LACT Unit Base Volume versus Base Prover Volume

Update: I should have also mentioned that Rossella will be conducting an October 15 webinar, Optimizing Wellpad Custody Transfer of Liquid Hydrocarbons. If you’re in the onshore oil & gas industry, you’ll want to register and bring your custody transfer questions.

The custody transfer process exchanging oil & gas production between business entities is a critical part of the overall production process. I received this question to an earlier post, How to Prove Your LACT Meter:

I was wondering if you could explain the difference between Base Volume and Base Prover Volume when proving meters.

In that post, Emerson’s Rossella Mimmi shared how provers were used to compare a known volume against the Lease Automatic Custody Transfer (LACT) unit’s flow meter output, where the ratio between the prover reference volume and the meter reading is the meter factor, which is used to correct the meter reading.

I shared this question with Rossella and asked her if she could help me explain the difference. She explained:

Rossella Mimmi  Pipeline Oil & Gas Industry Manager Flow Solutions Group

Rossella Mimmi
Pipeline Oil & Gas Industry Manager
Flow Solutions Group

I think the question refers to how the meter factor is calculated, dividing the prover reference volume by the base volume. Basically two quantities are compared, one is the volume actually measured by the flow meter, the other one is a reference known volume that is the prover’s one.

This is a prover’s operating principle:

Daniel-48in-Pipe-ProverThe prover consists of a length of pipe whose internal volume has been very accurately determined; the displacer is forced to travel at the same velocity as the liquid in the pipe. During meter calibration the meter and the prover are connected in series so that the volume swept out by the piston or sphere can be compared with the volume registered by the meter whilst liquid is flowing steadily from one to the other. As the displacer enters the calibrated pipe section it trips a detector, thereby initiating a count of pulses from the meter under calibration. Continue Reading

Enhancing Industrial Process Reliability using Nanotechnology

Robert Ferris, Ph.D. Strategic Planner

Robert Ferris, Ph.D.
Strategic Planner

Author: Robert Ferris, Ph.D.

Nanotechnology-enabled products are offering real value in equipment reliability

Reliability is the hot-topic in the automation world right now. Nearly every major company, ranging from BHP Billiton, BP, or BASF, has identified process reliability as essential for long-term productivity and profitability. Everybody wins when you improve plant reliability; there is increased production, safety, and lower operating costs. This means more revenue, more margin, and happier workers. Isn’t that nice.

Figure 1. Reliability is both a production a safety concern. (photo1 link, photo 2 link)

Figure 1. Reliability is both a production a safety concern. (photo1 link, photo 2 link)

Reliability, however, is a hard fought battle to gain sustainable improvements. Usually a step change in reliability requires a systematic change in how the plant operates, including; cross-disciplinary initiatives, operation practices, maintenance scheduling, inventory management, documentation, and even equipment suppliers. Continue Reading

How Good is Your Level Control?

So asks Emerson’s Lou Heavner in a thought-provoking post in the DeltaV track of the Emerson Exchange 365 community.

Lou opens:

Lou Heavner Systems/Project Engineering Consultant

Lou Heavner
Systems/Project Engineering Consultant

Is it good enough? Is it too good? Do you even know? Should you care?

Well yes, you probably should care. Most level processes are non-self-regulating or integrating processes. Everything you probably learned about tuning PID self-regulating loops like flow, pressure, and temperature does not work quite the same on integrating processes. So it is quite common for level loops to be tuned “by the seat of the pants” or trial and error. Furthermore, most level loops are tuned to achieve good setpoint response and yet most level loops have one setpoint (typically 50% of the tank height) and rarely is the setpoint ever changed. It is usually more important to consider the response to load disturbances. Even if and sometimes especially when the level is tightly controlled, regardless of how it was tuned, it is likely that the underlying disturbance and resulting variability is amplified rather than attenuated. That is never a good thing.

Lou notes that control loops are meant to control low-frequency disturbances. High frequency variability such as some flow loops can be reduced through the use of surge tanks or other vessels in the process. Lou writes: Continue Reading

Improving Reliability in Power Generation: A Competitive Advantage

Douglas Morris Director of Marketing, Mining & Power Industries

Douglas Morris
Director of Marketing, Mining & Power Industries

Author: Douglas Morris

Recently, the consulting arm of Black & Veatch published its annual strategic directions report for the US utility industry. In 2014 “reliability” was again identified as the top industry concern. This report discusses how technology will play an important role for utilities as they look to improve upon asset reliability.

The industry has always had some play with this discipline; in fact, most plants had staffs dedicated to the practice of reliability. As utilities cut back staffing over time, though, many of these departments disappeared and the focus was suddenly absent. When most fossil plants ran as originally intended, this didn’t pose a large problem. Times have changed and now with the growing number of renewables along with gas plants being cycled on a regular basis, former baseload plants are increasingly running in load following mode, subjecting these units to greater thermal cycling and more stress on mechanical equipment.

As the B&V report states, technology can be the tool that helps utilities achieve better reliability. Per the report: Continue Reading

Improving Technology Transfer by Earlier Adoption of Standards and Software Platforms

In 2011, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) published their Guidance for Industry – Process Validation: General Principles and Practices. A article, A Framework for Technology Transfer to Satisfy the Requirements of the New Process Validation Guidance: Part 2 shared the impact on the Life Sciences industry:

In the life of any drug product, the technology transfer of a process is a complex matter, made more complicated by the new definition of the Process Validation (PV) guidance issued by FDA in January 2011.

Zuwei Jin Senior Life Sciences Consultant

Zuwei Jin
Senior Life Sciences Consultant

Manufacturing Execution Systems (MES) and ISA standards can help pharmaceutical and biotech manufacturers streamline the technology transfer process throughout the drug development lifecycle. Emerson’s Zuwei Jin noted that solving the challenges associated with this complexity has received more and more attention among engineering companies and equipment and instrument suppliers.

Zuwei believes that early adoption of MES, as defined in ISA-95 (S95), a standard addressing the enterprise control system interface, and ISA-88 (S88), a standard addressing batch process control, provide a framework for implementing not only the technical but also the regulatory and business processes required to support the tech transfer and expansion throughout the drug development cycle. It is a key element in introducing a scalable, modular, hardware independent platform for drug development and data management. Continue Reading