×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

(OP)
Hi, I would like to know for incoming oil wells and gas wells, which are having two phase flow, will the pipeline be governed by B31.4 (liquid transport) or B31.8 (gas transport).

Thanks for the help.

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

Your choice.  In the houston area some ethane lines are B31.8 and some are B31.4 both operating at 1400 psig and 60F.  I have even taken a line that was built and operated under 31.8 and converted it on paper to 31.4.  We asked the DOT and they said just make the change and let them know so they could rearrange our inspections.

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

An interesting and frustrating question.  I would look extremely closely at the scopes of both 31.4 and 31.8.  I am going to stick my neck out to get somebody to respond.  You might have difficulty with both as I have done. (Not in the USA).  Some believe B31.8 is clearly not applicable.  31.4 is more vague depending on whether you want to support or oppose the argument. I believe it is down to interpretation and definitions of particular wording by whoever you are trying to persuade.  For B31.8 you might want to look at 802.12 especially paragraph f).
(I don't have 31.4 in front of me so I can't quote the paragraph).  One thing is for sure - don't do a thing until everybody including the independent inspector's dog has signed up in blood.  Also consider the intent behind the codes and how this ties into your service.  Why are allowable stresses higher for pipeline codes? Fluids with low corrosion rates, low risk of damage due to location and burial etc.    


RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

There are a lot of ways to skin this chicken:  
- Count the wells that were permitted as oil and the wells permitted as gas and go with the one with the most wells.
- Calculate mass flow rate of liquids and gases from the two streams and go with the biggest mass flow rate.
- Calculate the sales value of the two streams and go with the one that contributes the most value.

B31.8 is more forgiving of liquid in gas lines than B31.4 is about gas in liquid lines so you might weight the decision in favor of gas.

None of these is "right" and none of them is "wrong".  My approach would be to pick a justification, write a memo to file explaining the reasoning, and get on with it.

David

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

        FOR INCOMING OIL & GAS LINES ONSHORE
               
The answer is.... NEITHER.

B31.4 and B31.8 DO NOT even apply to gathering systems.

Notice the title of B31.8

             Now check the scope.

Quote:


B31.8 Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
B31.8 s802.12 (f)
wellhead assemblies, including control valves,  flowlines between wellhead and trap or separator, offshore patform production facility piping, or casing and tubing in gas or oil wells.

<check the definiitions>

803.2 Piping Systems
803.21 Transmission system is one or more segments of pipeline, usually interconnected to form a network, which transports gas from a gathering system, the outlet of a gas processing plant, or a storage field to a high or low-pressure distribution system, a large-volume customer, or another storage field.

803.211 Transmission line is a segment of pipeline installed in a transmission system between storage fields.

B31.8 s802.12 (i)
liquid petroleum transportation piping systems

B31.8 s803.23  Gathering system is one or more segments of pipeline, usually interconnected to form a network, that transports gas from one or more production facilities to the inlet of a gas processing plant.  If no gas processing plant exists, the gas is transported to the most downstream of (1) the point of custody transfer of gas suitable for delivery to a distribution system or (2) the point where accumulation and preparation of gas from separate geographic production fields in reasonable proximity has been completed.

803.231  Gathering lie is a segment of pipeline installed in a gathering system.


How please explain how does B31.8 include "Gathering Systems" when it specifically denotes a difference between "Transmission and Distribution systems" and "Gathering Systems" in regards to the title of the code?

You will find similar wording in B31.4

If you have further doubts, you can check the legal requirements in the US, CFR Title 49, Parts 192 for gas and 195 oil pipelines here,
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?sid=ca3d88e943c9b3619f96ac3d22f1c200&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title49/49cfrv3_02.tpl%20
Look at the Scope of each Part.
192 (Gas)
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=b9148e03326b5bc6df6fe097d42338b7&rgn=div8&;view=text&node=49:3.1.1.1.3.1.9.1&amp;idno=49
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=b9148e03326b5bc6df6fe097d42338b7&rgn=div8&;view=text&node=49:3.1.1.1.3.1.9.5&amp;idno=49
194 (Oil)
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=b9148e03326b5bc6df6fe097d42338b7&rgn=div8&view=text&amp;node=49:3.1.1.1.6.1.21.1&amp;idno=49

Gathering systems NOT INCLUDED.
Its not only your choice, you don't have to use any code except what is required by your company policy.

          FOR OFFSHORE GATHERING SYSTEMS   
          DOT CFR TITLE 149 DO NOT APPLY
                SEE MMS REGULATIONS

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

BigInch,
You are more or less correct, but if housing moves in to encroach on a gathering system then 49 CFR 192 becomes applicable and if you did not build the system to a code then it is really expensive to retrofit to the code.  This is happening a lot these days as groups of mobile homes set up on top of old gathering systems.  I've done several over the last few years and by the time you do the calcualtions, take the system down for a new static test, and x-ray accessible welds DOT has forced you into actions that result in the pipe looking like it was built to a code.

There is no downside to building gathering piping to code, you have to have some basis for design decisions and B31.8 is better than most.

David

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

In my case above, we applied all the way the the secretary of the department of transportation to clarify and received no responce.  Just pick a standard and live with it.  If you pick B31.3 (I've seen that too), then live with it.  If the line becomes jurisdictional to DOT as zdas04 says, you'll have to live with what you did, including the recreation of all missing documents and inspection.  

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

Encroachment happens to transmission lines too, which changes the design factor.  We just learn to live with it and deal with it in advance, if you can, or on a as needed basis, if you can't.  Its all the same.

I know pleanty of privately owned gathering systems that just install pipe....whatever pipe... with a preference for dented pipe....NO DESIGN AND NO CODES... no hydrotest... no inspection... no corrosion control program, no nothing.  Its really scarey how thin a wall thickness you can get with 100% smys and a little corrosion.  Talk to them about code and you'll get run off with a shotgun.

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

BTW, personally I'm in favor of no difference for gathering systems.  They all should be regulated under the CFRs.  I've seen what happens when they're not.

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

OK BigInch, lets go ahead and shutin about 23% of all domestic production because a 10 mcfd line at 10 psig is not up to some code and the consumer will suffer, not the companies.  The risk for gathering lines is so small, its not worth the added expense, so the wells will be shut in.

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

Well first, I don't believe that 23% of domestic production comes from 10 mcfd-10 psig gathering lines. You wouldn't be able to walk between all the large diameter lines anywhere in Tx.  The specific cases I was thinking about were 1440 psig lines w/ 10-100 MMCFD, some with 4.5% H2S, and which I know can afford to be built to code.  Even if they were built to code now, all benefit would be lost when they are not operated to standards.  Nobody even knew where half of those lines were or where they went.  A B31 design doesn't help much when there is no corrosion control program, no inspection, no maintenance and all relief valves are locked off.  If you're happy with 2 or 3 explosions each week... or BP Alaska getting shut down and you and the rest of the consumers paying for the oil price rise due to the shortfall ... why not?

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

If encroachment happens on a transmission line that has been built to B31.8 and inspected per "good engineering practices" then you simply have to redo the calcs with a different design factor.  This generally results in lowering the line's MAWP which often isn't a show stopper.

On the other hand an old GCNM line that was built with uncoated, dented, thin wall pipe was a major problem to bring up to DOT specifications.  Nearly impossible in fact.

David

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
www.muleshoe-eng.com
Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

The harder I work, the luckier I seem

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

The 23% represents all the feeder lines into the big one you know about.  Think about all the production lines too that were built with 2 3/8" upset tubing or discarded 7 inch casing.  Like you, I wonder how some companies can operate 1000 psig lines as non jurisdictional, but they did it by shutting down field dehydrators and called it raw gas.  OH GREAT, now you have wet gas at 1000 psig.  My point is at some combination of flow, pressure, location, and what not, the risk to reward isn't enough to replace or build new lines to meet DOT codes.

BTW, would you want a DOT regulated pipeline operating at 2200 psi in your backyard, I've done that and I was still scared to death as that line went 200 yards from a high school....

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

Nope.  Worked for the producer.  The specific lines I refer to were directly off the 982 wells and a whole bunch in the gathering system from the Laredo Airport south down to the La Perla Ranch, behind the Casa Blanca Restrauant, eventually reaching about 50 miles south to Zapata.  When we got into the H2S, I didn't want to hang around for obvious reasons, so I got back on 59.. that time pointing NE.

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

BigInch has got my vote.  The next time I come under  pressure (ouch!) to accept 31.4 and 31.8 for wet sour service flowlines I know where to come.  

(Its strange that all the hot shot experts are able to redefine the scope of the Code and sit on the fence - leaving you on your own when you have to make a stand and say nuts.  Funny old world).

    

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

The scope of the codes are the easiest provisions to "change" to suit one's own purpose.  Since nobody ever reads those sections, the wool fits comfortably over the eyes.

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

But is there really a problem with expanding the scope?  I can see where contracting the scope would be a bad thing, but if a section of pipe simply is excluded from all of the codes what is wrong with picking one that is close and building to it?  It does add some construction cost but it also gives you a design basis that keeps the design engineer from having to make up his own construction standards.

David

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

Nothing at all.. as long as you know you're doing it, I guess, which implies you know where that code ends and where you might have to pick up another one.  I'd just say, if you use a code, know its limitations... all of them.



http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

Hence, each company needs to decide and can make the dicission based on risk versus cost.  Here's my favorite scenerio, Liquid pipelines must have block valves on each side of a river (ok body of water, swamp..) to reduce the risk of a spill.  What about ethane or propane, can they spill in a river?

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

Provided they are competent to do so.  IMO they're a lot that arn't.  Even if they do, they still must operate appropriately.  Also a lot that arn't.

The smart aleck answer to your question decastro is, "YES! If you design/build and permit to/under CFR 49 Part 194 / B31.4". They sure can.  The solution (?)... you'd better have those valves, or apply for a variance and waiver beforehand.

So... that's what regulations and codes don't do for you.

 

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

BTW, I have not designed a propane or ethylene pipeline, but think I would be tempted to design such a line to CFR 49/192/B31.8, even if it contained liquid inside, due to the compressed energy contained within and the increaed hazard radius created by vaporization of liquid during a major leak or rupture... if I'm not mistaken.  During the design process, I would check actual flowing conditions (including liquid surge pressures if applicable, although as I recall you said that, due to the low SG, they're not significant).  As I would already have a simulation set up for the pipeline steady state case anyway, I could easily (and would) check surge pressures to satisfy my own ignorance as well.

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

In practice, all propane/propylene lines are liquid and about 50% of the ethylene lines were liquid.  The fun part is when we tied our gas ethylene line MAOP 2260 into a gas line MAOP 2180, the TRRC just looked dumb founded, but it was two different companies interconnecting.  When we bought another line, then they got worried, so we changed our lines to liquid without the block valves on each side of the river and asked for the waiver.  Thats when we got no responce from the FEDS.  The TRRC accepted the change because liquid lines actually require more inspections than gas lines.  ALSO, with gas lines you are suppose to either odorize them or gas sniff them, we convinced the TRRC that ethylene was odorized naturally (gave them a wiff) and got out of walking the line when it was gas. We flew the line every two weeks too because the gas line had a propylene line 5 feet away that was ours.

The point.... do whats right because its right, not because of a rule

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

My simple understanding is that the scope of any code is set to suit its design philosophy and safety factors.  For example, B31.3 has much lower allowable stresses than the pipeline codes because it is intended for above ground, at risk from damage, dodgy pipe supports, wind, fatgue, in close proximity to other pipe, etc.  The safety factors for the pipeline codes are lower because they are underground and should be protected as well as handling clean and low-corrosive liquid, different levels of material control, fabrication requirements, inspection etc.  My view is that rescoping any code is only be reasonable if it follows the original design intent.      

The old adage is horses for courses.  Rescoping a thorough bred race horse to pull a cart might be possible if you know what you are doing. Then again, if you don't you might just get a damn good kicking and dragged through the s**t at high speed.    

RE: ASME B31 for two phase pipeline

I believe the difference you mention is not so specifically AG/UG related, but rather to allow a wider variation in applications, which is to say, greater range of operating temperatures, number of operating cycles and higher overall average stress profiles, at more or less the same level of overall risk as a pipeline.  

http://virtualpipeline.spaces.msn.com

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources