Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
flare capacity and flare radiation 1
- Thread starter wd1980
- Start date
LittleInch
Petroleum
Depends on what flow rate the flare radiation was calculated / simulated on?
Not many details here....
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
Not many details here....
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
- Thread starter
- #3
@LittleInch
we have a brownfield project,we have requested the contractor to update the flare radiation report, the flare capacity is not exceeded, I need to know even if the flare capacity still within capacity , if the flare radiation can be affected?
we have a brownfield project,we have requested the contractor to update the flare radiation report, the flare capacity is not exceeded, I need to know even if the flare capacity still within capacity , if the flare radiation can be affected?
Can by affected, can be unaffected depending on calculations as radiation depends on many factors and capacity is only one of many. You are able to conduct a preliminary calculation by yourself, it is not overcomplicated.
-
1
- #5
LittleInch
Petroleum
No one here can say as we don't have access to any data or reports or anything really.
Flare "capacity" might be quite different to the actual capacity used to generate the flare radiation report.
Or maybe it's all ok?
Type of gas, mix of gases and flowrate can all change the radiation.
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
Flare "capacity" might be quite different to the actual capacity used to generate the flare radiation report.
Or maybe it's all ok?
Type of gas, mix of gases and flowrate can all change the radiation.
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
- Thread starter
- #6
LittleInch
Petroleum
IMHO, Yes it is as you're not answering the pertinent question which is:
Was the flowrate used in the radiation and vapour cloud disposal report equal to the design capacity or not.
We can't see the report and I'm struggling to believe updating the report is either a costly or time consuming thing to do and then no one can ever question the design.
If the radiation report was undertaken using a flow of say 50% of the "design" capacity then run it at twice the flow and buildings might burn down when the flare goes off or people injured.
Also analysis methods have changed over the years. How long ago was this previous report?
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
Was the flowrate used in the radiation and vapour cloud disposal report equal to the design capacity or not.
We can't see the report and I'm struggling to believe updating the report is either a costly or time consuming thing to do and then no one can ever question the design.
If the radiation report was undertaken using a flow of say 50% of the "design" capacity then run it at twice the flow and buildings might burn down when the flare goes off or people injured.
Also analysis methods have changed over the years. How long ago was this previous report?
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
- Thread starter
- #8
Was the flowrate used in the radiation and vapour cloud disposal report equal to the design capacity or not.
Yes equal
We can't see the report and I'm struggling to believe updating the report is either a costly or time consuming thing to do and then no one can ever question the design.
Cost
If the radiation report was undertaken using a flow of say 50% of the "design" capacity then run it at twice the flow and buildings might burn down when the flare goes off or people injured.
100% design capacity, the new equiment has been added, staggered blowdown has been set in order to not exceed the design capacity
Also analysis methods have changed over the years. How long ago was this previous report?
since 2017
Yes equal
We can't see the report and I'm struggling to believe updating the report is either a costly or time consuming thing to do and then no one can ever question the design.
Cost
If the radiation report was undertaken using a flow of say 50% of the "design" capacity then run it at twice the flow and buildings might burn down when the flare goes off or people injured.
100% design capacity, the new equiment has been added, staggered blowdown has been set in order to not exceed the design capacity
Also analysis methods have changed over the years. How long ago was this previous report?
since 2017
LittleInch
Petroleum
OK.
Now that is clear then it would appear that you are not exceeding the design flowrate which has been used previously.
Quite recent so I would say you do not need to revise the radiation analysis.
The real issue is who is going to authorise this? You need to talk to them to get their buy in, but it would seem reasonable not to repeat it based on your answers above.
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
Now that is clear then it would appear that you are not exceeding the design flowrate which has been used previously.
Quite recent so I would say you do not need to revise the radiation analysis.
The real issue is who is going to authorise this? You need to talk to them to get their buy in, but it would seem reasonable not to repeat it based on your answers above.
Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.
georgeverghese
Chemical
Permissible radiation flux ( which can be obtained from Operating Company standards or from the relevant API) will be different depending on the cause of the flaring event. So even if the design capacity is not exceeded, the permissible radiation flux rate at points of interest will depend on whether the cause of this new peak rate is the same as that for the design case. Also note the points of interest for the permissible flux rate may differ depending on the cause of flaring event.
Same goes for dispersion analysis.
The contractor has to provide suitable justification for not carrying out a radiation study, and it cannot be just a simple case of whether design case flare capacity is exceeded or not. Sometimes, operating philosophy may have also changed since 2017. Sometimes, new equipment may have been installed after 2017 which may see high radiation loads. Tread carefully.
Same goes for dispersion analysis.
The contractor has to provide suitable justification for not carrying out a radiation study, and it cannot be just a simple case of whether design case flare capacity is exceeded or not. Sometimes, operating philosophy may have also changed since 2017. Sometimes, new equipment may have been installed after 2017 which may see high radiation loads. Tread carefully.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question