Live online Basic

Flare Package System Design and Application

3(70)

403 enrolled

5811 views

COMPLETED

1.5 hrs

5811 views

Shanmugam VLead / Senior Mechanical Engineer/Static Equipment Engineer

Oil & Gas Upstream

Energy & Utilities

Session recordings included
Certificate of completion

Volume pricing for groups of 5+

Why enroll

Learn and Understand Flare Package System

Apply this learning into your professional role

This course will help beginners to expand their knowledge on Flare System

Those who are working on EPC Industry, this course is very useful

Your instructor

Shanmugam V

Pr Engineer

Lead / Senior Mechanical Engineer/Static Equipment Engineer

23+ yrs experience·United Arab Emirates

Is this course for you?

You should take this if

You work in Oil & Gas Upstream or Energy & Utilities
You're a Chemical & Process / Electrical Engineering professional
You prefer live, instructor-led training with Q&A

You should skip if

You need a different specialisation outside Chemical & Process
You need fully self-paced, on-demand content

Course details

Course suitable for

Opportunities that await you!

Career opportunities

Training details

This is a live course that has a scheduled start date.

Live session

Starts

Sat, Jan 13, 2024

6:00 AM UTC· your timezone

Duration

1.5 hours per day

✎ Where this fits — what comes before, what comes next

COMPLETED

Questions and Answers

Q: You're at site for pre-commissioning and searching "flare package pre commissioning checklist sequence acceptance test". The brownfield flare package has new pilots and a reused KO drum. What's the right verification sequence before introducing purge gas?

A: A lines up with field reality. Internals and arrestor orientation are mechanical barriers; you don't bury those after introducing fuel. Electrical continuity comes before lighting anything. B jumps to ignition with no mechanical sign-off. C mixes pressure testing with live pilots; that's a bad day during turnaround. D assumes drawings protect you from a misinstalled vortex breaker.

Q: While reviewing deviations and googling "flare stack material sour service high temperature corrosion" you notice the vendor proposes carbon steel for the upper flare tip body. The service includes H2S, intermittent flaring, and peak metal temps near 650°C. What's the dominant degradation risk?

A: A matches the chemistry and temperature window. Sulfur plus heat eats carbon steel fast. B sounds scary but needs wet chlorides and tensile stress at lower temps. C needs decades and different alloy history. D applies to syngas heaters, not open flare tips.

Q: You're sanity-checking a relief case and searching "flare radiation heat flux estimate back of envelope". A ground flare releases 25 MMSCFD of dry gas, HHV 1,000 Btu/scf. Assume 98% combustion efficiency. Order-of-magnitude radiation at grade 50 m away?

A: A shows the right chain: flow to heat, knock out combustion losses, then a realistic radiative fraction. B forgets flame emerges above the enclosure. C drops physics and treats convection as radiation. D stacks minor effects to scare yourself.

Q: During SAT you're looking up "flare pilot flame detection loop check procedure". The UV flame scanner intermittently drops out. What's the first on-site check before blaming the PLC?

A: A is physical and fast. Misalignment kills UV detection. B hides the symptom and risks SIL. C may be right later but not as a first move. D breaks the protection layer during testing.