You are on page 1of 4

HIPPS Black Magic or Science?

Recovering reserves at an acceptable capex investment for flowline and riser


installation presents significant challenges for deepwater projects.

High-integrity pressure protection systems (HIPPS) offer the potential to improve


recoverability. These systems provide pressure breaks between subsea systems that
are rated to full shut-in pressure and the flowline and riser, rated to a lower pressure.

The use of HIPPS is poorly understood and implemented, often causing additional
hazards and affecting reliability and uptime. Here using project examples Theon
Managing Director, Steve Rowbottom, asks why the industry is finding the use of
HIPPS so hard and offers advice on how they can be used to best effect and value.

Example 1

This design example was tabled during a HAZOP as a solution to protect the
separators from over-pressure due to a packed flowline. In summary the issues faced
and problems identified were:

Complex design 11 flowlines connecting into each separator


The Logic Solver needs to know which separator each flowline is lined up to at
all times
HIPPS valves closed by 2oo3 High Pressure in individual flowline in inlet to
first stage separator, inlet to test separator (up and downstream of heat
exchanger)
HIPPS valve also closed by 2oo3 High Level in each separator
ESDV in HIPPS valve bypass will reduce the reliability of the system
No credit for layers of protection taken
Original design intent was not available
This was a retrofit to an existing installation that had been in operation for more
than 20 years.
Example 2

This example relates to a new field and riser, connected to an existing separator. The
proposal uses the Riser ESDV and an additional ESDV as the valves to be closed by
the HIPPS:

RiserESDV trips on process shutdown (ESD2)


Additional ESDV trips on ESD1
Over time valves will wear and allow leakage

In this example, one failure scenario to be protected against is the Riser ESDV
spuriously opening with packed line pressure behind it. This scenario removes one of
the final elements from the design and therefore the system cannot meet the required
SIL.

Also, to achieve fast closure times, the ESDVs will need an additional actuator,
requiring significant structural support (for 12 valves).

Why problems occur with HIPPS


Our considerable experience in this field has highlighted a number of key problems in
the design and use of HIPPS.

Lack of clear design thinking. There is a tendency to wrongly believe it is easier


to add a protection system than to design the problem out. This can be exacerbated by
a this is what we did last time approach to the problem and the use of inappropriate
existing equipment such as ESDVs

Lack of design review. This is a particular problem in schedule-driven projects, made


worse by a lack of critical assessment of design often until HAZOP.

Lack of understanding of risk leading to inappropriate SIL assignment. In our


experience this is usually too high, as the findings of SIL Assessment Workshops and
LOPAs are not rigorously checked.

Lack of understanding of levels of protection. HIPPS were originally conceived to


remove the need for relief valves, which drives the perception that SILs should be
high.

Lack of understanding of on-going work to maintain HIPPS. Particularly in


relation to testing frequency (which is often driven by inappropriate SIL) and to
performance standards.

Pay now vs Pay Later Lack of holistic lifecycle thinking. A HIPPS system will
sometimes offer a lower capital cost for a project due to the possibility to use lower
pressure systems downstream of the HIPPS valves. However these reduced capital
costs are often out-weighed by the increased operational expenditure due to
maintenance and the increased risk and loss of production of performance verification
testing.

There is also a tendency for high pressure trips provided for process design reasons to
become de-facto HIPPs systems when this was never the original design intent.

How we believe it could be done better:

Although complex and challenging, HIPPS designed and used properly represent a
valuable solution. There are a number of key points we would urge companies to
consider in their design and use:

Whatever happened to Inherent Safety?

Design the problem out


Dont bolt on protection systems

Set design pressures sensibly

Relief valves/flare systems

Take credit for layers of protection


Consider early in the design process
Dont blindly copy previous designs
Consider other options

Above all we would urge companies to seek advice. At Theon we have the experience
and expertise to help. Our team of experienced process and technical safety engineers
will challenge the design thinking and examine the proposed solution to ensure that
the resulting design is appropriate, fit for purpose and offers the best long term
solution to the issue of pressure protection of equipment.

About the authors

A trained and highly experienced chemical engineer, Steve Rowbottom has worked
for and run a number of consultancies providing expertise to the energy industry.

He is one of the co-founders of Theon, established as an independent consultancy to


the oil and gas industry, serving owners, operators and contractors.

Ian Wallis, Theons Director of Safety, Risk & Reliability, has a broad spectrum of
experience encompassing oil & gas, chemicals and nuclear reprocessing.

Ian has significant experience of operating at all levels of company management both
as a consultant and an employee gained through working with contractors, owners and
operators both in the UK and overseas.

You might also like