Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Fuel System Design Classes

    Uploaded by

    Sixto Gerardo Oña Anaguano
    9 views5 pages
    The document outlines design classes for fuel gas systems, with Class 1 being the lowest reliability and Class 3 the highest. Key differences between the classes include: - Class 3 adds 20% design margin on gas flows and 40% extra capacity for future expansion over Class 2. - Class 2 adds 10% margin on gas flows and allows for 20% extra expansion capacity over Class 1. - Higher classes require more equipment redundancy for reliability, such as dual fuel systems and N+1 vessel sparing in Class 3. - Operability and maintainability improve with higher classes through features like increased fuel backup capabilities and dual fuel gas headers. - Only Class 3 considers flare gas recovery and fuel heating for energy efficiency.

    Original Description:

    "Since you are listed as ""Industrial"" and asking this question you must not know much if anything about piping. I will try to give you an answer that is simple to understand. In piping we have the term ""Nominal pipe size"" (NPS). Example 6""NPS. This does not neccessarally mean that the size (6"" NPS) of the pipe is actually the outside or the inside diameter. It is in name only. Flange pressure Classes are somewhat the same. A Nominal 150# line class is not exactly, only, or limited to 150 psig. The internal pressure of a line class will depend on the material of the pipe (Carbon Steel, Alloy, etc.) and the operating temperature."

    Original Title

    (0108) 00000793

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document outlines design classes for fuel gas systems, with Class 1 being the lowest reliability and Class 3 the highest. Key differences between the classes include: - Class 3 adds 20% design margin on gas flows and 40% extra capacity for future expansion over Class 2. - Class 2 adds 10% margin on gas flows and allows for 20% extra expansion capacity over Class 1. - Higher classes require more equipment redundancy for reliability, such as dual fuel systems and N+1 vessel sparing in Class 3. - Operability and maintainability improve with higher classes through features like increased fuel backup capabilities and dual fuel gas headers. - Only Class 3 considers flare gas recovery and fuel heating for energy efficiency.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    9 views5 pages

    Fuel System Design Classes

    Uploaded by

    Sixto Gerardo Oña Anaguano
    The document outlines design classes for fuel gas systems, with Class 1 being the lowest reliability and Class 3 the highest. Key differences between the classes include: - Class 3 adds 20% design margin on gas flows and 40% extra capacity for future expansion over Class 2. - Class 2 adds 10% margin on gas flows and allows for 20% extra expansion capacity over Class 1. - Higher classes require more equipment redundancy for reliability, such as dual fuel systems and N+1 vessel sparing in Class 3. - Operability and maintainability improve with higher classes through features like increased fuel backup capabilities and dual fuel gas headers. - Only Class 3 considers flare gas recovery and fuel heating for energy efficiency.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 5

    Design Class Detail

    Utilities Fuel Systems

    PROJECT

    Date

    Capacity
    Design Class

    Design
    Item

    Class 1

    Class 2

    Fuel gas
    producers,
    consumers and
    the FG system
    design basis flows

    Design flow based on


    the highest credible
    expected flows for
    each of the respective
    units.

    Design flow based on the


    highest credible
    expected flows for each
    of the respective units
    + 10% margin.

    Design flow based on


    the highest credible
    expected flows for
    each of the respective
    units + 20%.

    FG make up
    system sizing

    Make up size based


    on maximum credible
    expected make up
    flow.

    Make up size based on


    maximum credible
    expected make up flow
    + 10%.

    Either of:
    1. Make up size based
    on maximum credible
    expected make up flow
    + 20%.
    2. Dual makeup
    systems each sized
    base on maximum
    expected make up flow.
    (2 x 100%)

    Buffer / KO vessel
    sizing

    Sizing based on Class


    1 flow.

    Sizing based on Class 2


    flow.

    Sizing based on Class


    3 flow.

    Buffer/KO vessel
    sparing

    No spare vessel

    No spare vessel. Full


    flow bypass provided
    around vessel.

    Vessel sparing = N+1

    Fuel oil storage

    12 Hrs

    24 Hrs

    48 Hrs

    Fuel oil storage


    tank sparing

    One tank

    Two tanks
    2 x 50%

    Two tanks
    2 x 50%

    Fuel oil pump


    capacity

    Design flow based on


    the highest credible
    expected flows for
    each of the respective
    consumers maximum
    fuel oil requirements.

    Design flow based on the


    highest credible
    expected flows for each
    of the respective
    consumers maximum
    fuel oil requirements
    + 10% margin.

    Design flow based on


    the highest credible
    expected flows for
    each of the respective
    consumers maximum
    fuel oil requirements
    + 20% margin.

    Fuel oil pump


    sparing

    2 x 100%
    1 in operation
    1 electric motor
    + 1 steam turbine or,
    2 electric motors from
    independent electrical
    power sources.

    3 x 60%
    2 in operation
    1 electric motor
    + 1 steam turbine in
    service
    3rd either electric from
    independent power
    source or steam turbine.

    3 x 100%
    2 in operation
    1 electric motor
    + 1 steam turbine in
    service
    3rd either electric from
    independent power
    source or steam
    turbine.

    DEP 00.00.07.93-Gen. September 2011

    Class 3

    Page 1 of

    Design Class Detail


    Utilities Fuel Systems

    PROJECT

    Date

    Expandability
    Design
    Item
    Future expansion
    provision of fuel
    system

    Design Class
    Class 1

    Class 2

    No future expansion
    provision in the layout
    and header
    extension / tie-in.

    FG header sized with


    extra capacity, maximum
    of:
    a. projected expansions.
    b. 20% extra capacity.
    FG headers installed
    with connections for the
    extra capacity above.

    DEP 00.00.07.93-Gen. September 2011

    Class 3
    FG header sized with
    extra capacity,
    maximum of:
    a. projected
    expansions.
    b. 40% extra capacity.
    FG headers installed
    with connections for
    the extra capacity
    above.

    Page 2 of

    Design Class Detail


    Utilities Fuel Systems

    PROJECT

    Date

    Operability & Maintainability


    Design
    Item

    Design Class
    Class 1

    Class 2

    Class 3

    Back up fuel

    No back up fuel
    capability

    Dual firing on selective


    furnaces/boilers.
    Back up fuel system
    capacity based on
    credible scenario of plant
    in continuous operation
    and the largest single FG
    sources is out of service

    Most furnaces/boilers
    with dual fuel firing
    (100% back up fuel)

    Flaring of FG

    No flaring at the
    normal operating case
    at the premised
    condition.

    No flaring at the
    premised conditions and
    all operating cases.

    No flaring at the
    premised conditions,
    operating cases and all
    credible off design
    scenarios.

    No additional
    capacities in
    power/steam
    generation

    LP fuel gas
    system pressure
    control

    Control valve to
    supply
    Control valve to flare

    DEP 00.00.07.93-Gen. September 2011

    Additional capacities in
    power/steam generation
    to consume excess FG
    to prevent flaring in all
    operating cases

    Control valve to supply


    with a manual bypass
    valve
    Control valve to flare

    Additional capacities in
    power/steam
    generation to consume
    excess FG to prevent
    flaring in all credible off
    design scenarios
    Control valve to supply
    with a spare control
    valve
    Control valve to flare

    Page 3 of

    Design Class Detail


    Utilities Fuel Systems

    PROJECT

    Date

    Operability & Maintainability (Contd)


    Design Class

    Design
    Item
    FG pressure
    control valve on
    the make up line

    Class 1
    1 x 100%

    Class 2
    Spare manual control
    valve

    Class 3
    HP buffer vessel
    feeding to LP fuel gas
    system
    sized to absorb/liberate
    10 % of the normal
    system gas flowrate
    over a 1 h period,
    operating from the
    middle pressure of the
    operating range to the
    maximum/minimum
    pressure respectively.
    2 x 100% control
    valves

    FG header

    Single header

    Single header
    Connections installed to
    facilitate installation of
    second header

    Dual header in the


    common areas, single
    header ISBL

    Fuel gas quality


    monitoringl

    Composition analysis
    by sampling.

    Online Density analyser

    Online Fuel gas


    composition/ Wobbe
    index analyser

    Fuel gas quality


    control

    None

    FG mixing vessel to limit


    the rate of change of
    Wobbe index within
    specified range.

    Inert gas mixing for


    control of Wobbe Index

    DEP 00.00.07.93-Gen. September 2011

    Page 4 of

    Design Class Detail


    Utilities Fuel Systems

    PROJECT

    Date

    Energy Efficiency
    Design Class

    Design
    Item

    Class 1

    Class 2

    Class 3

    Flare gas recovery

    Flare gas recovery not


    considered.

    Flare gas recovery not


    considered.

    Flare gas recovery


    system with recovery
    compressor from Flare
    header

    Gas turbine fuel


    heating above
    minimum
    temperature for
    energy efficiency
    improvement.

    None

    None

    Fuel heating with LP


    steam for cogeneration
    fuel use.

    DEP 00.00.07.93-Gen. September 2011

    Page 5 of

    You might also like