You are on page 1of 13

OTC 23564

SS: Marlim 3 Phase Subsea Separation System: Controls Design


Incorporating Dynamic Simulation Work
R.M. Pereira, M.C.M.M. Campos, D.A. Oliveira, R.S.A. Souza, M.M. Calor Filho, R.C. Orlowski, D.G. Duarte, and
G.M. Raposo, Petrobras; C. Lillebrekke, D. Ljungquist, A. Carvalho, and M. Fares, FMC Technologies

Copyright 2012, Offshore Technology Conference


This paper was prepared for presentation at the Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston, Texas, USA, 30 April3 May 2012.
This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Offshore Technology Conference is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of OTC copyright.

Abstract
This paper describes the control system design for the Marlim three phase subsea separation system (SSAO) and how the
standard subsea control system has been adapted for the new requirements for automated control. This is the most advanced
subsea process system to date with several first ever applications of separation equipment subsea: harp, pipeseparator,
desanders and hydrocyclones. The SSAO has a total of 7 control loops and a number of complex automatic sequences.
Further, the paper addresses how dynamic simulation analysis has been used to validate the process control strategy and
improve the operational procedures designed during the basic engineering phase.
Control and operation of the SSAO has proved to be very challenging for several reasons:
There are strong interactions between different process components
The system dynamics are stiff due to small liquid hold-ups and low GOR in the system
The pressure drops of inline cyclonic equipment need to be balanced to ensure optimal performance
Constraints in valve opening/closing speed and the importance of limiting the number of valve movements put
restrictions on controller performance
Instrumentation is limited compared to topside facilities
The content described above contain several new aspects compared to a traditional subsea control system and this paper will
describe system considerations with regards to implemented process control and also the importance of using dynamic
simulations as a design tool.
Introduction
The Marlim three phase subsea separation system (SSAO) was designed to separate the produced water from the multiphase
well stream and re-inject this into the production reservoir. Water polishing is required due to the strict OiW content
requirement of less than 100 ppm. By re-injecting the produced water subsea, the backpressure in the flowline is reduced and
the production is increased. In addition less water handling capacity is required topside.
The SSAO has been installed in the Marlim Field, Campos Basin, in a water depth of 876 meters, 341 meters from the
production well and 2100 meters from the injection well. Oil, gas, sand and some remaining water will be sent to the P-37, a
Floating Production, Storage and Offloading unit (FPSO) with a turret system. The SSAO is connected to P-37 with a
multiphase line of 2400 meters (riser and flowline). The control of the process system and chemical injection management
system will be located topside on P-37, as well as the power supply and VSD for the subsea pump.
In Figure 1 it can be seen that the production first goes through a multiphase desander, which removes most of the sand before
the production flow enters the pipeseparator. This is important in order to reduce the amount of sand build up in the
downstream equipment and reduced the required frequency of flushing operations. In the harp, the free gas is removed before
the liquid is sent through the Pipe Separator to the outlet vessel. The water level in the outlet vessel is controlled varying the
speed of the water injection pump (WIP). The oil and gas are re-combined in the outlet vessel and then sent to the multiphase
line connected to P-37.
From the outlet vessel, the produced water goes through the water polishing equipment consisting of a desander and a twostage hydrocyclone module, before boosting and re-injection. The requirement for solids and oil content injected in the
injection well is 10 ppm and 100 ppm respectively. For a project overview, please see OTC-23230.

OTC 23564

Figure 1 Simplified process sketch of the production through SSAO

The SSAO will be controlled by a multiplexed electric-hydraulic control system, which consists of topside and subsea
equipment.All control logic is located topside and it is also from topside that the SSAO will be controlled. Subsea the control
system consists of subsea control modules (SCMs), sensors and actuators, which are monitored and controlled from topside.
This paper presents the adopted control architecture, the control philosophy, the different sensors used, qualification tests and
new subsea process control aspects for the operator. The dynamic analysis of the process system was important for control
loops definitions, optimization of the operational procedures and preliminary tuning of the control loops.
Topside Control System Architecture
All control logic will be located and executed topside. All electric and hydraulic power will also be supplied from topside to
subsea. The main topside equipments used for the SSAO control are: Master Control Station (MCS), Power and Control
Module (PCM), Control Hydraulic Power Unit (HPU) and Barrier Fluid Hydraulic Power Unit (BFHPU). Please see Figure 2
to visualize the main topside equipments.
The FPSO is connected to the subsea equipment through the turret. All subsea electric, hydraulics and optical lines that goes to
the FPSO through the umbilical need to pass through the turret to interface with equipment located topside. All equipment
located on the turret is designed for classified area.
The FPSO sends Emergency Shutdown (ESD) levels and chemical injection system critical signals to the SSAO control
system through hardwired signals.
Master Control Station (MCS)
The MCS is where all process control system logic is executed. This unit comprises a hot-standby PLC and redundant
electrical power and network communications architecture that controls the whole SSAO process. It has also a similar PLC
architecture dedicated for the level profilers.
This unit also has a subsea power and communication unit (SPCU) that communicates with the subsea equipment and external
controllers, and an engineering workstation (EWS) to perform system diagnosis and to update system software, if necessary.
Please see Figure 3.
The MCS interfaces with all other equipments described below.
Power and Control Module (PCM)
The PCM comprises the water injection pump motor variable speed drive (VSD), the pump control unit (PCU) and a heat
ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system.

OTC 23564

Control Hydraulic Power Unit (HPU)


The HPU supplies the hydraulic pressure for the subsea valves. It delivers low pressure (LP) and high pressure (HP) lines.
Barrier Fluid Hydraulic Power Unit (BFHPU)
The BFHPU maintains the barrier fluid pressure in the subsea pump seals above the process pressure. Please see Figure 3 that
shows the MCS cabinet and BFHPU.

Figure 2 Simplified Control Architecture

Figure 3 Master Control Station (on the left) and Barrier Fluid Hydraulic Power Supply (on the right)

OTC 23564

Subsea Control System


The subsea control system consists of subsea control modules (SCMs), sensors and actuators. The SCMs communicates with
the topside equipment, transmit sensors readings and actuate valves and chokes.
Due to the required number of hydraulic and electric functions, it was necessary to use two subsea control modules (SCMs) for
the SSAO. Each SCM has a total of 34 hydraulic functions (32 LP and 2 HP).
The SCMs communicate with the topside equipment through redundant fiber optics and have communication superimposed
with power supply over copper lines as a back-up solution.
All electric, hydraulic and optical connections between the modules goes through retrievable jumpers in the SSAO.
All subsea sensors are redundant, except for the Oil in Water (TOG) monitor. The sensors are described below.
For most of the sensors, CANBUS communication has been used, for a few sensors without CANBUS support, RS485 was
implemented.
Two umbilicals were used to supply all the facilities to the SSAO:
Integrated umbilical 1: Barrier fluid injection lines, chemicals, fiber optics for communication and power supply for
the pump motor.
Integrated umbilical 2: MEG injection lines, hydraulic lines, power supply and back-up communication for the
SCMs.
Sensors
A brief description of the main sensors used in the subsea system can be found below:
Differential Pressure Transmitters
For this project a special sensor was developed and qualified. The new sensor is able to transmit both absolute and
differential pressures and still provide the required accuracy for both measurements.
Pressure and Temperature Transmitters
Standard subsea pressure and temperatures transmitters are used in the SSAO. Two of them are used for high-high pressure
protection. The absolute readings obtained with the Differential Pressure Transmitters are also used for system diagnostics.
Flow Transmitters
A V-cone type was used in the water injection line to measure the water injection and a Venturi type was used in the pump
discharge line to monitor the flow through the pump.
Density Profiler
The subsea density profiler utilizes density measurements to calculate the interface levels of the different phases in the
outlet section. The profiler consists of a nucleonic source and two detector arrays with Geiger Muller tubes. Two subsea
profilers with redundant electronics are installed in the outlet section:
o One is located near the outlet vessel entrance to monitor the sand build up.
o The second is located near the outlet vessel water line to measure the water interface level. This
measurement is used as an input to the level controller and will also trip the system in case of low low water
interface level.
Sand Detector
These acoustic sensors are installed in critical parts of the system for monitoring, including one installed on the water
injection line.
Oil in Water (TOG) Monitor
The sensor was developed for this project and will be used to evaluate the water quality for re-injection. The sensor is
installed downstream the water injection pump and utilizes scattered light turbidity to measure the oil content in the water. In
addition to the TOG monitor, water samples can be taken through sampling lines in the umbilical to check the produced water
quality.
Process Control
The SSAO has the most advanced subsea process system to date, with several first ever applications of separation equipment
subsea: pipeseparator, desanders and hydrocyclones. The SSAO has a total of 7 control loops and a number of complex
automatic sequences. As mentioned in the previous section, the process control functionality is executed in the topside Master
Control Station (MCS). The Operator Interface (HMI) is available on dedicated operator workstations for operation and
integrated into the platforms existing HMI system for monitoring.

OTC 23564

Control Loops
There are a total of 7 control loops in the process: (i) Level controller, (ii) Two pump flow rate controllers (min/max flow),
(iii) Multiphase choke valve-DP controller, (iv) Two hydrocyclone controllers, (v) Flushing controller. With the exception of
the hydrocyclone control logic, all controllers are based on standard PID control blocks.
(i) Level controller
The level controller maintains the water interface level in the pipe separator outlet section. To measure the water level, a
nucleonic density profiler is utilized. The profiler uses an array of density measurements and outputs the level of all phases in
the outlet section (gas, foam, oil, emulsion, water and sand), but only the water interface is used for process control. Quick
response is required in order not to drain the outlet section and contaminate the produced water lines and cyclonic equipment.
The profiler is usually configured to a 30sec time constant, but for this project it was necessary to optimize the time response
and the averaging time was set to only 3sec, reducing the accuracy. The output (pump speed) from the controller is sent to the
Pump Control Unit (PCU) which directly controls the speed of the single phase water injection pump (WIP). See figure 4. To
avoid constant speed changes a dead band can be configured on the input to the controller. This will allow the level to change
within the dead band limits before the controller takes action and changes the pump speed. Filtration of the input signal is also
possible, but both these functions have to be used with care, in order not to slow the controller down too much.

Figure 4 Simplified level controller loop.

(ii) Two pump flow rate controllers (min/max flow)


The final pump protection is taken care of by the PCU. In case the pump operating point moves outside the pump envelope
(max/min flow region), the PCU will take action and trip the pump. Frequent pump tripping is not wanted and therefore it was
necessary to implement measures in the MCS to avoid this. Two PID controllers have been implemented to help the operating
point to stay inside the envelope. The minimum flow controller control the position of the choke valve on the minimum flow
recirculation line and will open this valve in case the flow through the pump is too low (see figure 5). The maximum flow
controller controls the choke valves downstream the WIP and will start to close these if the operating point of the WIP moves
into the max flow region. The controllers are using a set point with an offset from the respective minimum and maximum flow
alarm thresholds in the PCU. The flow rate differential pressure set points are dynamic and will depend on the speed of the
WIP. The offset (Min Flow A and B constants) from the PCUs alarm thresholds are configurable and can be adjusted by the
operator (see figure 6). Both controllers utilize dead bands and input filtering to reduce unnecessary choke stepping.

Figure 5 Simplified minimum and maximum flow controllers loop.

OTC 23564

Figure 6 Minimum flow controller screen.

(iii) Multiphase choke valve-DP controller


The multiphase choke controller is necessary in order to maintain a fairly stable backpressure for the rejects from the
desanders and hydrocyclones. This controller has the possibility to configure an asymmetrical dead band to allow the pressure
to have some fluctuations without moving the choke. See figure 7.

Figure 7 Multiphase choke valve-dP controller loop

OTC 23564

(iv) Two hydrocyclone controllers


To control the hydrocyclones, the logic is using DP measurements across the hydrocyclones to keep the reject rate between
2-6% (see figure 8). As described below, it was found during the TQP, that by using logic to open and close the reject choke
valves, the control of the hydrocyclones improved. The logic implementation uses dead bands and will allow the reject to float
between 2-6% of the incoming flow rate.

Figure 8 Simplified hydrocyclones controller loops

(v) Flushing controller


The flushing controller is only active when the pipe separator flushing sequence is executed. The controller is adjusting the
pump speed to achieve the required flow velocity in the pipe separator to remove potential sand build up (see figure 9).

Figure 9 Simplified flushing controller loop

Automated Sequences
The SSAO is designed to run with limited manual operation. For normal conditions the operator will be able to perform all
procedures by starting automated sequences and monitoring the process. This includes WIP startup, start of water injection,
flushing sequences and planned shutdowns. All the automated sequences have been verified by integrated dynamic flowline
and dynamic process simulations, which will be described in the next section.
Due to expected sand production, the compact separation equipment requires regular back flushing/flushing in order to
remain functional throughout the expected life time of the SSAO. High pressure water from downstream the WIP is used to
perform the flushing and water injection have to be stopped during these operations. Due to the fact that there are several lines
and equipment that require flushing the sequences are quite complex and it will take some hours until the process is back in
normal mode with water injection. The screen for the flushing sequence is shown in figure 10.

OTC 23564

Figure 10 Flushing sequence screen.

Emergency Shutdowns and Equipment Protection


The SSAO equipment and process is protected from unwanted operation and damage by implementation of operational
interlocks and a cause & effect shutdown logic, respectively. There are two levels of Process Shutdowns (PSD). The first level
will trip the WIP and stop water injection, while the second and higher level also bypasses the SSAO. In addition to process
initiated shutdowns, the process can be tripped from the P-37 emergency shutdown system (ESD). The implemented interlocks
will protect the process from incorrect operation. For exemple, in case the operator tries to open a valve with an active
interlock, the control system will prevent this action from taking place. In case of special operation, it is possible to bypass
interlocks on a higher login level (supervisor or engineer).
System Testing
Factory Acceptance Tests (FATs) were conducted at the sub suppliers site, with representatives from operator, contractor
and sub-supplier present. Due to challenges during dynamic simulations and delayed development of the sequence
specifications, the factory acceptance testing was split in two. The first part of the FAT concentrated on the controllers and
logic. The second part was a complete test of the sequence functionality, C&E and equipment interlocks. The punch list items
from phase 1 FAT was also re-tested during this test.
After system assembly it has also been executed a System Integration Test, where all the automated sequences have been
tested again. The pump system has not been part of the SIT, but its inputs have been simulated on the MCS, wherever
necessary to start the automatic sequencies and the physical operation of the system have been evaluated.

OTC 23564

Technology Qualification Program (TQP)


A significant technology qualification program (TQP) was executed during the SSAO project (see OTC-23417). Two activities
were directly related to verification of the process control system and executed in parallel with the detail engineering.
Water Level Control
A flow loop with a scaled pipeseparator, outlet section and a pump programmed to behave similarly to the water injection
pump was constructed for this activity. Nucleonic level profilers were utilized for realistic water interface level measurement
to the level controller. The objective for the test was to evaluate if the foreseen control using profilers for water level
measurement and controller actuation of the pump speed could handle process fluctuations, considering all inherent delays and
the system operational volume (outlet section design). The test results were positive and verified that the control is satisfactory
for the SSAO.
Hydrocyclones Module Control
A flow loop was constructed for this activity and the objective of the test was to evaluate the proposed control philosophy
for the hydrocyclones. The initial tests indicated that it was necessary to change the system architecture due to high sensitivity
to pressure fluctuations in reject of the second stage hydrocyclone.
A new architecture was discussed and implemented and a new test planned. The next test activity showed that the new
configuration with the addition of a choke valve in the reject of the second hydrocyclone is less sensitive to pressure
fluctuations.
During this activity a new control philosophy was proposed and used instead of the previously suggested PID controller.
The new controller, based on logic, delays and operational bands, was tested and approved for the system. The controllers
main objective is to let the process oscillate within operational acceptable limits to reduce unnecessary choke movements.

Figure 11 Test loop for the water level control evaluation (on the left) and the test loop for the hydrocyclone module control
evaluation (on the right)

Dynamic Analysis
As discussed above control and operation of the SSAO is challenging and it is based on new technology. Consequently,
verification of the process flow, control philosophy, operational sequences and system design with respect to transient
responses is important. This verification was performed as far as possible by a Technology Qualification Program (TQP).
However, to analyze the total system in detail with realistic boundary conditions, complementary dynamic analysis was
necessary, and a dynamic model was developed for this purpose. Dynamic simulations were also used to verify operational
sequences and perform pre-tuning (see S. Skogestad3) of the system, including trip set points.
Model Building and Implementation
Inclusion of flowline dynamics is important when the scope is to verify the control system and operational sequence in
detail. Consequently the total model included both a dynamic flowline model and a dynamic process model.
The individual process units included in the dynamic process model were (i) inline multiphase desander, (ii) harp, (iii)
pipeseparator, (iv) outlet section, (v) inline water desander, (vi) hydrocyclones, (vii) ejectors, (viii) water pump including
recycle loop, (ix) water injection well, (x) production well. Each of these unit models were specified and tested individually
before combining them into a total model. The testing included comparisons to test data from similar equipment, TQP data and
model responses from models implemented in other software tools. In addition, choke valves, on/off valves, time delays,
controller algorithms and measurement noise was included in the model to make the simulations as realistic as possible. As an
example the hydrocyclone model is shown in figure 12.

10

OTC 23564

Figure 12 Hydrocyclone model example

When each process unit model had been tested, three different subsystems including controller loops were defined. The
controller loops were tuned preliminary as part of the subsystem testing. Finally the total model was put together and tested by
combining the subsystem models.
Work Process
Since it was important to demonstrate operability and identify potential challenges as early as possible, it was decided to
run the dynamic simulation study in two phases. In phase 1 the model was built based on preliminary process information and
preliminary controller tunings. The purpose of this phase was to demonstrate process operability by running 21 predefined
cases. During this phase, numerous findings were reported including the need for design adjustments, optimization of
operational sequences, improvement of the control system and controller tuning, and the need for investigation of model
details.
As a part of phase 2 the model was updated according to updated process information and the findings from phase 1. Also
the controllers were re-tuned prior to starting the phase 2 case runs. The main purpose of phase 2 was to document system
performance with the new controller tunings and to verify the updated operational sequences. In addition, the controller
tunings and operational sequences were slightly optimized and adjusted as a part of phase 2 simulations. To save time, only the
most important cases were rerun in phase 2.
Examples
One important control objective for the SSAO is to control the reject ratio of the hydrocyclones to ensure satisfactory
performance with a minimum number of reject choke adjustments. This is important to reduce wear and tear on the
hydrocyclone reject chokes. The control system allows for different initial choke positions for the alternative operational
sequences. The table below shows the reject chokes initial conditions used for the most important simulated operational
sequences. As shown in the table, the simulations verify that the same initial position can be used for the different sequences.
However, the simulations also show that for an alternative start-up sequence, different choke initial positions are
recommended. The reason is that the cross-over choke between the pump discharge and the multiphase production pipeline is
used more actively in the alternative start-up procedure, which changes the system response.
Table 1 Initial choke position for each sequence

OTC 23564

11

Flushing and sand removal operations at regular intervals are needed to prevent clogging and accumulation of sand in the
SSAO. The flushing sequences were simulated as part of the dynamic analysis to verify that the system is able to perform the
flushing according to the operational sequences and to optimize the sequence with respect to system performance and
sequence duration. One example is flushing of the water desander reject line. In the main step of the sequence water from the
injection pump discharge is used to flush the desander reject line. This case was run for different production years both with
and without simulated noise on the sensors. Production years with large amounts of produced water are of course most
challenging for the flushing sequences since the water used for flushing needs to be routed topside. Simulation results are
shown in the two figures below (figures 13 and 14). The simulations verified that the procedure ensured satisfactory system
performance during the flushing procedure with a satisfactory desander reject line flushing rate.

Figure 13 Example plot, WIP speed and water level in outlet section during flushing sequence.

Figure 14- Example plot, Flow rates through WIP during flushing sequence.

12

OTC 23564

Dynamic Simulation Findings and Relevance


In summary, the simulations demonstrate that the operational sequences work as expected and that the control system is
able to control the system. This verification is important due to the complexity of the system. Also the simulations
demonstrated that the dynamics of the system is significantly changed when the cross-over choke between the pump discharge
and the multiphase production line is open, a fact which is important to the operational procedures and tuning of the control
system. The dynamic simulation findings are reflected by
Improved operational sequences including minimization of the duration
Improvements in the control system
Input to an Operational guidelines and troubleshooting document
Initial tuning of the controllers (will be retuned/checked during commissioning)
The work on SSAO demonstrated that dynamic simulation is an interdisciplinary activity, both because building and
verification requires input from several disciplines and because simulation results form an effective basis for communication,
discussions and iterative improvement of the system. When simulating the start-up procedure for example, several alternative
procedures, controller system modifications and controller tunings were simulated and discussed. Some of the variable
interactions and variations would have been very difficult and perhaps impossible to foresee and analyze without a dynamic
model.
Having a dynamic model to establish a common understanding of the challenges and solutions, thereby simplifying the
process of agreeing on actions, was also important since four locations were involved in the detailed engineering: Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil, Arnhem, The Netherlands, Houston, USA and Asker, Norway. Live meetings and e-mailing of simulation
results were extensively used, especially during the project phases when case runs were performed.
Conclusion
SSAO has been a very challenging system considering all the new technology and applications involved on the project in all
the considered subjects: subsea process, subsea process control, dynamic analysis, mechanical design of state of art subsea
process systems, etc. It has been an important project to improve the knowledge on all these subjects. A very critical part of the
project has been to execute TQP, dynamic simulations and detailed engineering simultaneously. Dynamic simulations has
proved to be a very important tool for verification of control philosophy and verification and development of the automated
sequences but also required a big effort to build up a library of subsea process equipment models.
One critical issue that was necessary to resolve during detailed engineering was to make sure there was enough control volume
for the level controller and the level controllers response time. Reducing the control loop time response has been an area of
focus during the project. Topside control of subsea equipment implies that communication and control takes more time.
Working with chokes as control valves also implies challenges. Hydraulic actuated choke valves are acting significantly
slower than normal topside control valves, additionally it is important to consider wear and tear of choke valves.
For this reason the controllers have to allow some process fluctuations in order to avoid excessive step choke movements.
This is achieved by the use of dead bands for the PID controllers and by the logic parameters adjustments for the
hydrocyclones module chokes.
Other innovative characteristic in this subsea system for the operator are the foreseen operational automated sequences, that
were created in order to make it easier for the operator and to guarantee the best dynamic for each sequence.
For the operator not only the above is new for subsea control, but also subsea processing itself, all operational sequences, the
control philosophy, PID controllers and closed loops controllers in general.
For higher water depths, the use of compact process separation technologies leads to lower residence times and fast dynamics,
requiring quicker response time in the control loops. So special attention is needed for future systems where subsea process
control valves may be mandatory to the feasibility of process control loops.
Aknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Petrobras for permission to present the information contained in this paper.
We would like also to extend our gratefulness to all colleagues who, directly or indirectly contributed to this work.
References
1. M. L. Euphemio, I. F. Lima, R. Orlowski, R. S. Pereira, F. Inacio,F.G de Castro and L.S.Figueiredo Petrobras; L. S. Ribeiro, N. Fletcher
and I. Loureno, FMC Technologies, Marlim 3 Phase Subsea Separation System (Petrobras) Project Overview And Execution
Strategy - OTC-23230 Houston, Texas - 2012
2. C. A. C. Moraes, F. S. da Silva, L. P. M. Marins, D. A. de Oliveira, A. S. Monteiro, R. M. Pereira, R. S. Pereira, A. Alves, G. M. Raposo,
L. Figueiredo, R. Orlowski, H. Folhadella, R. Mikkelsen, J. Kolbu, L. McKenzie, Z. M. F. Elamin, O. T. McClimans, Marlim 3 Phase
Subsea Separation System (Petrobras) Subsea Innovative Process Design Validated By Comprehensive Technology Qualification
Program - OTC-23417 Houston, Texas - 2012
3. S. Skogestad, Simple analytic rules for model reduction and PID controller tuning, Journal of Process Control 13 (2003) 291309

OTC 23564

Abbreviations
BFHPU - Barrier Fluid Hydraulic Power Unit
C&E
- Cause and Effect
DP
- Differential Pressure
ECOS - Operating and Supevisory System
ESD
- Emergency Shut Down
EWS - Engineering Work Station
FAT
- Factory Acceptance Test
FIC
- Flow Indicator and Controller
FPSO - Floating Production, Storage and Offloading unit
FT
- Flow Transmitter
GOR - Gas Oil Ratio
HMI
- Human Machine Interface
HP
- High Pressure
HPU
- Control Hydraulic Power Unit
HVAC - Heat Ventilation and Air Conditioning
LIC
- Level Indicator and Controller
LP
- Low Pressure
LT
- Level Transmitter
MCS - Master Control Station
MEG - Mono Ethylene Glycol
OiW
- Oil in Water
OWS - Operator Work Station
P-37
- Marlim FPSO
PCM - Power and Control Module
PCU
- Pump Control Unit
PDT
- Pressue Differential Transmitter
PFIC - Pressure Ratio Indicator and Controller
PID
- Proportional Integral Derivative
PLC
- Programmable Logic Controller
PSD
- Process Shut Down
SCM - Subsea Control Module
SIT
- System Integration Test
SPCU - Subsea Power and Communictaion Unit
SSAO - Separaco Submarina gua-leo (Subsea separation of water and oil)
TOG
- Oil in Water Monitor
TQP
- Technology Qualification Program
VSD
- Variable Speed Drive
WIP
- Water Injection Pump
XT
- Christmas Tree

13