Wireless Instrumentation in the Oil & Gas Industry Status and trends IFEA Wireless Summit, Oslo 16.-17. April 2012 Simon Carlsen, Statoil
Agenda Motivational factors Technical & Operational Requirements Instrumentation Classes On the situation with competing standards Current Status Wireless Instrumentation in Oil & Gas Wireless in Monitoring Applications Wireless in Control Applications Wireless in Safety Applications Wireless instrumentation in Statoil Summary 2
Motivational factors Some business & operational drivers Savings: Cost savings Weight savings Field installation time Enhancements: HSE aspects Extended monitoring Production optimization Simplifications: Engineering Commisioning Installation Scalability Retrofit of older systems New application areas: Asset tracking Localization Control in the field? 3
Technical & Operational requirements Wireless instrumentation shall: In general fulfill the same performance requirements as wired instruments Performance requirements are application dependent Not introduce new maintenance loads Not interfere, nor disturb other systems utilizing the same frequency band ATEX classification according to zone requirements (usually ATEX zone 1) Ensure data integrity, resilience to hacking, unauthorized access and sabotage Be based on open, international standards From «Technical Requirements» (TR) documents: Redundant gateways (with automatic failover), connected to one logic solver Segregation principles shall be followed, i.e. separate wireless gateways shall be provided for F&G, ESD, PSD and PCS. 4
Instrumentation Classes NAMUR Class ISA Class 5
Current Industrial Standards Keywords: Based on IEEE 802.15.4 PHY 2.4 GHz ISM band 15 channels @ 3 MHz bandwidth TDMA slotted communication with frequency hopping Coexistence management ACK-based communication with retransmissions Support for star, mesh or starmesh network topologies Closely related, but not compatible! 6
Status Wireless Instrumentation in Oil & Gas What is required to get here? (Can existing standards cover the requirements) We are here. Technology requirements covered in existing standards (But, two non-compatible standards) 7
Wireless in Monitoring applications Wireless instrumentation qualified for non-critical monitoring *) First deployments (Gullfaks A) in 2007 In ordinary operation at a growing number of facilities To date, mainy deployed as supplementary instrumentation for non-critical monitoring purposes Approximately 150 wireless instruments in operation Typical measurment tasks Temperature, pressure, vibration, A number of new developments plan for wireless infrastructure *) Currently, in Statoil WirelessHART is fully technology qualified for monitoring applications. Scope is under consecutive evaluation 8
Experiences to date wireless for monitoring*) Reduced commissioning Fast and easy installation Simple configuration and system integration High reliability (very little data loss) Immediate operational gain Proven financial gains Once wireless infrastructure is established, new application areas emerge rapidly Satisfied operators! *) Experiences based on applicatios & technology within scope of current tecnology qualification 2011-06-01 9 Classification: Internal 2011-10-25Classification: Internal 2010-05-03
Wireless in Control applications? Operator Operation station Automation network Controller Wireless Gateway Actuator Level transmitter Flow valve TANK 10
Challenges Two-way communication Wireless Gateway Today s standards implemented with optimizing uplink communication in mind Communication scheme from sensor to wireless gateway well organized (designated TDMA slots on a deterministic basis) Downlink communication (gateway to actuator) based on «best effort» principles Latency and timing issues Variations in latency (jitter) due to retransmissions and (for mesh networks) alternative routing paths Lack of QoS measures to ensure end-to-end delay sensor controller Power consumption High update rates less compatible with battery operation 12
Inside the Wireless «Gateway» Access Network Security Gateway: Point: Manager: The «Radio Responsible Interface wireless Resource towards interface. for access backhaul Handles physical Managment» control systems layer. and data Separate integrity module with Link Data PCDA dedicated scheduling encryption and administrative microcontroller and routing Network interfaces management ID Network Key Ethernet management performance: (and serial) MODBUS, Latency OPC, GSAP etc Fieldbus Power standard, consumption e.g. Profinet Response/agility to come «Black box» implementation No detailed specification in standard The hidden secret of the stack/protocol provider! ACCESS POINT (RADIO) NETWORK MANAGER GATEWAY } Radio module SECURITY MANAGER (WirelessHART terms used Slightly different terminiology in ISA100) } Linux environment Wired interface to PCDA (Ethernet or serial) 13
End-to-end signal path sensor-controller PHYSICAL QUANTITY PROBE Scope of measured wireless latency ACCESS POINT (RADIO) A/D Conversion APPLICATION PROCESSOR NETWORK MANAGER SECURITY MANAGER RADIO GATEWAY Timestamp and transmit at next available timeslot Industrial Ethernet CONTROLLER 14
Contributions to end-to-end latency wireless sensor automation controller Sampling vs. timeslots Wireless latency as measured by network Gateway internal communication External bus (Modbus, Profinet, ) t sampling t tx-sensor t rx-gateway t tx-backbone t tx-external t rx-controller Ex: Measured latency in WirelessHART network 15
Control in the Field Moving intelligence to Field Device? Automation network Operator station Controller Wireless Gateway «Intelligent» Actuator Level transmitter Flow valve TANK 16
Wireless in Safety Applications? Gas detector Gas detector GAS Gas detector Wireless Gateway SAS network 17
Some application specific challenges related to wireless in Control vs wireless in Safety Item Control Application Safety Application Update rate +++ + Latency and jitter (ms-range) +++ + Reliability ++ +++ Timeliness *) ++ +++ Power consumption +++ ++ «Safe» rated communication protocol +++ SIL requirements +++ *) The imporance of a message arriving within a strict defined timeout window 18
Main requirements for gas detection systems in Oil & Gas facilities at the NCS Response time from gas detection alarm <= 5 sec Communication detector controller shall be SIL 2 rated according to IEC 61508 All «safe» rated communication initiated from controller Process safety time = 1 min: In the normal situation (no gas) the complete system should continously self-test with a timeout window of 1 minute. The communication shall be inintiated from controller How to fulfill requirements utilizing wireless protocol? Fieldbus implementation on top of wireless protocol Safety protocol on top of fieldbus protocol «Smart» communication scheduling to allow for battery operation 19
www.gassecure.com The GasSecure project: 20
SIL2-rate safe wireless communication Initiated from controller Max 2 seconds latency from gas detection to packet at controller Max two hops Safe communication over grey channel Message: Gas concentration Battery status Diagnostic 21
Detector response No gas Gas detected 22
Wireless instrumentation in Statoil First deployments (Gullfaks A) in 2007 In ordinary operation at a growing number of facilities To date, mainy deployed as supplementary instrumentation for non-critical monitoring purposes A number of new developments plan for wireless infrastructure R&D acitivities and small-scale offhore experiments on the use of wireless in selected control loops Partner in the WiCon Project Research project on real-time wireless process control Development partner in the world s first wireless gas detection system Offshore pilot installation planned for Q3 2012 Active R&D group focusing on wireless! 23
Summary Wireless instrumentation a viable alternative for monitoring applications Two standards WirelessHART and ISA100.11a International initiative for a common standard, but is expected to take time We are probably closer to wireless in safety, compared to wireless in time-critical closed loop applications For wireless process control, several challenges remain the most important are related to lack of true real-time hardware designs in today s solutions Power consumption and battery operation at high sampling rates still an unresolved task 24
Wireless Instrumentation in the Oil & Gas Industry Simon Carlsen Principal Analyst E-mail address scar@statoil.com Tel: +4790216882 www.statoil.com 25