TABLE 1: LEVEL TECHNOLOGIES IN INTERFACE SERVICE WITH THICK EMULSIONS TECHNOLOGY
MEASUREMENT
TDR MULTIPHASE DETECTOR (GENESIS)
TDR-based with concentrated top- down and bottom-up signals for multiphase measurement
GUIDED WAVE RADAR
TDR-based with signal concentrated down the probe reflecting off the liquid level(s) when impedance changes are detected
DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE
Inferred interface measurement near the average density of the emulsion layer
Provides density profile or level
NUCLEONIC (GAMMA/
RADIOMETRIC)
outputs by detecting the amount of radiation through the varying specific gravity (SG) emulsion layer
DISPLACER TRANSMITTERS
Buoyancy-based capable of tracking interface of two immiscible liquids when displacer is fully submerged
MAGNETO- STRICTIVE
Buoyancy-based floats weighted for different liquid SGs; particularly useful for bottom of thick emulsion layer
Detects level based on capacitance
CAPACITANCE
changes between low and high dielectric liquids
TOMOGRAPHY
Detects conductivity differences using electrodes at various segments down a probe
• • • •
TOTAL LEVEL
TOP OF EMULSION
BOTTOM OF
EMULSION SAND / SEDIMENT STRENGTHS Thick emulsion layers • • • • • • • • • • • •
No calibration or density dependency
Lower upfront cost relative to profilers Buildup detection
Low total cost of ownership
Clean, distinct interfaces
No calibration or density dependency Buildup detection
Most widely used level technology / familiarity in total level applications
Relatively economical upfront price
Non-contact options depending on vessel size
Thick rag layers with non- uniform densities
Can potentially profile sand
• • • • • • • • • Recommended • • • • • Review 6 / EMULSION IN THE FIELD: The Genesis of TDR Multiphase Level Measurement • • • •
Historical familiarity Steady output
Capable of measuring interfaces with higher dielectric on top
Thick emulsion layers
Capable of measuring interfaces with higher dielectric on top
Multi-float configurations
Historical familiarity for interface measurement
Economical upfront price No density dependency
No density dependency Tolerant of buildup
Can potentially detect sand/solids for full profile
• Not Recommended
Thick and dynamic emulsion layers
Heavy buildup
Thickness of layer affects density causing inaccuracy
Total level assumed constant in interface service
Most expensive upfront price
Additional regulations and maintenance costs
Potentially wall buildup
Radiation safety concerns
Density dependent Moving parts
Tracks near middle / average of emulsion layer
Interface or total level
Density dependent Moving parts
Minimum separation required by physical float dimensions
Calibration required for total level or interface
Recalibrations or errors due to dielectric shifts
Buildup / coating Expensive upfront price Higher power
consumption and price point compared to GWR
WEAKNESSES
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 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93
