首页> 外文OA文献 >Reliability Assessment of Subsea X-mas Tree Configurations
【2h】

Reliability Assessment of Subsea X-mas Tree Configurations

机译:水下X-mas树配置的可靠性评估

摘要

The focus of this thesis is to provide input for choosing the optimal X-mas Tree (XT) configuration for a subsea production system.The subsea XT is used to direct, regulate, and stop the flow from a well. These functions and some more are achieved through several valves, a subsea control module, and some sensors. The choke valve has the worst inherent reliability of the components on a XT. Because of this the choke valve is designed for easy retrieval. The choke valve could also be placed in a separate flow control module. The subsea control module is the XT component with the second worst reliability. Both these components are modules because it is good method of improving system maintenance of unreliable components.The main XT configurations are the vertical XT, the horizontal XT, and the deepwater vertical XT. The main differences are how the main valves are placed and how the tubing with tubing hanger is installed. In subsea reliability it is common to use mean time to failure as a performance indicator and the exponential distribution to model lifetimes.A Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability (RAM) analysis is frequently used to analyze the subsea production system. RAM analysis software use reliability block diagrams, flow diagrams, and Monte Carlos next event simulation to simulate the lifetime and the availability of the subsea production system.Two main sources of reliability data for subsea components are OREDA and SubseaMaster. When applying component reliability data in a RAM analysis, this often give a lower availability than experienced in real life. This could relate to how, from when, or from where the data are collected. Expert judgment can be used to calibrate the data so that the model fit the real life scenario. The sensitivity and uncertainty of assumptions and the analysis should also be considered. The model and analysis can then be used to optimize the reliability of the design.In OREDA the vertical XT has a lower inherent reliability than the horizontal XT. The low reliability may relate to the large share of older generation vertical XTs installed. Understanding the quality of the data is difficult and decisions should not be taken solely on the basis of unprocessed data. A key difference between the XT configurations is the maintainability of the tree and the tubing. Wells that are expected to have many tubing failures should be equipped with a horizontal XT and a vertical XT should be on a well with few tubing failures. This is mainly due to the order of which the components are installed as the HXT allows the tubing to be retrieved without retrieving the tree and vice versa for the VXT.A failure on the wellhead connector will have a large impact on the availability. Interventions on the horizontal XT are done with a blowout preventer. The height of both these components puts more strain on the wellhead than the other XT configurations. Tripping out tubing is one of the more dangerous operations in a well; this combined with the extra strain on the wellhead may cause bad consequences. This may give an advantage for the VXT in a risk perspective.A horizontal XT with a flow control module will have improved maintainability, but this adds potential leak paths and makes the design more complex. The vertical XT and deepwater vertical XT are easier to retrieve and may be better off with a simpler design without the flow control module.The deepwater vertical XT is easier to maintain than a vertical XT. It may be a good choice of configuration for wells with a medium amount of tubing failures. The DVXT is more complex and has more leak paths than the other two configurations and may have a higher infant mortality because of this. OneSubsea help their customers choose XT configuration with a tree selector tool. Ranking the importance of different aspects give an output of how the XT configurations fit this ranking. This gives a good indication of which configuration to choose for a well.CAPEX and OPEX are important factors in the decision process.A RAM analysis would give an overall look on the reliability and life cycle cost of the subsea production system. RAM analysis software is able to process the many varying factors that impact the optimal XT configuration for a subsea production system and should be the foundation of the decision process.
机译:本文的重点是为海底生产系统选择最佳的X-mas树(XT)配置提供输入。海底XT用于引导,调节和停止井的流动。这些功能和更多功能是通过几个阀门,一个海底控制模块和一些传感器来实现的。在XT上,节流阀的固有可靠性最差。因此,节流阀设计为易于取回。节流阀也可以放置在单独的流量控制模块中。水下控制模块是可靠性第二差的XT组件。这两个组件都是模块,因为这是改善不可靠组件的系统维护的好方法。主要的XT配置是垂直XT,水平XT和深水垂直XT。主要区别在于主阀的放置方式以及带有油管悬挂器的油管的安装方式。在海底可靠性中,通常使用平均失效时间作为性能指标,并使用指数分布来建模寿命。可靠性,可用性和可维护性(RAM)分析经常用于分析海底生产系统。 RAM分析软件使用可靠性框图,流程图和Monte Carlos下次事件仿真来模拟海底生产系统的寿命和可用性。海底组件的可靠性数据的两个主要来源是OREDA和SubseaMaster。在RAM分析中应用组件可靠性数据时,这通常会导致可用性低于实际应用中的可用性。这可能与如何,从何时或从何处收集数据有关。可以使用专家判断来校准数据,以使模型适合实际情况。假设和分析的敏感性和不确定性也应予以考虑。然后可以使用模型和分析来优化设计的可靠性。在OREDA中,垂直XT的固有可靠性低于水平XT。低可靠性可能与安装的较老一代垂直XT占很大比例有关。了解数据的质量非常困难,并且不应仅根据未处理的数据来做出决策。 XT配置之间的主要区别是树和管道的可维护性。预期会有很多油管故障的油井应配备水平XT,而垂直XT的油井应具有很少的油管故障。这主要是由于组件的安装顺序,因为HXT允许在不取回树的情况下取回油管,而对于VXT则反之亦然。井口连接器发生故障将对可用性产生重大影响。水平XT的干预是通过防喷器完成的。与其他XT配置相比,这两个组件的高度给井口带来了更大的压力。跳出油管是井中较危险的操作之一。这加上井口的额外压力可能会导致严重的后果。从风险的角度来看,这可能会给VXT带来好处。带有流量控制模块的卧式XT将具有更好的可维护性,但这会增加潜在的泄漏路径,并使设计更加复杂。垂直XT和深水垂直XT更容易取回,如果没有流量控制模块,可以通过更简单的设计获得更好的效果。深水垂直XT比垂直XT更易于维护。对于中等数量的管道故障,它可能是配置的不错选择。 DVXT比其他两种配置更复杂,泄漏路径更多,因此,婴儿死亡率更高。 OneSubsea通过树选择器工具帮助其客户选择XT配置。通过对不同方面的重要性进行排名,可以得出XT配置如何适合此排名的输出。这很好地表明了选择哪种井的配置。CAPEX和OPEX是决策过程中的重要因素。RAM分析可以全面了解海底生产系统的可靠性和生命周期成本。 RAM分析软件能够处理影响海底生产系统的最佳XT配置的多种因素,并且应成为决策过程的基础。

著录项

  • 作者

    Wanvik Petter Gullhav;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2015
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号