Copyright 2014, Pipeline Simulation Interest Group

This paper was prepared for presentation at the PSIG Annual Meeting held in Baltimore,
Maryland, 6 May 9 May 2014.

This paper was selected for presentation by the PSIG Board of Directors following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). The material, as presented,
does not necessarily reflect any position of the Pipeline Simulation Interest Group, its officers,
or members. Papers presented at PSIG meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial
Committees of the Pipeline Simulation Interest Group. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or
storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of PSIG
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 where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, Pipeline
Simulation Interest Group, P.O. Box 22625, Houston, TX 77227, U.S.A., fax 01-713-586-5955.

Abstract
Pipeline Surge Analysis Studies require the
hydraulic simulation of pressures and flows in
fluids caused by the transient operations of pumps
and valves. Pressure surges can cause significant
damage to pipelines producing pipeline leaks,
cracked pump casings, contamination and
environmental damage. Without adequate surge
protection this will result in significant downtime in
process plants and distribution systems, and the
reduced life expectancy of the pipeline.

This paper discusses pipeline surge analysis and
looks to address the challenge of efficiently
reviewing entire pipeline networks for pressure
surges in order to comply with the Department of
Transport regulatory requirements. To reduce the
effort required in conducting pipeline surge analysis
studies for pipeline design, operational changes, and
product changes, a surge analysis program has been
developed to automate the procedure from the
scheduling of simulation scenarios to the creation of
the surge analysis report.
Why Surge Analysis?
The consequences of pipeline failure may be
catastrophic, and strict regulatory requirements are
in place to ensure the safe operations of pipelines.
The UK Pipeline safety regulations state that:
The pipeline operator shall ensure that no fluid is
conveyed in a pipeline unless the Safe Operating
Limits (SOL) of the pipeline have been established
and that a pipeline is not operated beyond its SOL.
(Ref 2)

This pipeline safety regulation can be found (with
words to the same effect) globally in numerous
pipeline safety regulations. A few examples are:
U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline
and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration
British Standard Code of Practice for Pipelines
European Harmonised Standard Petroleum and
Natural Gas Industries Pipeline
Transportation Systems

The recognised standards often allow short
excursions of pressure above Maximum Allowable
Operating Pressure (MAOP). The pipeline may
therefore, for limited periods, see pressures above
MAOP and still be in code. The SOL, above which
the pipeline is not allowed to run under any
circumstances, is therefore higher than MAOP. The
SOL for the maximum pressure is typically 10% to
15% larger than the MAOP limit, depending upon

PSIG 1417
Pipeline Surge Analysis Studies
Garry Hanmer - ATMOS International Limited
Susan Bachman and Gregory Lind Enterprise Products


2 Garry Hanmer, Susan Bachman, Gregory Lind PSIG 1417
local pipeline safety regulations.

Pipeline failures are rare occurrences, but have the
potential to cause extensive property damage, loss
of life and shut down of pipeline facilities for
extended periods of time.

The causes of pipeline failure can be internal or
external. Internal causes include events such as
pressure surge and material defects. External causes
include events such as earthquakes and third party
intervention.

Pressure surge in a pipeline system can produce
pressures in excess of the allowable maximum and
minimum pipeline pressures. High pressures can
damage pumps, valves and other pipeline objects,
along with the potential to rupture the pipeline. Low
pressures can lead to pipeline collapse, and
cavitation. Vapour cavity closures can produce
high shock pressures.

Transient pressure surges occur in pipelines because
of sudden changes in the fluid flow velocity. These
changes in flow velocity can occur due to
operations such as valve movements, pump power
failures, and pump start-up. Pressure surges can
occur in all fluid pipeline systems resulting in
pipeline fatigue and pipeline failure. Pressure surge
may be avoidable through sufficient pipeline
assessments and protection.

The consequences of a pipeline failure can be
tragic. On Saturday 1 J une 1974, a 20 inch pipeline
in Flixborough, UK ruptured. Within one minute of
the rupture, approximately 40 tonnes of
cyclohexane leaked from the pipeline, forming a
vapour cloud 200 metres (650 feet) in diameter.
This vapour cloud ignited resulting in injuries to
thirty-six workers, and fatalities to twenty-eight
workers. Offsite a further fifty-three injuries were
reported and varying levels of damage to property
were registered up to three miles away. No one
escaped from the control room, where all eighteen
personnel were killed (Ref 1).

The rupture occurred due to an over pressurization
of the pipeline. An assessment of the technical
failings concluded that a plant modification had
occurred without a full assessment of the potential
consequences, where only a limited amount of
calculations were conducted on the integrity of the
pipeline. No pressure testing was carried out on the
modification to the installed pipework.

Detailed pipeline assessments may be time-
consuming, requiring large amounts of calculations
to be computed for each pipeline section. This is
due to the large variety of different operating
conditions which must be analyzed within the surge
analysis study, where each valve closure, pump trip
and fluid change must be considered.

Pipeline simulation packages can be used to run
pressure surge analysis on pipeline sections to
provide accurate transient surge predictions and
analysis. A surge analysis application has been
developed to directly interact with the pipeline
simulation tool in order to schedule dynamic
simulation scenarios, run transient simulations,
conduct initial analysis of the simulation results and
create a surge analysis report. This whole procedure
is automated into a single step through the
utilization of the surge analysis program, allowing
the surge analysis study to be conducted in a much
timelier manner, making the surge analysis study a
much more efficient process.

What Causes Surge?
Pressure surge refers to the pressure produced by a
change in velocity of the moving fluid that results
from events such as the shutting down of a pumping
station or pumping unit, unstable controls,
oscillations in tank levels, vapour pocket collapse,
the closure of a valve, or any other sudden blockage
PSIG 1417 Pipeline Surge Analysis Studies 3
of the moving fluid. These pressure surges may
occur in all fluid pipeline systems and can result in
pipeline fatigue and pipeline failure. The effects of
valve movement, pump trip, and pump start-up will
be considered below.

Valve Movements
One of the most common causes of pipeline
pressure surge is the movement of a valve. Any
valve movement causes pressure waves to
propagate through the pipeline system. The
magnitude of this pressure wave depends on several
factors. These factors include the type of valve, how
quickly the valve is moved, the hydraulic properties
of the system, and the elastic properties and
restraint of the pipeline.

A sudden valve closure, such as an emergency
shutdown valve closure with a short valve closure
time creates the same behaviour as a slamming
check valve. Check valves can cause large pressure
surges if the flow back through them can occur
before the valve closure is complete. This may
occur following a pump failure where the pump
discharge pressure drops rapidly resulting in the
check valve closure.

Most modern check valves do not slam. A spring or
weight are commonly used to close the valve at the
instant when the flow ceases, while other check
valves close slowly, regulated by a damping
mechanism, to bring the flow to rest gradually.
Even for these check valves there may be some
elastic energy in the system which will cause a
pressure surge.

Therefore it is important to ensure that the valve
either closes quickly before a reverse flow can
become large or closes slowly over a time interval
that is considerably greater than the critical time of
closure as given by Equation 4 below. Otherwise a
high pressure could occur at the time of the valve
closure.

Pump Trip
Pipelines with a large static lift and where the
pipeline elevation profile immediately downstream
of the pumps rises rapidly can observe severe
pressure surge following an event such as a pump
power failure. When a pump stops, the pressure
drop propagates down the pipeline. This pressure
drop may result in cavitation and cavity closure
shocks. A flow reversal may occur, resulting in over
pressurisation of the system if the transient is not
controlled correctly. This over pressurisation tends
to occur in the vicinity of the pumps.

The magnitude of a pressure surge depends upon
the fluid compressibility, its density, and the
magnitude of the change in the flow velocity. The
magnitude of the pressure surge caused by a sudden
change in fluid velocity can be approximately
expressed by J oukowsky's Law (Equation 1), which
is based on the total conservation of kinetic energy
of motion into pressure head.

Pump Start-up
When a pump starts up a positive pressure surge is
created in the downstream pipeline section. The
magnitude of this pressure increment depends upon
how quickly the velocity is increased when the
check valve is forced open and the fluid in the line
begins to move.

Pump start-up pressure surge typically occurs when
the pipeline is not completely primed for the start-
up, such as following the tripping of a pump in the
event of a power failure. The fluid may come to rest
in the pipeline following the possible formation of
vapour cavities. When pumping is resumed these
vapour cavities collapse resulting in transient
pressures developing. (Ref 3)

What are the Effects of Surge?
Pressure surges within pipeline systems can lead to
severe damage and the potential failure of pipeline
equipment. Pressure surge damage can occur due to
pressures in excess of the maximum allowable
pipeline pressures, resulting in damage to pumps,
valves and the pipe. Damage may also occur due to
pressures below the minimum allowable operating
4 Garry Hanmer, Susan Bachman, Gregory Lind PSIG 1417
pressures, where low pressures can result in
cavitation and pipeline collapse. Failures can occur
under a number of different situations, including:
Failure of static components through fatigue,
erosion or corrosion
Failure of dynamic components leading to
high fatigue loads on other components
Failure of the piping system due to extreme
pressures or temperatures
Transients in pipeline systems can cause the local
absolute pressure of the fluid to approach its vapour
pressure. At the vapour pressure of the fluid, gases
begin to come out of the solution. If a pipeline
transient results in a drop in pressure which is
severe enough to cause the pressure to reach the
vapour pressure, then the fluid boils (cavitates)
forming pockets of un-dissolved gases and vapour
(column separation).

When the local absolute pressure increases, the
cavitation bubbles collapse rapidly and violently.
During the collapse of the cavitation bubbles, the
vapour bubbles will transform themselves back into
a liquid state. There is a large volume change
during this transformation, where the collapsing
bubbles release a large amount of energy resulting
in pipeline damage. Damage due to cavitation can
include, material fatigue, component damage and
cavitation erosion.

When the vapour pressure of a homogenous fluid
such as water is reached, the entire fluid begins to
change phase, resulting in the formation of large
vapour cavities. For non-homogenous fluids such as
a hydrocarbon, only the light ends (such as
condensates) with low specific volume are affected.
Figure 9- Fluid Vapour Pressures shows the
vapour pressures of Ethane, Iso-Butane, Propane,
Iso-Pentane, Pentane and Hexane.

How to Mitigate Surge?
There are many devices and procedures which may
be used in order to mitigate unacceptable levels of
pressure. Surge mitigation is a safety critical
requirement and should be treated with the highest
level of importance. A surge mitigation device or
procedure which does not perform when required
may result in catastrophic consequences. The
following devices and procedures will be analyzed
in the following sections; valve movements, relief
valves, surge tanks, increased pipeline diameter and
increased pipeline wall thickness.

Valve Movement
The impact of valve movements varies significantly
between different types of valves. Gate valves for
example must be nearly closed before it generates
enough head loss to decrease the velocity by a
significant amount.

The sudden closure of a valve causes an increase in
pressure head to occur at the upstream location and
a decrease in pressure head ( H ) in the
downstream location, which propagate at a speed
(c). Using the linear momentum equation the
change in pressure head can be calculated:

=
c
V
g
V c
H 1
*

(Equation 1)

In most rigid pipe situations V/c is less than 0.01
and Equation 1 is therefore often reduced to:
V
g
c
H =

(Equation 2)
Where:
Gravity g
Wavespeed c
Change Velocity V
Change Head essure H
=
=
=
=

Pr


From this equation it can be seen that a change in
velocity results in a change in pressure head. The
calculation depends upon the wave speed as
calculated in (Equation 3).

There are several equations which can be used to
calculate the speed of the pressure wave. These can
PSIG 1417 Pipeline Surge Analysis Studies 5
vary depending upon fluid types and pipe
properties. For an approximation of thin-walled
pipes the wave propagation speeds can be
calculated using:
2
1
1

+ =
Ee
D
K
c

(Equation 3)
Where:
Factor stra
Thickness Wall e
Elasticity of Modulus E
Diameter Pipe D
Modulus Bulk K
Density
Wavespeed c
int Re



=
=
=
=
=
=
=

The wave will subsequently reflect from upstream
and downstream and may then result in excessively
high or low pressures on either side of the pumps.

The wave reflection time can then be calculated
using the following equation:
c
L
T
2
=

(Equation 4)
Where:
Wavespeed c =
Length Pipe = L
Time Reflection Wave = T


Thus according to (Equation 4), the configuration
given in Figure 1- Single Pipe would show
conditions at the supply occurring L/c seconds after
the conditions at the demand.

The effects of the pressure head change can be
demonstrated by varying the valve closure time.
Figure 2- Upstream Pressure when the Valve is
closed within Different Time Periods shows the
simulated effects of different valve closure times on
the pressure immediately upstream of a valve. A
linear valve curve was used for the purposes of
generating this data. The figure shows valve
closure times of one second (red), five seconds
(blue), ten seconds (pink), thirty seconds (green),
and sixty seconds (orange).

The increasing valve closure time in each case
shows a decreasing peak pressure. The simulated
fluid velocities for each of these valve closure times
within Figure 3- Upstream Velocity When the
Valve shows the velocity is reduced at lower rates
with the increasing valve closure time, resulting in
the lower pressure. Figure 3 shows valve closure
times of one second (red), five seconds (blue), ten
seconds (pink), thirty seconds (green), and sixty
seconds (orange).

Relief Valve
Relief valves allow for fast acting pressure relief
within the pipeline. Relief valves open when a pre-
defined pressure is exceeded and range from
inexpensive and simple spring loaded discs to more
expensive and complicated systems designed to
operate within milliseconds. The purpose of relief
valves is to provide an escape for the flowing fluid
so that a sudden change in velocity and consequent
change in pressure do not occur.

Figure 4- The Effect of a Relief Valve compares
the simulated upstream pressure of a one second
valve closure on two similar networks. The only
difference between these two networks is the
presence of a relief valve in one network
immediately upstream to the closing valve. The red
trend shows the pressures without the relief valve,
and the green trend shows the pressures with the
relief valve. It can be seen that the chosen relief
valve has a significant effect on lowering the peak
pressure at the upstream location of the closing
valve.

Surge Tanks
Surge tanks can be used to mitigate both high and
low pressures. They may act as temporary storage
devices for excess liquid which has been diverted
from the main pipeline flow. This diversion allows
6 Garry Hanmer, Susan Bachman, Gregory Lind PSIG 1417
for a more gradual change in velocity in the pipeline
and a reduction in the magnitude of transient
pressure waves.

Surge tanks may also be used to supply liquid to the
pipeline to prevent excessive deceleration and low
pressures. Surge tanks can be used to act as
damping devices on a pipeline where velocities go
back and forth frequently.

Increased Pipeline Diameter
Increased pipeline diameters may be included in the
pipeline design to reduce potential surge pressures.
This is done by reducing the fluid velocity resulting
in a reduced change in momentum to bring the fluid
to rest.

Increased pipeline diameters may also have a
negative impact due to the reduction of the
frictional damping of the pressure fluctuations. The
following formula can be utilized to calculate the
pipeline design pressure:
T J L F
D
t S
P * * * *
* * 2
=

(Equation 5)

Where:
3) (Table Factor Derating e Temperatur T
2) (Table Factor J oint l Logitudina = J
1) (Table Factor Location = L
1) (Table Factor Design = F
Diameter Pipe External = D
Thickness Wall = t
Strength Yield Minimum Specified = S
Pressure Design = P
=


The calculated design pressure observed when
varying external pipe diameter can be seen in
Figure 5- External Diameter Vs. Design Pressure.
This figure utilizes the equation above and shows
that as the external diameter is increased, the design
pressure decreases. An increase to the pipe wall
thickness may be used to balance the reduced
design pressure produced by the increased diameter.
Note that Figure 5- External Diameter Vs. Design
Pressure assumes that all other factors within the
equation remain constant, for example as the
pipeline diameter is increased, the pipe wall
thickness remains constant.

Pipeline Wall Thickness
A stronger pipeline may be necessary where other
surge mitigation techniques are not possible.
Stronger pipelines may be achieved through
increased wall thickness for example.

Increased pipeline wall thickness is a more costly
method in terms of initial capital, although it does
not require the same level of further maintenance
and testing as other mitigation methods require.
(Equation 5) may be used to show the effects of an
increased pipeline design pressure in relation to
pipeline wall thickness.

Figure 6- Pipe Wall Thickness Vs. Design
Pressure shows the calculated effects on the design
pressure to a variation in pipeline wall thickness.
Note that this figure assumes that all other factors
remain constant and the only variable is the pipe
wall thickness.

How to Perform Surge Analysis?
When analyzing the pipeline for pressure surge
scenarios, it is important to ensure that all of the
potential hazards and threats to the pipeline which
result in pressure surge are addressed. Each
pipeline will be unique in this respect; however the
following is a sample of scenarios which should be
considered:
1. What if power fails to the motors driving the
pumps?
2. What if the power fails to the motors driving the
pumps?
3. What if the pump delivery valve closes in a
given number of seconds?
4. What if one pump trips and another keeps
running?
PSIG 1417 Pipeline Surge Analysis Studies 7
5. What if a pump is restarted within a given
number of seconds after being tripped?
6. What if a control or emergency shut-down valve
is closed rapidly?
7. What if an operator opens/closes a valve too
quickly?
8. What if a given pipeline component
malfunctions?
9. What if the demand on the system is increased?
Should there be any changes to the pipeline design
or operating conditions; the pressure surge analysis
should be conducted again on all parts of the
pipeline system. This pressure surge analysis should
include all pipeline and operating condition
modifications and should monitor the effects of
these modifications on all parts of the network and
not just the modified section of the pipeline.

This analysis should ensure that the design data is
correctly input and attempts should be made to
ensure that the design data is reliable. Unreliable
design data can have a significant impact on the
reliability of the analysis. This design data includes
items such as, flow rates, component operating
characteristics, material specification and fluid
properties.

An Example Surge Analysis
The procedure for a manual surge analysis study
utilizing some of the equations discussed above will
be followed for a simple pipeline. A valve closure
at the outlet of a short crude oil pipeline will be
studied. There is a safe operating limit on the
pipeline equal to a head of 1000 meters (3280.83
feet) for the crude oil which will be transported in
the pipeline. Table 4 details the pipeline properties
which will be used for the surge analysis study
calculations.

In order to calculate the J oukowskys head, the
wave propagation speed and the fluid deceleration
must first be calculated. The wave propagation
speed can be calculated as follows:

s ft
s m c
c
Ee
D
K
c
/ 64 . 3368
/ 76 . 1026
1 *
7 . 12 * 2.0E11
4 . 914
1.3E9
1
840
1


2
1
2
1

=
=

+ =

+ =

In order to calculate the fluid deceleration it is
assumed that the fluid velocity will decrease
linearly over the valve closure time. This
assumption may result in inaccuracies within the
calculated values. The magnitude of the
inaccuracies will depend upon the actual valve type
being used on the pipeline.
2
* r
q
V

=

(Equation 6)
Where:
Radius Pipe r
Rate Flow q
Velocity Fluid V





=
=
=


This gives:
s ft
s m V
V
/ 44 . 26
/ 06 . 8
4445 . 0 *
5


2
=
=
=

J oukowskys law may now be used to approximate
the head increase for the given valve closure:
8 Garry Hanmer, Susan Bachman, Gregory Lind PSIG 1417
ft
m H
H
V
g
c
H
45 . 2767
52 . 843
06 . 8 *
81 . 9
76 . 1026




=
=
=
=

Before this value can be compared to the pipeline
design pressure, the initial pipeline head at the
location of the valve closure must be added to the
J oukowskys head. This will give the maximum
head value as:
ft
m Head Max
Head Max
Head Joukowsky
Head Initial Head Max




17 . 4726
54 . 1440
52 . 843 02 . 597


=
=
+ =
+
=

It can be seen that the calculated head is above the
design head for the required fluid and there is now a
requirement for a surge mitigation procedure or
device. This can be done be controlling the valve
movements, such as the manipulation of the valve
closure time.

J oukowskys law assumes that the valve closes
instantaneously. A modification of this law can be
made for short pipes to include the valve closure
time, where the wave reflection time given in
(Equation 4) is sufficiently less that the valve
closure time. The 500 meter pipeline given in Table
4 was used to demonstrate this equation, and
compared against simulated data. An approximation
for valve closure times of 1 second, 2 seconds, 3
seconds, 4 seconds and 5 seconds can be given by
the equation:
dt
dV
g
c
H =

(Equation 7)

Rearranging this equation to give the required valve
closure time; an approximation of 2.78 seconds
ensures that the pipeline pressure does not rise to
unacceptable levels following the valve closure with
a safety factor of 10%. This equation assumes a
linear fluid deceleration for the entire valve closure
time, which is an unrealistic assumption. For a gate
valve for example, only the last 2-5% of the valve
closure motion is critical for determining the
maximum pressure and different valve types will
produce different results.

The length of the pipeline section immediately
upstream of the closing valve (to the next upstream
constraint or boundary condition) will also have a
considerable effect on the maximum head, which is
also not taken into account.

As shown above, although it is possible to perform
simple surge analysis based on various equations,
the use of an accurate hydraulic simulation software
is essential for pipeline design, expansion study and
operations planning. A few benefits of hydraulic
simulation analysis are:
Accurate assessment of pressure surges caused
by different operating scenarios, based on the
exact pipeline material, dimensions, fluid
properties, equipment type and location
Effective transient simulations and analysis of
emergency situations such as power failure, and
equipment malfunction
Timely analysis and automatic report of a large
quantity of surge scenarios

How to Automate Surge
Analysis?
To carry out surge analysis, the entire pipeline
network must be included for the effects of pressure
surge, including any branches. Hydraulic
PSIG 1417 Pipeline Surge Analysis Studies 9
simulations are an effective way of conducting this
analysis, where the simulation may be used to
analyze the entire pipeline network as a whole or
various subsections of the network.

A hydraulic simulation software that can accurately
model the effects of the pressure surge should be
used. The following elements should be considered
when selecting a hydraulic simulation software for
surge analysis:
Variable knot spacing allows for accurate
analysis of the pressure surge, minimizing
interpolation and errors
Variable time steps allow for accurate
analysis of the pressure wave propagation
Reverse velocity modelling allows dynamic
check valve modelling
Pump modelling allows accurate spin up
and spin-down times
Control logic for accurately simulating
pipeline control systems during surge events
Valve characteristic inputs allows for
accurate valve closure modelling

Surge Analysis Tool
While a hydraulic simulation software is effective at
identifying pressure surges, the effort required in
conducting surge analysis studies can be extensive
and time consuming. This is due to the large
variety of operating conditions that must be
analyzed. This issue is only amplified for large
pipeline networks and poses a significant challenge.

To reduce the effort required in conducting pipeline
surge analysis studies for pipeline design,
operational changes, and product changes, a surge
analysis program has been developed to automate
the procedure from the scheduling of simulation
scenarios to the creation of the surge analysis
report.

The surge analysis program has been exclusively
designed for the purpose of surge analysis,
simplifying and automating the process of providing
the necessary submissions to the regulatory
authorities.

The surge analysis program will analyze all selected
parts of the pipeline sequentially without any
further input from the user. This can be an
extremely efficient method for analyzing very large
pipelines and networks, allowing the users to
conduct other tasks while the calculations are being
conducted by the software. The user will receive a
report in their selected format when the analysis is
complete. This report outlines each surge scenario
with the resulting pressure and produces tables and
trends of the data.

The automatically generated surge analysis report is
provided in a format that the regulatory authorities
and surge analysis engineers can easily scrutinise.
Figure 7- Surge Analysis Sample Pipeline
Network shows a sample pipeline configuration for
a pipeline with four intermediate pumping stations.
Figure 8 Surge Analysis Report shows the
automatically generated report from the surge
analysis tool for the sample pipeline configuration,
where examples of the tables and trends are
displayed.

The automatically generated report shows a
selection of information within a tabulated format
for each pressure surge scenario. This information
includes:
Software version for traceability
Project name and description
Date report is generated
Name of closed valve \ tripped pump
Indication of MAOP \ SOP violation
Time \ Location \ Pressure of MAOP \ SOP
violation

10 Garry Hanmer, Susan Bachman, Gregory Lind PSIG 1417
Pump trip times

The report also generates a selection of trends for
each pressure surge scenario including:
Pressure trend at MAOP \ SOP violation
Pressure trend upstream of valve closure \
pump trip
Maximum piezometric pressure profile for
each scenario
Minimum piezometric pressure profile for
each scenario
Scenario flow trends

This information is automatically generated without
any further interaction with the pressure surge
analysis engineer. Pressure trends at the location of
the MAOP \ SOP violations are automatically
generated at the point of the violation. There is no
requirement for a reporting point to be pre-defined
within the simulation at the location of the
violation. This prevents a duplication of the surge
analysis study, where an initial analysis is
conducted to determine the location of the
violations and a second study is conducted to
interrogate the pressure trends at the location of any
violations.

In the event of a failure within any of the surge
analysis scenarios this information can be used to
determine which surge mitigation procedure or
device to incorporate. The minimum and maximum
piezometric pressure profiles as determined by the
hydraulic analysis results may be used with
(Equation 5) for example to calculate the required
wall thickness for a given design pressure. Increases
within the pipeline wall thickness are normally not a
practical solution for an existing operational
pipeline, due to the costs associated with the
modification. Existing operational pipelines are
usually looped as a way to increase capacity for
example. Increased pipeline diameter is therefore
typically only considered during the pipeline design
phase.

The pressure surge analysis study may then
automatically rerun the schedule of scenarios with
the applied pressure surge mitigation procedures
and devices incorporated. An updated report will
then be generated for the modified scenarios.

A pipeline configuration report may also be
generated from the hydraulic simulation software to
be included within the pressure surge analysis
report. This configuration report will provide
detailed information regarding the pipeline
configuration, such as pipe lengths, diameters, wall
thickness, pump and valve performance curve data
and the model boundary conditions for each model
item.

A surge analysis study could take several days,
weeks or even months to conduct depending upon
the size and complexity of the pipeline. Running
each individual pressure surge scenario,
interrogating the simulation results and generating a
surge analysis report are all routine tasks which can
be automated. The automation of these tasks often
allows the surge analysis study to be conducted
within a few hours. This can reduce costs and
enhance opportunities significantly. The enhanced
opportunities could be from the additional revenue
generated by completing the surge analysis study
timely for an increase in pipeline capacity earlier, or
the ability to provide temporary capacity increases
to fulfil a one-off demand which may not have been
possible if the surge analysis study were to take
several days or weeks to conduct. The automated
interrogation of results also allows for the removal
of human errors from the procedure, thus increasing
the accuracy of the analysis. The selection of an
incorrect location of the peak pressure, for example,
could have catastrophic consequences.

Pipeline Logic Control
During a pressure surge a flow reversal may occur,
which could result in the over pressurization of the
system if the transient is not controlled correctly.
Pipeline pressure surge can be controlled providing
the procedures are fully understood and planned in
advance. Planned procedures may assist with
minimizing the impact of a pressure surge. This
requires that a previous analysis of the system
PSIG 1417 Pipeline Surge Analysis Studies 11
including the pipeline controls has been conducted.
In the event of a pipeline operator closing a pipeline
valve too quickly for example, the pipeline control
logic may be replicated and where necessary
modified to safely respond to the valve closure,
minimizing the pressure surge and reducing the
likelihood of cavitation.

Advanced pipeline control logic may be included in
the hydraulic simulation to achieve the most
accurate representation of the pipeline system
response. This control logic includes feedback
control elements such as PID control blocks.
Figure 10: Control Diagram Editor shows a PID
control block embedded within the hydraulic
simulation software, where feedback control of the
pipeline system is being used to automate the
response of pipeline components to the effects of a
pressure surge. Utilizing control elements within a
hydraulic simulation allows the simulation to
replicate the physical control system on the pipeline
network.

Pipeline pressure surge analysis may therefore be
conducted on the pipeline control system in addition
to the pipeline. This allows the pressure surge
analysis study to monitor the effects of the control
system and indicate much safer methods for
operating the pipeline network.

Case Studies
Two surge analysis case studies will be considered
in this section. Case 1 considers a capacity
expansion of an existing low sulphur diesel
pipeline, and case 2 considers a new pipeline design
study.

Case 1
Consider a pipeline modification study for an
existing low sulphur diesel pipeline with 100 km
(62.14 mile) in length and 16 inches in diameter.
The pipeline requires an increase in the existing
flow rate. This increases the volumetric flow rate
from 0.15 m3/s (5.3 ft3/s) to 0.2 m3/s (7.06 ft3/s).
The pipeline has a booster pump and a mainline
pump located at the pipeline inlet and an
intermediate pumping facility located 50 km (31.07
mile) downstream. Figure 11: Case 1 Pipeline
Modification Surge Analysis shows the pipeline
configuration.

There is a maximum allowable operating pressure
of 6550 kPa (950 psi) and a minimum pressure at
the pipeline outlet of 450 kPa (65 psi).

Steady state analysis of the pipeline indicates that
the pipeline discharge pressure at the main pump
station is required to be 5100 kPa (740 psi) and a
discharge pressure at the intermediate pump station
is required to be 4500 kPa (652.67 psi). A dynamic
surge analysis study can now be conducted on the
pipeline. Three pressure surge events will be
considered:
1. Pump trip at the pipeline inlet
2. Pump trip at the intermediate pumping station
3. Sudden valve closure at the pipeline outlet

The steps demonstrated within the An Example
Surge Analysis section above could take several
days to perform for this modification. A hydraulic
simulation utilizing the surge analysis program can
perform this operation in a number of minutes. This
allows the surge analysis study to be much more
cost effective and allows the results to be obtained
much sooner. The pipeline operator would
therefore benefit from the cost savings of
conducting the studies and would be able to utilize
the increased pipeline capacity much sooner,
generating additional revenue.

Figure 12: Case 1 Pipeline Maximum Pressures
Violation shows an automatically generated trend
from the surge analysis tool for the peak pressure
location on the pipeline. An image of this trend is
appended to the surge analysis report which is
produced by the surge analysis programme. The
blue trend shows the pressure over time at the
location of the peak pressure during the simulation
run. The red and orange trends show the MAOP
and SOP limits respectively. It can be seen that the
peak pressure exceeds the MAOP limit when the
valve is closed suddenly at the outlet.

12 Garry Hanmer, Susan Bachman, Gregory Lind PSIG 1417
In order to mitigate the pressure surge an increase in
the valve closure time could be made. Each of the
simulation scenarios can be rerun automatically
with the applied change. Figure 13: Case 1
Pipeline Maximum and Minimum Pressures is a
pipeline profile trend from the report produced by
the surge analysis programme following the applied
change. This trend shows the maximum (red trend)
and minimum (green trend) pressures for each point
along the selected pipeline section, for the entire
duration of the hydraulic simulation. It can be seen
that the increased valve closure time has the desired
effect on lowering the peak pressure below the
MAOP setpoint.

This peak pressure could be lowered further through
the use of the advanced control logic within the
hydraulic simulation. This could be done by
tripping the upstream pumping facilities following
the valve closure. This logic control could then be
implemented on the physical pipeline.

Case 2
Consider a pipeline design study for a new crude oil
pipeline with 60 km (37.28 mile) in length and 16
inches in diameter. The pipeline requires a pumping
station to be located at the main inlet, and has a tie-
in point at 20 km downstream. There are 8
intermediate block valve stations along the pipeline.
Figure 14: Case 2 Pipeline Design Surge Analysis
shows the pipeline configuration.

There is a maximum flow rate at the pumping
station of 0.15m3/s (5.3ft/s) and 0.04m3/s (1.41ft/s)
at the tie-in point, and a discharge pressure
requirement at the pipeline inlet of 10100 kPa (1450
psi). There is a maximum allowable operating
pressure of 10200 kPa (1480 psi).

Steady state analysis of the pipeline indicates that
the pipeline pressures and flows are sufficient to
meet the production targets. A dynamic surge
analysis study can now be conducted on the
pipeline. Eleven pressure surge events will be
considered:
1. Pump trip at the pipeline inlet
2. Sudden valve closure at the 8 intermediate block
valve facilities
3. Sudden valve closure at the pipeline inlet and
outlet

Usually this analysis could take several days to
weeks to conduct. The surge analysis tool can be
used to conduct the required pressure surge analysis
in a much more efficient manner, reducing the
analysis time to several hours.

The one step solution provided by the surge analysis
programme prepares a detailed analysis of the
pipeline pressures and flows for the required
pipeline section. The automatically generated report
shows that the required valve closure time produces
peak pressures of 12100 kPa (1750 psi). This
pressure is above the MAOP threshold of 10200
kPa (1480 psi), and also above the SOP threshold.

In order to mitigate the pressure surge an increase in
the valve closure time could be made, however this
may be limited by the emergency shutdown
requirements on the pipeline. A second option is
for a surge relief tank to be located immediately
downstream of the pumping station with a relief
pressure of 10100 kPa (1465 psi), and an additional
tank located at the first and second block valve
stations. Figure 15: Case 2 Pipeline Design Surge
Analysis with Surge Relief shows the modified
configuration with the pressure relief valves and
surge relief tanks installed.

Figure 16: Case 2 - The Effect of a Relief Valve on
Pressure shows the effects of the surge relief valves
in reducing the pressure surge to below the MAOP
limit. The green trend shows the pressure at the
pipeline high pressure location without the relief
valve, and the blue trend shows the pressure at the
same location with the relief valve. The orange
trend shows the MAOP setpoint. It can be seen that
the chosen relief valve has the desired effect on
lowering the peak pressure below the MAOP
setpoint.

As with Case 1, the peak pressure could also be
lowered further in Case 2 through the use of the
PSIG 1417 Pipeline Surge Analysis Studies 13
advanced control logic within the hydraulic
simulation. This could be done by tripping the
upstream pumping facilities following the valve
closure. This logic control could then be
implemented on the physical pipeline.

Conclusions
Surge analysis studies are an essential part of
pipeline design and operations planning. Hydraulic
analysis of the pipeline network allows for potential
pressure surge risks to be identified and for surge
mitigation measures to be designed and
implemented.

In order to avoid pipeline damage resulting from
pressure surge, it is necessary to determine if there
is likely to be a pressure surge. This may be
determined through the use of pipeline simulation
tools, where valve closures and pump station
shutdowns may be simulated and the resulting fluid
behaviour analyzed.

To prevent an increase in fatigue damage to the
pipeline, devices and procedures such as valve
opening and closing times, pressure relief valves,
surge tanks, increased pipeline diameter and
increased pipeline wall thickness can be used as
surge mitigation measures. Efforts however should
be made to ensure that these measures agree with
emergency procedures.

To reduce the effort required in conducting pipeline
surge analysis studies, routine procedures may be
automated utilizing a surge analysis tool to schedule
and run simulation scenarios, interrogate the
simulation results and generate a surge analysis
report.

This paper has demonstrated that the whole surge
analysis procedure can be automated into a single
step, reducing the time from several day or weeks to
a few hours. In addition, it improves the accuracy of
the analysis by removing human errors from the
process. The reduced time in completing such surge
analysis can help increase revenues by running
pipelines at higher capacities sooner and reduce the
cost of such analysis.

Author Biography
Garry Hanmer is a Principal Project Engineer at
ATMOS International in Manchester, United
Kingdom. Garry Hanmer has over 8 years
experience in the pipeline industry with an
emphasis on pipeline hydraulic simulation. He also
has experience in development and delivery of
pipeline operations and integrity management
software systems. Garry Hanmer has a Master of
Engineering in Aeronautical Engineering (MEng
Hons) from the University of Salford, UK.

References
1. Flixborough (Nypro UK) Explosion 1st J une
1974. http://www.hse.gov.uk
(http://www.hse.gov.uk/comah/sragtech/caseflix
boroug74.htm)
2. Pipeline Pressure Limits - Pipelines Safety
Regulations 1996 http://www.hse.gov.uk
(http://www.hse.gov.uk/pipelines/resources/pipe
linepressure.htm)
3. Entrapped Air in Pipelines, Martin C.S., 1976
4. Hydraulics of Pipeline Systems. Bruce E.
Larock, Roland W J eppson, Gary Z Watters.
5. Pipeline Design and Construction A Practical
Approach. M. Mohitpour, H. Golshan, A.
Murray.
6. Fluid Transients in Pipeline Systems. A.R.D
Thorley

FIGURES

Figure 1- Single Pipe Example for Water Hammer Analysis


Figure 2- Upstream Pressure when the Valve is closed within Different Time Periods


Figure 3- Upstream Velocity When the Valve is Closed within Different Time Periods
PSIG 1417 Pipeline Surge Analysis Studies 15

Figure 4- The Effect of a Relief Valve on Pressure


Figure 5- External Diameter Vs. Design Pressure

16 Garry Hanmer, Susan Bachman, Gregory Lind PSIG 1417

Figure 6- Pipe Wall Thickness Vs. Design Pressure


Figure 7- Surge Analysis Sample Pipeline Network
PSIG 1417 Pipeline Surge Analysis Studies 17


Figure 8- Surge Analysis Report


Figure 9- Fluid Vapour Pressures
18 Garry Hanmer, Susan Bachman, Gregory Lind PSIG 1417



Figure 10: Control Diagram Editor


Figure 11: Case 1 Pipeline Modification Surge Analysis

PSIG 1417 Pipeline Surge Analysis Studies 19

Figure 12: Case 1 Pipeline Maximum Pressures Violation



Figure 13: Case 1 Pipeline Maximum and Minimum Pressures
20 Garry Hanmer, Susan Bachman, Gregory Lind PSIG 1417

Figure 14: Case 2 Pipeline Design Surge Analysis


Figure 15: Case 2 Pipeline Design Surge Analysis with Surge Relief


Figure 16: Case 2 - The Effect of a Relief Valve on Pressure
PSIG 1417 Pipeline Surge Analysis Studies 21
TABLES
Design Factor * Location (Gas and Liquid))
Application Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4
Gas (nonsour)
General & cased crossings 0.8 0.72 0.56 0.44
Roads 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4
Railways 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4
Stations 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4
Gas (sour service)
General & cased crossings 0.72 0.6 0.5 0.4
Roads 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4
Railways 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4
Stations 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4
High Vapour Pressure
Liquid General & Cased crossings 0.64 0.64 0.64
Roads 0.64 0.64 0.64
Railways 0.5 0.5 0.5
Stations 0.64 0.64 0.64
Low vapour pressure liquid
All but uncased RR crossings 0.8 0.8 0.8
Uncased railroad crossings 0.8 0.5 0.5
Table 1 Design Factors for CSA Z662-07

Pipe Type CSA Z662-07
Seamless 1.0
Electric Welded 1.0
Submerged arc welded 1.0
Furnace butt welded 0.6
Table 2 Longitudinal J oint Factors for CSA Z662-07

Temperature (C) CSA Z662-07
>120 1.0
150 0.97
180 0.93
200 0.91
130 0.87
Table 3 Temperature Derating Factors for CSA Z662-07

SI Imperial
Pipe Diameter 0.9144 m 36 in
Pipe Wall Thickness 0.0127 M 0.5 in
Pipe Length 500 M 1640.41 ft
Pipe Modulus of Elasticity 1300000000 Pa 188549.06 psi
Pipe Inlet pressure 5101325 Pa 739.88 psi
Pipe Steady State Flow 5 m3/s 176.57 ft3/s
Restraint Factor 1 - 1 -
Fluid Density 840 Kg/m3 52.43 lb/ft3
Table 4 Pipeline Properties