First page padding

REMOTE MONITORING OF ER PROBES USING A 900MHZ MESH NETWORK

Timothy H. Bieri
BP Exploration (Alaska), Inc.
CIC Group
900 East Benson Blvd.
Anchorage, AK 99519

Robert Steele
Rohrback Cosasco Systems
11841 East Smith
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670

ABSTRACT

At Alaska’s North Slope, existing fields span a large geographic area where three phase
production fluids can cause severe corrosion. To monitor corrosion and provide feedback for the
chemical mitigation program, electrical resistance probes connected to remote data collectors are
installed at approximately 80 locations. Measurements are made on a four hour interval at each
location, and data are collected during weekly site visits. A wireless remote monitoring unit utilizing a
mesh network of 900 MHz spread spectrum radios was developed to collect data from the existing
hardware and transmit it to a central location. In a pilot project, five remote monitoring units and one
central unit were successfully deployed in the summer of 2005.
Keywords: remote monitoring, remote data collector, electrical resistance, digital network, mesh
network, smart radio, data packets, frequency hopping, spread spectrum

BACKGROUND

BP Exploration (Alaska), Inc. is the operator of Greater Prudhoe Bay (GPB), which is one of
several fields located along Alaska’s North Slope (see Figure 1). GPB is a remote field that is spread
across an area of ~400 mile2 (1,036 km2) with drill sites connected by a road network. Three-phase
production fluids coming from wells are combined together and transported to separation facilities via
flow lines. With 12% CO2 and water cut in excess of 70%, sweet corrosion can be severe and is
mitigated with continuous injection of corrosion inhibitor. Electrical resistance (ER) probes are used to
monitor short term trends in corrosion rates on the flow lines and provide feedback to the chemical
mitigation program. There are ~80 ER probes in service throughout GPB, making measurements on 4-
hour intervals. The data are stored in a remote data collector (RDC) and downloaded to a handheld
unit once per week by a technician. The data are then uploaded from the handheld unit to a database
where they are available for analysis.

Figure 1 - Alaska's North Slope Oil Fields

The ER probe locations are typically remote from any power or communication infrastructure. This
lack of infrastructure provided the reason to evaluate wireless remote monitoring technologies. The
term “wireless remote monitoring” can have many meanings1; within the context of this paper it is
considered a Class 5 network that has no immediate operational consequence.

WIRELESS REMOTE MONITORING REQUIREMENTS

General Hardware Requirements

Given the significant investment in existing hardware and training, designing a wireless solution
that would interface with the existing hardware was one of the chief requirements. Secondary
requirements for the new Remote Monitoring Unit (RMU) included:
o Reducing technician visits from once per week to once per quarter,
o Operating in an extremely remote and harsh environment,
o Providing power and control of a suitable communication device,
o Providing data logging capability (possible future use with other applications),
o Utilizing modular construction for ease of installation and maintenance,
o Operating from a field replaceable battery pack (or from an optional external power
source),
o Providing secure data transmissions,
o Allowing remote reconfiguration of the hardware,
o Providing for system expansion or redeployment.

Selection of a Communication System

Central to the process of recovering data from remote locations is the communication system itself.
In choosing the most appropriate communication system, a number of technologies were evaluated
including two-way paging, cellular, satellite, and radio (VHF, UHF and microwave). Each of these
options was assessed against a list of important selection criteria, including the following:
o System reliability,
o Maintaining data integrity,
o Operating in remote areas, without the need for communication infrastructure,
o Unrestricted volume of data,
o Recurring communication fees,
o Interference and compatibility with other nearby communication systems,
o Operating at temperature extremes,
o Power consumption,
o Integration into the RMU,
o Expansion capability.
Prior experience in using all of these types of communication systems helped make the selection
of both the type of communication and the specific manufacturer easier. A series of “smart” radios
utilizing 900 MHz digital spread spectrum frequency hopping to form a mesh network was determined
to be the most suitable communication system meeting the selection criteria.
System Reliability: The top priority is network reliability. No single radio failure should be able to
impact the network. The radio network is inherently robust because each radio operates as a node in a
mesh (see Figure 2). Each radio operates with distributed network intelligence as a “smart” radio that
can automatically and dynamically map its nearby neighbors and then route data via the most efficient
path.

Figure 2 - Mesh network diagram

Data Integrity: At the start of each data transmission, the smart radio breaks larger pieces of data
into smaller groups or “packets” of data. These smaller packets of data are transmitted to the
destination and reassembled. Transmitting data in small packets improves transmission reliability.
Each radio also employs encryption security and error checking algorithms to further assure message
integrity and data reliability.
Unrestricted volume of data: Beyond the limitation due to battery constraints, there is no restriction
on the amount of data that the radio mesh network can handle.
Communication Infrastructure: Since the radios create a mesh network allowing communication
from any point to any other point, there is no need for a communication infrastructure as is needed for
cellular, paging, or satellite communications. Eliminating that communication infrastructure is important
because common communication systems may be sporadic or even totally lacking in remote locations.
Communication Costs and License Fees: Monthly communication costs for a large network can be
high. Eliminating communication infrastructure also removes on-going communication costs. This
radio system has no monthly communication charges.
The 902-928 MHz frequency range is used worldwide for unlicensed industrial, scientific, and
medical instrumentation (ISM). In a few countries, some of the frequencies in this range may be
unavailable for general use, and the radios selected can be programmed not to use specific
frequencies as required on a country-by-country basis.
Interference: The spread spectrum asynchronous frequency hopping technique allows
simultaneous users of the frequency spectrum to coexist without interfering with each other and also
without being interfered with by radios outside the network system. For many years, operating radios
with the narrowest bandwidth possible was the target goal in order to minimize interference. Low cost
digital radios operating for short periods of time on many frequencies (spread spectrum frequency
hopping) allow many users to use the same frequency spectrum.
A pseudo-random frequency hopping technique guarantees that the next frequency is not near the
prior frequency and allows each radio to use well-developed narrow bandwidth techniques. Since each
frequency is used only for a very short time (less than 400 milliseconds), interference on that frequency
is unlikely. However, should interference or noise block the data packet from being received, the radio
network would detect the missing data and resend the packet, if need be by using different radios in the
mesh network. Even in the presence of interference, data are not lost.
Integration into the RMU, power consumption, and operating at extremes of temperature: Battery
power dictated that the communication technology use low power. The selected radio has low receive
power consumption, is transmit-power limited by regulation, and is specified to operate over a wide
range of ambient temperatures. To offset the low transmit power, high gain omni-directional antennas
were planned for all locations, with each antenna mounted as high and as clear of obstructions as
possible.
Expansion Capability: Because each radio can speak to and respond to neighboring radios, each
radio is an equal participant in the network. Each radio can function both as an end device and as a
repeater for other radios. Each radio employs automatic rerouting if a particular data path is unclear,
and can automatically minimize the number of hops between radios. As the network expands with the
addition of more units, the radios have more routing choices and the network becomes inherently more
robust. This built-in scalability allows easy system expansion, including the option of repositioning units
to meet new field needs.
Limitations: One inherent communication limitation of the radios is transmission range. While
communications in the 900 MHz frequency range are “line-of-sight”, the ability for the radios to mesh
minimizes this limitation since the each radio only needs to “see” another radio versus seeing the base
radio. Preliminary signal mapping indicated transmission distances between 5 and 10 miles (8 to 16
km).

RMU Design and System Integration

A key part of the instrument design was the power source. Lack of available AC power dictated
the need for an alternate power source. Wind driven sources were rejected because the various points
being monitored were too far apart to share power, and having individual wind driven power sources for
each of the many locations would be cost prohibitive. Indeed, the cost of providing a power source for
many separate locations ruled out other options as well. While solar power could be utilized cost
effectively at some locations, this project required year-round operation in the Artic region with long
periods of darkness. As a result, battery power became the power supply of choice.
Long-term operation from a battery required balancing a number of factors, including available
battery chemistries, shelf life (battery self discharge when disconnected), operation a very low
temperatures (where some battery chemistries would freeze), change in battery capacity versus
temperature, the amount of data being transmitted, how frequently data was being transmitted, and the
nature of discharge peaks caused by digital radio transmissions.
A field-replaceable, multi-cell lithium battery pack was designed to provide a year’s power supply
with once per week data transmission, or six months with once per day transmissions. Batteries from
multiple manufacturers were tested in an environmental temperature chamber using real RMUs to
verify battery and RMU performance.
Key hardware features of the instrument design included:
o Operation over an extended temperature range, -40 °F to +140 °F (-40 °C to +60 °C)
o A NEMA 4X outer enclosure and a sealed electronics inner enclosure for environmental
protection
o Multiple RS-232/RS-485 data ports for connection to the RDC, the radio, and a notebook
computer
o An embedded microprocessor for overall control
o A real time clock for RMU wakeup (powered by an independent lithium backup battery)
o Non-volatile data storage memory
o DC to DC power conversion to power the radio
In addition, to allow for feature enhancements and changes in operation, the instrument was
designed to allow field upgrades of the microprocessor firmware.
All of the data being transmitted was sent to a central location (Base Station), which consisted of
an identical radio as used in the RMU, which was attached to a personal computer (PC). The PC ran
custom developed software that received data from each RMU. This allowed the user to change the
RMU reporting schedule, change the RDC configuration, and configure the received data into files to be
merged with an existing database used for on-going corrosion analysis.

PILOT PROJECT FIELD DEPLOYMENT

Five remote units and one central unit were deployed during the summer of 2005. Refer to Figure
3 and Table 1 for locations and distances between units. The locations for these units were selected to
provide a good cross-section of transmission distances, make use of known obstructions which would
force certain radios to relay data, and provide general accessibility from the base station location.
 Figure 3 - Pilot locations and communication paths

Table 1 - Pilot transmission distances

Distance, miles
CIC 02C S01D E36U C36U X74U
CIC 2.0 4.3 9.6 8.1 7.5
02C 2.0 3.2 7.8 6.1 5.6
S01D 4.3 3.2 8.0 5.3 6.7
E36U 9.6 7.8 8.0 3.0 6.5
C36U 8.1 6.1 5.3 3.0 3.5
X74U 7.5 5.6 6.7 6.5 3.5

The units are essentially asleep 99% of the time, programmed to wake up at a specific date and
time. Once the radios are powered, they establish the mesh network. The control module interrogates
the RDC and downloads the data. The data are then transmitted and several data checks performed at
the base station. Once all the data are transmitted, the units wait for a specified period of time to
receive the current time, next wake up time, and any configuration changes. Once the cycle is
complete, the units go back to sleep.
Figure 4 shows the components of the RMU. Figure 5 shows a typical installation before insulating
the RMU and securing the cables. Figure 6 shows the insulating enclosure that captures waste heat
from the pipeline keeping the RMU warm, thereby increasing battery life.
Figure 4 - Remote Monitoring Components

Figure 5 - Typical deployment

 Figure 6 - Insulating Enclosure

The units have been operational for ~3 months and have performed nearly as expected. One of
the RMUs did have a problem with the radio unit and was sent back to the manufacturer for
diagnostics. The remaining units continue to operate sending data on a daily frequency.
Operational testing verified the ability of the radios to network and relay data. Transmission
distance was better than expected with the maximum range between 10 and 15 miles, depending on
terrain. The units will undergo several more months of operational testing through the winter. In
addition, a detailed cost benefit analysis will be performed in order to support deployment of additional
units.
As with any pilot project there were areas of improvement identified in both the hardware and
software. These improvements were prioritized and several software improvements have been
implemented through either firmware upgrades or PC software upgrades. Certain hardware
improvements were implemented in the field while others required additional testing by the
manufacturer. These improvements will be incorporated into the hardware if the project moves forward
with additional units.

BENEFITS

ER probes respond quickly to changes in system corrosivity. Having access to these data on a
timely basis allows the engineer to optimize the chemical usage and minimize corrosion damage to the
asset.
Remote monitoring reduces the travel required to obtain data and allows technicians to focus on
troubleshooting versus routine data gathering. If deployed on a field wide basis, remote monitoring
would save ~15,000 miles/year of driving and ~500 hours/year of technician time. Further, it reduces
the risk associated with driving on hazardous road conditions during a significant portion of the year.
The units are expected to result in an increase in the overall data availability and optionally increase the
data frequency (tradeoff against battery life).
 Certainly the technology is not limited to solely ER probe data. There are many possible uses for
this remote monitoring system and the radio mesh network. Applications such as logging and
transmitting data from other sources (e.g. 4-20 mA transmitters), enhanced digital ER transmitters,
process parameters, and even closed loop process control are possible through this system.

CONCLUSION

Corrosion mitigation at GPB is through chemical mitigation. Corrosion monitoring provides

identifies changes in fluid corrosivity and provides feedback to the mitigation program. ER probes and
data collectors are installed in many locations and collect data six times per day. These data are
downloaded by a technician into a handheld unit and then uploaded into a database for analysis. A
wireless remote monitoring solution was developed using a 900 MHz digital mesh network. Hardware
was developed which meets key criteria including integration with existing monitoring equipment. Five
units have been deployed in a pilot project and the initial results are encouraging. Freeing up
technician time from routine tasks and reducing driving time, timely access to data for feedback into
corrosion mitigation programs, and the potential for other uses of the wireless network are some of the
initial benefits. Additional improvements to the hardware and software have been identified and a
detailed cost-benefit analysis needs to be performed. The units will continue to operate over the
coming winter and the decision to deploy more units will be made during the first half of 2006.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work could not have been completed without an entire team devoted to its’ success. The
authors wish to recognize and thank the following people: Ken Rummelhart and Eric Johnson, ASRC
Energy Services, Inc.; Iavor Djonov, Rohrback Cosasco Systems; David Lafferty, BP Chief Technology
Office; and Richard Woollam, BP America, Inc. The authors would also like to express their gratitude to
BP Exploration (Alaska), Inc. and Rohrback Cosasco Systems, Inc. for permission to publish this work.

REFERENCES
1
Instrumentation, Systems and Automation Society’s (ISA) ISA-SP100 Wireless Systems for
Automation, http://www.isa.org/MSTemplate.cfm?MicrositeID=1134&CommitteeID=6891.