alert facility operators to potential problems, enabling targeted investigation and preventative maintenance. There is now an increasing interest within the oil and gas industry to assess and log these


42


diagnostic process values. This employs software packages that use machine learning and advanced mathematical modelling techniques to automatically interpret device performance by identifying correlations between diagnostic parameters across multiple sensors and process control equipment. Such a system gives end users access to a new level of facility performance analysis and therefore has the potential to streamline decision making with regards to production and maintenance spending. A time-based calibration (TBC) of devices,


such as flow meters, means that they are potentially taken out of service unnecessarily, wasting time, effort and money. There is therefore a financial and operational desire to move towards a system which embraces condition-based calibration (CBC). A CBC schedule has the potential to reduce


operating costs by allowing facilities to develop more dynamic operating patterns that are based on continuous automated diagnostic analysis of facility and meter performance. By logging key meter diagnostic values in tandem with standard device outputs and comparing


them to known baseline conditions, it is possible to determine whether a flow meter is operating within specification. Additionally, with enough historical information on a specific device, it is possible to predict data calibration drift over time. However, there are a number of potential


variables associated with a large production facility, such as valves, pipe bends, temperature and pressure effects. When this is combined with the variations in meter design, it becomes clear that implementing a reliable CBC system is no small task. This is currently one of the key reasons that time-based calibration (TBC) methods are still widely used in the oil and gas industry. Factors that are gradually increasing the


uptake of CBC-based facility maintenance patterns are the continued growth and adoption of cloud-based computing and data storage, as well as affordable computing power required for complex modelling and prediction. The standardisation of digital communication protocols, as well as individual manufacturers supporting the integration of their devices into cross platform packages,


October 2019 Instrumentation Monthly


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82