DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
POLICY STATEMENT
policy.pdf
1.0
INTRODUCTION
Sec1.pdf
2.0
Sec2.pdf
3.0
DESIGN PROCESS
Sec3.pdf
4.0
Sec4.pdf
5.0
MULTIPHASE FLOW
Sec5.pdf
6.0
Sec6.pdf
7.0
THERMAL MODELING
Sec7.pdf
8.0
TRANSIENT OPERATIONS
Sec8.pdf
9.0
HYDRATES
Sec9.pdf
10.0
PARAFFIN WAXES
Sec10.pdf
11.0
ASPHALTENES
Sec11.pdf
12.0
EMULSIONS
Sec12.pdf
13.0
SCALE
Sec13.pdf
14.0
EROSION
Sec14.pdf
15.0
CORROSION
Sec15.pdf
16.0
SOLIDS TRANSPORT
Sec16.pdf
17.0
SLUGGING
Sec17.pdf
18.0
SLUGCATCHER DESIGN
Sec18.pdf
19.0
PIGGING
Sec19.pdf
20.0
OTHER OPERATIONS
Sec20.pdf
21.0
H-0806.35
01-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
22.0
Sec22.pdf
23.0
Sec23.pdf
24.0
Sec24.pdf
25.0
Sec25.pdf
APPENDICES
SECTION 9 APPENDIX A: GAS HYDRATE STRUCTURES, PROPERTIES, AND
HOW THEY FORM
Sec9 App A.pdf
SECTION 9 APPENDIX B:
PROGRAMS
H-0806.35
ii
01-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
POLICY STATEMENT
H-0806.35
1-Dec-00
1.0
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
INTRODUCTION
The Flow Assurance Design Guide (FADG) sets forth basic engineering requirements
and recommended practice deemed necessary for the reliable and cost effective design
and operation of multiphase production systems. Because flow assurance is a multidiscipline activity, the FADG addresses each discipline and explains how each fit in the
overall design process. The major flow assurance technologies covered in the guide are:
H-0806.35
1-1
1-Dec-00
2.0
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
2-1
1-Dec-00
3.0
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
DESIGN PROCESS
This section describes the design methodology or process that the flow assurance
engineer follows in developing a successful, cost effective subsea production system and
its operating philosophy. The flow assurance design methodology flow chart is presented
in Figure 3-1 and forms the basis for the discussion on the design process. Links to the
relevant sections in the Flow Assurance Design Guide are also provided.
As illustrated in the design methodology chart, the flow assurance design process
involves several major steps:
Each step can be addressed individually; however, all steps will be considered
collectively because they are inter-related. The chart shows some of the considerations
and/or decisions involved with each step. For purposes of illustration, design process
steps are generally shown to be sequential. However in practice, several of the steps will
need to be addressed simultaneously.
The flow assurance design process starts early in the field development effort, potentially
even before any wells have been drilled when the types and amounts of reservoir fluid
samples are specified. The general sequence begins with the development of the design
basis and then the thermal-hydraulic design and assessment of fluid behavior. During the
thermal- hydraulic design phase, the flow assurance engineer will begin to interface with
other design engineers, such as pipeline/flowline and facilities engineers. In what is
typically a parallel effort, the flow assurance engineer will interface with the subsea
mechanical designers and other engineers, will develop operating strategies, and will
assist in determining host facility requirements. An over-riding consideration in the
design process is system economics and risk management.
H-0806.35
3-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The design process will be iterative due to inevitable changes in the design basis, interim
results during the design, changes in system economics, and other changes. Such
iterations are indicated in the design methodology flow chart at the decision points in
which no would be the answer.
The flow assurance design process involves multiple technical interfaces.
engineering, completions engineering, pipeline/flo wline mechanical design,
controls engineering, facilities engineering, and operational personnel will
with flow assurance during the design process. The numerous interfaces
effective project management.
3.1
Reservoir
subsea and
all interact
necessitate
Design Basis
The first major effort in the design process is to establish the design basis. The flow
assurance engineer will be directly involved in terms of determining and documenting the
fluid characteristics, in terms of both PVT behavior and the potential for solids formation.
For the other aspects of the design basis, such as reservoir behavior, site characteristics,
and host facilities, the flow assurance engineer will need to ensure that the data needed
for the flow assurance analyses are included in the design basis. Thus the flow assurance
engineer will need to interface with those responsible for reservoir engineering,
metoceanic data, bathymetry, and surface facilities. These interfaces will continue
throughout the project. It is important to note that the design basis will need to be built
with conservatism to offset poor or missing data.
This step in the design process assumes that fluid samples have been collected. A
substantial amount of laboratory work may be required to determine the characteristics of
the fluid samples. Standard PVT measurements should be performed on the fluids, and
then fluid characterizations should be developed for use in thermal-hydraulic and other
modeling (reservoir and process). Section 4 discusses PVT behavior and fluid
characterization. The fluids should also be tested for potential solids formation such as
wax and asphaltenes.
3.2
Thermal-Hydraulic Design
The thermal- hydraulic design effort evaluates the lifecycle performance of the entire
production system. All parts of the system and all interfaces must be considered
throughout the operating lifetime of the development. This effort also should include
assessment of the potential for flow reductions due to solids formation.
H-0806.35
3-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
At the beginning of this step, basic design and operating principles should be set.
Examples include methods to be used to keep the production system out of the hydrate
formation region. For oil systems this could mean insulation. For gas system this would
require chemical inhibition. Another example would be to establish a lower limit on well
production rate and/or to use insulated tubing to prevent wax deposition in wellbores
during normal operation. This could be extended to the flowline, or wax may be
managed in the flowline with pigging and chemical injection. Such principles help guide
the flow assurance engineer through the design process; however, these principles should
be continuously evaluated in light of system operability and economics.
3.2.1
Hydraulic Modeling
Most system design attributes can be set on the basis of steady state analyses. Steadystate hydraulic models are used to determine the diameters for production tubing,
production flowlines, injection flowlines, and export pipelines. Criteria for line sizing
include pressure constraints, flow rates, and erosional velocity limits. As part of the line
sizing exercise and hydraulic assessment, changes in parameters such as production rates,
water cut, and GOR during the field life need to be evaluated. Artificial lift may also be
considered. Operating pressures will be calculated. Sections 5, 6, and 14 deal with
multiphase flow, line sizing, and erosion.
3.2.2
Thermal Modeling
Thermal modeling is typically combined with hydraulic modeling, thus thermal- hydraulic
modeling. Operating temperatures are calculated as a function of insulation level and
other parameters initially via steady state analysis. Section 7 covers thermal modeling.
3.2.3
H-0806.35
3-3
1-Dec-00
3.2.4
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
3.3
3.4
Operating Strategies
Operating strategies must be consistent with the system design and should be adaptable to
suit new circumstances in the event that fluid characteristics or other system
characteristics are found to be significantly different from those in the design basis.
Development of operating strategies is presented in Section 21.
3.5
H-0806.35
3-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
20, and 22 cover slugcatcher design, pigging, other operations, and host facility
requirements.
3.6
System Economics
There are numerous detailed design and manufacture activities and considerations that
are implicitly lumped into the Assess System Economics step. Section 23 covers system
economics and risk management.
H-0806.35
3-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 3-1: FLOW ASSURANCE DESIGN PROCESS
ESTABLISH DESIGN BASIS
Reservoir Behavior
as f(t)
Productivity Index
Production Profiles
Pres. vs. Depletion
Temperature
Fluid Behavior
PVT Characterization
Hydrates
Wax
Asphaltenes
Flowline
Routing
Bathymetry
Seabed Temp.
INTERFACE WITH
MECHANICAL DESIGN
Host Facilities
Separator Pres.
Acceptable Arrival
Temp.
OPERATING
STRATEGIES
Model
Wells
Model
Flowlines
Model
Wells
Select Tubing
and Flowline
Diameters and
# of Flowlines
No
Plateau and
EOL Conditions
Satisfied?
Hydrates
Wax
Asphaltenes
Scale
Model
Flowlines
Prediction
Control
Remediation
Select Tubing
and
Flowline
Insulation
ThermalHydraulics OK?
No
HOST FACILITY
REQUIREMENTS
ASSESS
TRANSIENT
THERMALHYDRAULICS
Yes
No
ThermalHydraulics and
Fluid Behavior
OK?
Yes
Reservoir, Flow
System, and Host Design
Compatible?
Yes
Processing Capabilities
Processing Pres./Temps.
Metering
Storage Volumes
Export Requirements
PCS
Chemical Injection Pumps
Chemical Storage
Flare Requirements
Utility & Emergency Power
Surge/Slug Volumes
Surge/Slug Control
Startup / Warmup
Shutdown / Cooldown
Turndown / Ramp-up
Depressurization
Slugging
Yes
No
Procedures
Valve Sequences
Pump Sequences
Chemical Injection
Rates
Activity Durations
ASSESS FLUID
PHASE
BEHAVIOR
THERMAL DESIGN
ASSESS SYSTEM
ECONOMICS
CAPITAL COST
OPERATING COSTS
NET PRESENT VALUE
No
System
and Economics
Optimum?
Yes
DONE
H-0806.35
3-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
4.0
4.1
Introduction
Modeling of oil and gas production, processing, and transportation system requires
knowledge of how the fluid behaves with changes in temperature and pressure. This
modeling work will require not only fluid properties (densities, viscosities, heat
capacities) but also the phase behavior of the fluids.
Multi-component phase behavior is a complex phenomenon, which requires accurate
determination if two-phase pressure loss, hold-up and flow regime are to be determined
with any degree of confidence.
The phase behavior will determine the vapor-liquid split and the thermodynamic
properties of each of the phases present, and it is important for the designer of such a
system to have a knowledge of what form this equilibrium takes, and how it may change
in different parts of the pipeline. Since it is expected that both temperature and pressure
will fall as fluids flow along the pipeline, it is possible that either condensation or
evaporation will take place within the pipe. This can have a significant effect on liquid
holdup and hence pressure drop. It also means that the CGR (or GOR) can vary
significantly depending on whether it is based on pipeline inlet or outlet conditions, and it
is therefore important to make it clear under what conditions it has been calculated.
In practice, experimentally determined phase behavior is often limited and one has to
employ some method of prediction. There are two approaches commonly employed in
the prediction of hydrocarbon phase behavior. These are the black oil method, which
assumes that only two components, i.e. gas and liquid, make up the mixture, and the socalled compositional approach, in which each hydrocarbon component is taken into
account. The methods have their own relative merits and are discussed in this section.
This section also addresses fluid sampling. Without appropriate sampling techniques,
sample handling, and analysis methods, the predictive methods used in modeling of the
production and processing of reservoir fluids will be in error.
H-0806.35
4-1
1-Dec-00
4.2
Reservoir Fluids
4.2.1
Phase Behavior
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Reservoir fluids are often described in terms of their phase behavior, which can be
defined as the relationship between the fluid phases (usually the gas and the
oil/condensate) and how the phases change with variations in temperature and pressure.
Single Component Phase Behavior
In describing phase behavior, a system consisting of a single, pure substance is
considered first. Such a system behaves differently from systems made up of more than
one component. A phase diagram (or phase envelope) is a plot of pressure versus
temperature showing the conditions under which the various phases will be present.
Figure 4.2-1 shows a phase diagram for a single, pure substance.
4000
CRITICAL
POINT
Pressure
3000
LIQUID
SOLID
2000
VAPOR PRESSURE
CURVE
1000
TRIPLE
POINT
VAPOR
0
-50
50
100
150
200
Temperature
H-0806.35
4-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
4-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
7000
6000
CRITICAL
POINT
BUBBLE
POINT
CURVE
5000
Pressure (psia)
CRICONDENBAR
4000
LIQUID
99
MOLE %
QUALITY
LINES
3000
95
MOLE %
CRICONDENTHERM
90
MOLE %
80
MOLE %
2000
1000
VAPOR
0
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Temperature (F)
H-0806.35
4-4
1-Dec-00
1000
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
bubble point. The pressure at which the first gas is formed is the bubble point pressure.
As the pressure is decreased below the bubble point pressure, more and more gas appears.
Critical Point
As can be seen when comparing Figures 4.2-1 and 4.2-2, the definition for the critical
point for a single component is not the same as that for a multiple component mixture. A
rigorous definition of the critical point is that it is the point at which all properties of the
liquid and the gas become identical.
Cricondentherm and Cricondenbar
The highest temperature on the two-phase envelope is called the cricondentherm. The
highest pressure on the two-phase envelope is called the cricondenbar. These are
illustrated on Figure 4.2-2.
Quality Lines
Another feature in the two-phase envelope are quality lines. These lines indicate curves
on constant vapor or liquid quantities within the two-phase region. In Figure 4.2-2 there
are quality lines for 99, 95, 90 and 80 mole percent vapor. The quality lines all converge
at the critical point.
Retrograde Condensation
For many multiple component mixtures a phenomenon called retrograde condensation
can occur. If the mixture is at a pressure greater tha n the cricondenbar and at a
temperature greater than the critical temperature, it will be single-phase gas. If the
pressure is decreased isothermally, the dew point curve will be crossed and liquid will
form. A decrease in pressure has caused liquid to form; this is the reverse of the behavior
one would expect, hence the name retrograde condensation. As the pressure continues
decreasing, more liquid will form until at some pressure the amount of liquid starts
decreasing. Eventually the dew point curve will be crossed again.
Dense Phase Region
It is common practice to refer to the area above the cricondenbar as the dense phase
region. In this region it possible to move from a temperature well below the critical
temperature to one well above it without any discernible phase change having taken
place. At the lower temperature the fluid would behave more like a liquid and at the
H-0806.35
4-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
higher temperature it would behave more like a vapor, but in between it would not exhibit
any of the traditional signs of a phase change.
4.2.2
Waxes
Naphthenes
Aromatics
Large molecules composed mainly of aromatic rings or carbon and hydrogen but
also can contain nitrogen, sulfur, oxygen, and metals
Water
Sulfur compounds
Nitrogen (N2 )
Helium
Metals
4.2.3
Vanadium, nickel
Mineral salts
H-0806.35
4-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The reservoir fluid type can be confirmed only by observation in the laboratory; however,
some rules of thumb can help identify the fluid type. Three properties that can be used
with the rules of thumb are the initial producing gas-oil ratio, the gravity of the stock tank
oil, and the color of the stock tank oil.
The behavior of a reservoir fluid during production is determined by the shape of its
phase diagram and the position of its critical point. Each of the five reservoir fluid types
can be described in terms of its phase diagram.
Black Oils
The phase diagram for a black oil is presented in Figure 4.2-3. Indicated on the phase
diagram is the critical point and quality lines. The vertical line in the figure indicates the
pressure reduction at constant temperature that occurs in the reservoir during production.
As the reservoir of a black oil is produced, the pressure will eventually drop below the
bubble point curve. Once below the bubble point, gas evolves from the oil and causes
some shrinkage of the oil.
Black oils are characterized as having initial gas-oil ratios (GORs) of 2000 SCF/STB or
less. The producing gas-oil ratio will increase during production when reservoir pressure
drops below the bubble point pressure. The stock tank oil will usually have a gravity
below 45API.
hydrocarbons.
The stock tank oil will be very dark due to the presence of heavy
Volatile Oils
The phase diagram for a typical volatile oil, Figure 4.2-4, is somewhat different from the
black-oil phase diagram. The temperature range covered by the two-phase region is
somewhat smaller, and the critical point is much lower than for a black oil and is
relatively close to the reservoir temperature (but still greater than the reservoir
temperature). The vertical line in the figure shows the reduction in reservoir pressure at
constant temperature during production. For a volatile oil, a small reduction in pressure
below the bubble point can cause a relatively large amount of gas to evolve.
The dividing line between black oils and volatile oils is somewhat arbitrary. Volatile oils
may be identified as having initial producing GORs between 2000 and 3300 SCF/STB.
The stock tank oil gravity is usually 40API or higher, and the stock tank oil is colored
(usually brown, orange, or green).
H-0806.35
4-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Retrograde Gases
The phase diagram of a retrograde gas, Figure 4.2-5, has a somewhat smaller temperature
range than that for oils, and the critical point is further down the left side of the phase
envelope. The changes are a result of retrograde gas containing fewer heavy
hydrocarbons than the oils. Additionally, the critical temperature is less than the
reservoir temperature, and the cricondentherm is greater than the reservoir temperature.
During initial production, the retrograde gas is single-phase gas in the reservoir. As the
reservoir pressure declines, the dew point is reached, and liquid begins to condense from
the gas and form a free liquid in the reservoir. This liquid will normally not flow and
cannot be produced.
The initial producing GORs for a retrograde gas ranges from 3300 SCF/STB on the lower
end to over 150,000 SCF/STB (the upper limit is not well defined). The producing GOR
will increase after the reservoir pressure drops below the dew point. Stock tank gravities
of the condensate are between 40 and 60API and increase as reservoir pressure drops
below the dew point. The stock tank liquid will be lightly colored to clear.
Wet Gases
With wet gases the entire phase envelope will be below the reservoir temperature as
illustrated in Figure 4.2-6. Wet gases contain predominately low molecular weight
molecules. A wet gases will remain as single phase gas in the reservoir throughout the
production life; however, the separator conditions do lie within the two-phase region.
Thus, somewhere in the production system, the dew point curve will be crossed and
liquid will condense from the gas.
Wet gases produce stock-tank liquids with gravities ranging from 40 to 60API; however,
the gravity of the liquid does not change during the production life. Wet gases have very
high GORs, typically more than 50,000 SCF/STB.
Dry Gases
Dry gases are primarily methane with some light intermediates. Figure 4.2-7 shows that
the two-phase regions is less than the reservoir conditions and the separator conditions.
Thus no liquid is formed in either the reservoir or the separator.
H-0806.35
4-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
4500
BLACK OIL
4000
PRESSURE PATH
IN RESERVOIR
3500
90
Pressure (psia)
3000
2
CRITICAL
POINT
80
2500
70
60
2000
50
1500
40
30
1000
20
10 % LIQUID
500
SEPARATOR
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Temperature (F)
H-0806.35
4-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
4000
PRESSURE PATH
IN RESERVOIR
1
3500
VOLATILE OIL
CRITICAL
POINT
Pressure (psia)
3000
BUBBLE POINT
90
CURVE
80
70
2500
60
50
40
30
20
2000
10 % LIQUID
1500
1000
500
SEPARATOR
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Temperature (F)
H-0806.35
4-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
5000
PRESSURE PATH
IN RESERVOIR
RETROGRADE GAS
Pressure (psia)
4000
CRITICAL
POINT
3000
60
50
40
30
20
10 % LIQUID
2000
3
SEPARATOR
1000
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Temperature (F)
H-0806.35
4-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
3000
PRESSURE PATH
IN RESERVOIR
1
WET GAS
2500
Pressure (psia)
2000
CRITICAL
POINT
1500
20 % LIQUID
10
5
1000
2
SEPARATOR
500
0
-50
50
100
150
200
250
Temperature (F)
H-0806.35
4-12
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
3000
PRESSURE PATH
IN RESERVOIR
DRY GAS
2500
Pressure (psia)
2000
1500
1000
SEPARATOR
1% LIQUID
500
0
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
Temperature (F)
H-0806.35
4-13
1-Dec-00
4.3
4.3.1
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The black oil approach to the prediction of phase behavior ignores the fluid composition
and simply considers the mixture as consisting of a gas and liquid phase in which the gas
may be dissolved in the liquid. The basic assumption of a black oil model is that
increasing system pressure (and reducing temperature) cause more gas to dissolve in the
liquid phases, and, conversely, decreasing system pressure (and increasing temperature)
cause gas to evaporate from the liquid phase. It was previously noted that retrograde
condensation involves the conversion of gas to liquid on reducing pressure. This is
contrary to the fundamental assumption of the black oil model and so the black oil
approach is only valid for systems operating at conditions far removed from the
retrograde region.
In a typical liquid reservoir, the reservoir condition is well to the left of the critical point
and so the expansion process involves the continual evolution of gas, i.e. the operating
point moves steadily across the quality lines to a condition of ever decreasing liquid
content. This type of process would be adequately represented by a black oil model.
For the gas reservoir, the reservoir condition lies to the right of the critical point so that
on expansion, (reducing pressure) the operating point moves across the quality lines to a
condition of increasing liquid content, i.e. retrograde condensation. This process could
not be represented by a black oil model.
As a general guide a black oil model should be adequate for describing crude oil- gas
systems, while a compositional model is necessary to describe wet-gas, gas-condensate
and dense phase systems.
The black oil model employs certain concepts and nomenclature, which require
definition. These are discussed briefly below:
Producing Gas Oil Ratio (GOR)
This is the quantity of gas evolved when reservoir fluids are flashed to stock tank
conditions. The units are standard cubic feet of gas per stock tank barrel of oil
(SCF/STB) measured at 14.7 psia and 60F.
The GOR of a crude is obtained by experimental testing. However, the GOR will vary
depending on how many flash stages are employed to get down to stock tank conditions.
H-0806.35
4-14
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The normal convention is to calculate GOR from the sum of gas volumes evolved from a
multistage flash procedure (normally this involves 2 or 3 flash stages). This more closely
represents conditions in the field with the pressure and temperature conditions chosen for
the first stage flash approximating to conditions likely to be experienced in the first stage
separator in the field.
Solution Gas Oil Ratio (R s )
This is the quantity of gas dissolved in the oil at any temperature and pressure. It
represents the quantity of gas that would be evolved from the oil if its temperature and
pressure were altered to stock tank conditions, 14.7 psia and 60F. Hence, by definition
the Rs of stock tank oil is zero.
The Rs crude at its bubble point is equal to the producing GOR of the reservoir fluids.
The volume of free gas present at any pressure and temperature is the difference between
the GOR and the Rs. The volume of free gas is corrected for pressure, temperature and
compressibility to compute the actual in-situ volume of gas and hence superficial gas
velocity. Rs can be evaluated from standard correlations such as Glaso or Standing.
These correlations require as input the oil and gas gravity and the pressure and
temperature conditions.
Volume Formation Factor (B o )
The volume formation factor is the ratio of the volume occupied by oil at any pressure
and temperature to the volume occupied at stock tank conditions. The units are pipeline
barrels per stock tank barrel (BBL/STB). The volume formation factor of stock tank oil
is thus 1.0. Through use of Bo the volume flow rate and density of the liquid phase can
be calculated. Standard correlations are available to compute Bo . These require as input
the oil and gas density, the Rs of the liquid at the conditions of interest, and the pressure
and temperature.
Live Oil Viscosity
The viscosity of the oil in a two-phase pipeline depends on the stock tank oil viscosity
(dead oil viscosity), the solution gas oil ratio at the conditions of interest, and the pressure
and temperature. Correlations are available to compute the live oil viscosity.
The correlations available for Rs, Bo and live oil viscosity will yield approximate values
only and where laboratory or field data is available, these should be used to adjust and
H-0806.35
4-15
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
tune these correlations. The way in which the correlations are tuned will depend on the
quantity of field data available.
The minimum physical property information required to run a black oil model is:
sg i * Gi
i =1
Gi
i =1
where:
sgi = gravity of the ith separator stage off- gas
Gi = free gas GOR at the ith separator stage
n = number of stages in the separator train with the final stage at stock tank
conditions.
H-0806.35
4-16
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
applications is a minimum of production data: oil gravity, gas gravity, solution gas/oil
ratio and, if water is present, the watercut.
When to Use Black Oil Fluid Modeling
Black oil fluid modeling is appropriate for a wide range of applications and hydrocarbon
fluid systems. In general, the basic black oil correlations will provide reasonable
accuracy in most PVT fluid property evaluations over the range of pressures and
temperatures likely to be found in production or pipeline systems. However, care should
be taken when applying the "black oil approach" to highly volatile crude oils or
condensates where accurate modeling of the gaseous "light ends" is required. In this
case, the modeler needs to consider using compositional modeling techniques, which
describe the fluid as a multi-component system.
To increase the accuracy of the basic black oil correlations for modeling multiphase flow,
thermal- hydraulic simulators typically provide the facility to adjust salient values of a
number of the most important PVT fluid properties to match laboratory data.
Specifically, the following points can be calibrated:
Formation volume factor at pressure above the bubble point to account for oil
compressibility above bubble point
The above fluid properties are considered the single most important parameters affecting
the accuracy of multi-phase flow calculations. Calibration of these properties at the
bubble point and above can increase the accuracy of the correlations over all pressures
and temperatures.
This facility is typically optional, but the above calibrations will significantly improve the
accuracy of the predicted gas/liquid ratio, the flowing oil density and the oil volume
formation factor as a function of temperature and pressure. If the calibration data are
omitted, however, the thermal-hydraulic simulators will calibrate on the basis of oil and
gas gravity alone and thus, there will be a loss in accuracy. It should be noted that the
H-0806.35
4-17
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Black Oil calibration is only applicable to oil fluid types as it is not appropriate for a gas
fluid type.
4.4
Compositional Models
4.4.1
Equations of State
In a compositional model the predictions of gas and liquid physical properties are
performed through use of an equation of state, EOS. Any equation correlating pressure
(P), volume (V) and temperature (T) is known as an EOS. For an ideal gas the EOS is
simply:
PV = nRT
where:
n = number of moles of gas
R = Universal gas constant.
A gas is ideal if its molecules do not interact with each other and occupy no volume.
This is obviously not true, but the behavior of most real gases does not deviate drastically
from the behavior predicted by the ideal gas behavior. One way of writing an equation of
state for a real gas is to insert a correction factor into the ideal gas equation. This results
in:
PV = ZnRT
where the correction factor, Z, is known as the compressibility factor or z- factor. The
compressibility factor is the ratio of the volume actually occupied by a real gas at a given
pressure and temperature to the volume it would occupy at the same pressure and
temperature if it behaved like an ideal gas. The compressibility factor is not a constant.
It varies with changes in composition, pressure, and temperature.
To account for the non- ideality of most gas systems the ideal gas equation is modified to
include various correlating constants. The most commonly used equations of state used
in the oil and gas industry are called cubic equations of state because their mathematical
forms are cubic in terms of density or the z- factor. The two most popular equations of
state used in industry today are the Redlich-Kwong-Soave, the Peng-Robinson EOS, and
modifications of them.
H-0806.35
4-18
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
These cubic equations of state include terms to correct pressure for the forces of
attraction between the molecules. The actual pressure exerted by a real gas is less than
that of an ideal gas. Additionally, the cubic equations of state attempt to correct the
molar volume due to the volume occupied by the molecules.
The Peng-Robinson (PR) EOS, for example, is given by:
P =
RT
V b
a(T )
V (V + b) + b(V b )
b = i bi
i
k ij =
i j (l kij ) ai a j
and j.
ai a j =
temperature and represent the pressure contribution from the attractive forces.
The cubic equations of state can model liquids as well as gases and can be used to
calculate the vapor- liquid equilibria of hydrocarbon mixtures. The equation of state
allows a thermodynamically consistent method to evaluate the gas and liquid properties
when these two phases coexist.
The prediction of liquid densities was an area that ne eded improvement in original
development of the cubic equations of state. An empirical but effective way to improve
the accuracy of the liquid density predictions is to use the volume translation correction.
The volume translation is a linear correction of the predicted EOS volumes which does
not affect the equilibrium results from the original EOS. Therefore, this correction,
which is sometimes referred to as the Peneloux correction, is thermodynamically
consistent.
H-0806.35
4-19
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Another equation of state that is sometimes used in the oil and gas industry is the
Benedict-Weber-Rubin (BWR) equation and its derivative, the BWRS equation.
4.4.2
Viscosity
Viscosity, which is a transport property, cannot be evaluated from an EOS, but the EOS
provides compositional and property data that is needed in the viscosity models. Two
compositional methods to predict viscosity are commonly used: the LBC method (gas
and liquid) and the Pedersen method (gas and liquid). Preliminary testing has shown the
Pedersen method to be the most widely applicable and accurate for oil and gas viscosity
predictions. The Pedersen method is based on the corresponding state theory, as is the
LBC method.
Lower Alkanes
Predicted liquid viscosities using LBC and Pedersen methods have been compared to
experimental data for methane and octane as a function of both temperature and pressure
and for pentane as a function of temperature. For both methane and pentane the Pedersen
method predictions show close agreement with experimental data. For octane, the
Pedersen and LBC methods give comparable results. For the aromatic compound, ethyl
benzene, the Pedersen method is not as good as the LBC method.
Higher Alkanes
The results for higher alkanes eicosane and triacontane are mixed: the Pedersen method is
adequate for eicosane whereas the LBC method is slightly better than Pedersen for
triacontane. For triacontane both LBC and the Pedersen methods are inadequate.
However, in the majority of cases the higher hydrocarbons should be treated as petroleum
fractions rather than as single named components.
Petroleum Fractions
The LBC method describes viscosity as a function of the fluid critical parameters,
acentric factor and density. The LBC model is therefore very sensitive to both density
and the characterization of the petroleum fractions.
Water
The Pedersen method suffers the same drawback as the LBC method in that it is unable to
predict the temperature dependence of water, a polar molecule. To overcome this
problem, the Pedersen method has been modified especially for water so that it can
H-0806.35
4-20
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
accurately model the viscosity of water in the liquid phase. This was achieved by the
introduction of a temperature-dependent correction factor. However the prediction of the
viscosity of the gas phase is also affected, though in only a minor way.
Methanol
Neither the LBC nor the Pederson method can deal with polar components with the
Pederson method slightly worse than the LBC method. This is not surprising, as both
methods were developed for non-polar components and mixtures. The Pedersen method
works best with light alkanes and petroleum mixtures in the liquid phase. It performs as
well or better than the LBC method in nearly all situations.
The choice of the equation of state has a large effect on the viscosities predicted by both
methods. The LBC method is more sensitive to these equation of state effects than is the
Pedersen method.
4.5
Fluid Characterization
Petroleum reservoir fluids consist of thousands of different hydrocarbon molecules. The
diversity in chemical structure of the individual components increases with the carbon
number. In reality it is not practical to analyze for all of the components that may exist in
a reservoir fluid. Even if the separation and identification of each component present
were possible, the usefulness of such information would be limited. From a modeling
standpoint, it is desirable to keep the number of components small in using EOS to
minimize computation time requirements and round-off errors.
Standard composition analyses often stop at C7, C10, or C20. The gas chromatographic
analysis of pure hydrocarbon components up to C6 is routine. The physical and chemical
properties of these compounds (as required by an EOS) are accurately known. However,
compounds with higher carbon numbers are conventionally analyzed in terms of true
boiling fractions. The analysis is usually done in a gas chromatograph and provides the
mole fraction of all compounds that contain the same number of carbons in their
structure.
There are components that are too heavy and/or polar and are not volatile enough to be
separated by GC carbon number analysis. These components typically make up the
residue that is reported as the last carbon number component, and this residue consists of
all the components that have carbon numbers equal to or higher than the highest
H-0806.35
4-21
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
unseparable carbon number group. The residual group may be the C7+, C10+, C20+, or
C30+ fraction.
Because the components with carbon numbers C7 and higher are not separated as pure
compounds, their critical parameters are not known for use in EOS modeling. As a
result, a process is used to develop a set of pseudo-components to represent these
compounds and to determine the critical and other EOS parameters for these pseudocomponents. This process is referred to as the fluid or oil characterization process. An
EOS characterization refers to a list of hydrocarbon components and pseudo-components
and their critical properties and molecular weights, and it includes the binary interaction
parameters.
The fluid characterization procedure uses experimental data to assign equation of state
parameters to a set of pseudo-components. The experimental data often originates from
PVT experiments (e.g. constant mass expansion, constant volume depletion, differential
liberation, multistage flashes) of the reservoir fluid of interest. Viscosity data may also
be used. Because the characterization process will be using data for a specific reservoir
fluid, the resulting characterization will only be valid for that reservoir fluid. There are
no universal fluid characterizations.
The development of an EOS characterization proceeds through a series of steps:
All relevant experimental data is collected and reviewed. These data may include:
Constant mass expansion
Constant volume depletion
Differential liberation
Multistage flashes
Viscosity
Compositional analysis
H-0806.35
4-22
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Tuning EOS models to the experimental PVT data can be more of an art than a science,
and it requires the use of appropriate software programs. This is at least partially a result
of the EOS models being highly nonlinear and the number of adjustable parameters in the
regression being large. Additionally, there is no rigorous way to arrive at the global
minimum of such a highly nonlinear function. Special non-linear regression techniques
have been developed that allow adjusting the constants of the EOS and the critical
properties of the pseudo-components to tune the EOS predictions to PVT measurements.
There are limitations associated with fluid characterizations. The pseudo-components are
assumed to behave as single, lumped components in phase behavior, but in reality they do
not. Some of the pure components lump ed in a pseudo-component may not in reality
move from one phase to another as the pseudo-component does in the simulation of the
fluid. To overcome inaccuracies in the use of EOS to describe the phase behavior of
reservoir fluids, characterization procedures need to be followed to generate the most
appropriate set of pseudo-components and their relevant properties.
The EOS characterization may only be applicable to some of the processes the fluid may
undergo (e.g. reservoir depletion, flowline transport, facilities processing). These
processes may be those for which data were available and used in the development of the
characterization. Thus, the range of applicability of the EOS characterization depends on
the type of PVT data used and the pressure and temperature range of that data
4.6
H-0806.35
4-23
1-Dec-00
4.6.1
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Overview
Executive Summary
As field developments move to deeper water and subsea technology becomes more
widely used, paraffin and asphaltenes become more of a real problem than an annoyance.
Proper planning becomes critical and cannot be performed without data obtained from
representative fluid samples. CTR 901 was formed to address the special considerations
associated with collecting and handling fluid samples containing paraffins and
asphaltenes.
These guidelines were expanded somewhat beyo nd the basic goal of fluid sampling for
paraffin because it was recognized that in many instances the same sample would be used
for multiple reservoir fluid studies by a wide range of disciplines.
The following guidelines were developed with input from industry experts and with
vendor input. Issues related to sampling at surface facilities, sampling with downhole
flowstream samplers and sampling with downhole formation testers were addressed
individually.
Conclusions
In addition to the obvious concerns with obtaining a representative sample from the
reservoir, other problem areas must be understood and carefully addressed. First, all
equipment used in a sampling operation must be clean. Steam cleaning alone may not
remove previously deposited solids and these solids, which precipitate from one sample,
may dissolve in the next. Second, sample transfers are a major concern in the area of
sampling. In general, transfers performed on samples stabilized at reservoir conditions of
temperature and pressure should provide the greatest opportunity for representative
transfer. Response from the vendor community is that this is a realistic and attainable
goal. Consequently, vendor efforts have recently been directed toward the design and
testing of such a system. Ideally, proper planning and equipment selection can minimize
the number of transfers.
A major hindrance to getting samples to the lab exists in the area of availability of D.O.T.
approved transportation cylinders. While laboratories are increasing their capabilities to
analyze samples at reservoir pressure, the availability of suitable transportation cylinders
is lagging, especially above 10,000 psi. Vendors report that the cost and time associated
with obtaining D.O.T. approval for a specific cylinder design in the pressure ranges
required for deepwater development is prohibitive. While some vendors are pursuing this
H-0806.35
4-24
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
approval, none are currently known which can transport a sample at pressures higher than
10,000 psi.
Recommendations
4.6.2
Investigate all reasonable sampling options and carefully plan and document all
sampling operations. Coordinate planning efforts with all departments involved in
acquiring the sample or in the use of the data that will come from the sample.
Develop a prioritized analysis program for the sample detailing which analyses are
the primary purpose of obtaining the sample. Communicate with all vendors
involved in obtaining and analyzing the sample.
Minimize the number of transfers a sample will undergo. Perform transfers as near to
reservoir conditions of temperature and pressure as possible.
Do whatever possible onsite to verify that a satisfactory sample has been obtained
before concluding the sampling operation.
H-0806.35
4-25
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Studies/Chemical
Inhibitor
Stud ies
H-0806.35
4-26
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
6. Water analysis, e.g. chlorides, scale, corrosion (Reservoir Management and System
Design)
7. Crude Assay (Refinery Information, Product Value Determination)
Fluid types may or may not be known before sampling takes place. Certain sampling
methods can be problematic for specific fluid types. In addition to the anticipated phase,
information may also be available concerning contaminants like H2 S, CO2 , Sulfur, etc.
It is important to attempt to tabulate how much sample is needed to accomplish the goals
and objectives listed above. In addition to the quantity needed for a specific set of goals
and objectives, backup samples may be needed. A table is included in section 4.4.14
which may be of assistance in determining required sample volumes.
It is important to give prior thought to the equipment that will be needed or available for
a particular job. This applies not only to sampling equipment but also to any site transfer
and transportation equipment. Company policy and experience may limit choices in this
area. It should be verified that all necessary equipment is available and suitable for the
job. Among the things to check are:
Pressure and temperature ratings of all equipment. Verify with vendors that
pressurized tools can be heated to the desired temperatures for site transfer as well as
being rated for downhole conditions.
Verify that sample containers for transfer and storage meet the goals and objectives of
the job. Items to consider in the selection of sample containers include:
Whether atmospheric, low pressure (i.e. in the range of separator conditions) or
high pressure (i.e. in the range of reservoir conditions) will be required. Verify
that all cylinders will be pressure tested prior to use.
Whether special cylinders are required (e.g. for H2 S, Hg, etc.)
In all but rare instances D.O.T. certification of transportation is required. Not all
currently available equipment, especially in the higher pressure ranges, has been
approved for transportation in the United States. Verify with the vendor that all
necessary equipment has been D.O.T. certified (or exempted).
A variety of transfer and displacement mechanisms are available in sampling and
transportation equipment. Company policy and experience may limit the available
choices as well as safety concerns. The following list details the available transfer
H-0806.35
4-27
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Consider in advance any onsite transfer to transportation vessel needs. These may
include:
Having a sufficient quantity of equipment on hand including backup equipment in
case of problems.
Method and degree of heating. Coordination with sampling tool vendors will be
necessary to obtain a heating program which is acceptable to all parties.
Additional technology is needed in this area to provide heating methods that
address the safety concerns of the vendors related to doing transfers at higher
temperatures.
Solvents and other supplies for cleaning all equipment prior to and during the
sampling operation should be available along with proper disposal containers.
Make sure all vendor and field personnel are properly trained and understand the
importance of your sampling job. Sampling in existing developments is sometimes
performed by field personnel who may:
not be properly trained in sampling
not understand the importance of obtaining a representative sample and
maintaining it during transfer and analysis, and
not understand the importance of supplying proper documentation of the sampling
effort.
H-0806.35
4-28
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Make certain that the laboratories involved have the proper capabilities for the type of
sample you are providing. The additional cost of taking a pressurized sample and
transporting it under pressure to the lab is wasted if the lab must reduce the pressure
of the sample to perform the transfer or to analyze the sample.
H-0806.35
4-29
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
If possible avoid splitting sample until main goals are achieved. Splitting samples
and recombining them has inherent opportunities for sample alteration.
Cost and time limitation are always a consideration and may limit the type and
volume of sample taken.
Reservoir and well specific characteristics will impact your sampling efforts.
Following are some items to consider:
Wellbore: hole diameter, rugosity, deviation, size of casing and other well bore
equipment, drilling problems which have been encountered, etc.
Again, verify that all equipment is rated for the reservoir temperature and pressure
anticipated in this wellbore. Also, verify that all equipment is rated for any special
contaminants anticipated.
If possible make some prediction concerning the maximum drawdown that can be
achieved without taking reservoir fluid through a phase change. Often this will
not be possible.
Formation: Formation pressure, permeability, formation consolidation and grain
size.
Mud system: Mud system, mudcake and their associated filtrates and fines. In
some cases, critical sampling needs may dictate in advance that the mud system
meet certain criteria, e.g. it is extremely unlikely that an uncontaminated oil
sample can be acquired with formation testers if oil based mud is used in the
drilling of the well. In some cases, it has been reported that even after two weeks
of drill stem testing oil based mud contamination could still be detected in the
flow stream.
4.6.4
Determine in advance what will be needed in the "Final Sampling Report" and
communicate this to all relevant parties. Include specific requirements for
presentation of data and conclusions as well as for onsite documentation of the
sampling job.
Surface Sampling
Pre-job Preparation
Verify that the well is properly conditioned for sampling (See section 4.4.9).
Verify all equipment has been properly cleaned (See section 4.4.10).
H-0806.35
4-30
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Verify that sufficient sample containers of appropriate type are available and on site.
Verify that all sampling equipment is prepared for sampling.
Job Execution
Sampling points on the surface depend on the objective of sampling and tests to be
performed. Examples of sampling locations for various test objectives are as follows:
The wellhead or choke manifold may be the best sampling point when checking
(qualitatively) for the existence of paraffins and asphaltenes. This would typically be
the surface sampling point usually having the highest temperature and pressure with
the least likelihood of deposition having occurred. Care must be taken with high
pressure environments by using appropriate high pressure sampling cylinders. This
sampling point is also feasible for dead oil sampling.
The separator is the most suitable place to sample if the objective is to reconstruct the
reservoir fluid. This would be done for such tests as PVT, hydrates etc. Consider that
the test separator may contain contaminants from previous testing. Attempt to
properly size the separator to allow sufficient throughput to clean any residue left in
the separator. The primary stage separator should be the one used for sampling.
Sampling points on the separator include:
Siphon tube - A siphon tube is available on some separators which extends from
an external sampling valve down into the oil pan of the separator.
Oil dump - oil
Meter runs - oil or gas
Top valve - gas
Sight glass for oil or gas. This may not be preferred if it is cooler than the rest of
the separator.
H-0806.35
4-31
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Verify valves are plugged on arrival and for shipping. Sample containers should also be
checked for leaks prior to shipping. This can be done by checking for bubbles after
applying "Snoop", Soapy water, or by submersion in water.
Properly label all cylinders and document relevant details of the test. An example form
has been included in the section 4.4.13 which may be sent to the location of the sampling
job.
4.6.5
Location of the hydrocarbon sample with respect to the depth of the formation water
level to assure a representative sample.
H-0806.35
4-32
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Pump through modules or clean up chambers. The pump through modules allow
flowing an unlimited amount of sample through the tool to remove near probe
contamination. Clean up chambers allow flowing a limited volume of reservoir fluid
to auxiliary chambers.
Use fluid analyzers which can detect various differences in the fluid flowing into the
tool. Some currently available analyzers use either the resistivity or optical
characteristics of the fluids to make this differentiation.
Minimize the pressure drop while filling the sample chamber. Effectively this involves
the use of water cushions, throttling valves or chokes which may result in a longer
sampling period. Coordination with the drilling department will be necessary to arrive at
a mutually agreeable time period. Also, attempt to fill all void space within the tool with
water to prevent excessive drawdown at the instant the tool is opened.
It would be desirable to only sample one zone per run, even with a multi-sampler tool to
maximize the potential of taking an uncontaminated sample. These tools have portions of
the flow path which will be used for every sample taken. Sampling multiple zones in a
single run will cause some mixing of sample. The multi-sampler tools are better suited to
taking larger amounts of sample from a single zone.
Caution should be used to prevent pressure release during tool disassembly and sample
transfer at surface. This is a common sense statement but once pressure has accidentally
been released the damage has been done. Always assume you have a quality sample
during the transfer process even if downhole sensors or leakage at the surface suggest
otherwise.
Record any indication during disassembly of tool of downhole fluids: oil, gas, mud,
water, etc. This can be an early indication of whether hydrocarbons have been sampled or
whether only drilling fluid has been sampled.
Keep detailed documentation of sampling job. An example form has been included in the
appendix which may be sent to the location of the sampling job (See section 4.4.13).
H-0806.35
4-33
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Minimize number of transfers fluid will have to undergo. Every time sample is
transferred the likelihood of having an altered sample increases. The following
suggestions should be considered:
Consider sampling tools with transportable D.O.T. certified sample chambers.
Chambers which can be detached from the sampling tool and shipped to the lab
with the sample intact prevent onsite transfers.
If possible use transportation cylinders which can hold all of sample cylinder
volume so lab recombination will not be necessary. Subsampling into multiple
chambers means doing more onsite transfers and also more transfers when the
transportation cylinders arrive at the lab.
Agitate heated sample and return to single phase before transfer to promote
homogeneity.
Disassemble sample chamber and "swab" out all remaining oil and solids. Place these
solids and the swabbing cloth in a D.O.T. certified glass container for later analysis.
Report observations.
H-0806.35
4-34
1-Dec-00
4.6.6
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Chemically rinse the sample chamber until clean and place these samples along with
a virgin sample of the chemical used for rinsing in separate D.O.T. certified
containers (not plastic) for later analysis. Advance coordination with the vendor will
be necessary to identify appropriate cleaning solvents. For a more complete
discussion on cleaning see section 4.4.10.
Compositional gradients may result in the static fluid column from the pressure and
temperature gradient in that column.
Water may begin to settle in the bottom of the wellbore which may result in sampling
water.
The well may be sampled while flowing but issues such as the following must be
considered:
H-0806.35
4-35
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Drawdown across the perforations may cause gas to be liberated and the resulting
sample may be nonrepresentative.
At very low rates slugging may occur; again this may result in a nonrepresentative
fluid sample.
Minimize the pressure drop while filling the sample chamber to increase your chance of
sampling single phase fluid.
Caution should be used to prevent pressure release during tool disassembly and sample
transfer at surface. This will limit the usefulness of the sample and could prove very
costly in resampling.
Record any indication during disassembly of tool of downhole fluids: oil, gas, mud,
water, etc. This can be an early indication of whether the proper fluid has been sampled
(See also section 4.4.3).
Fluid should be compressed to maintain or obtain single phase condition during transfer.
Take backup surface samples if possible. This should be relatively inexpensive and may
prove invaluable if the bottomhole sample quality is questionable.
Keep detailed documentation of sampling job. An example form has been included in
section 4.4.13, which may be sent to the location of the sampling job.
4.6.7
Verify that opening pressure is the same as it was at the well site at the temperature at
which it was performed at the wellsite.
Repeat P-V check (i.e. bubble-point) that was done on site and at that temperature.
Stabilize temperature and pressure of the live fluid samples at reservoir conditions.
H-0806.35
4-36
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Technology Gaps
CTR 901 believes that additional R&D and implementation are needed in the following
areas. The items listed are either not currently available or don't exist in sufficient
quantities to meet projected Gulf of Mexico needs. In some cases the technology exists
but is not consistently implemented.
A sight glass in the transfer lines should be used during transfer to verify sample
quality onsite.
D.O.T. approved high pressure cylinders (> 10,000 psi.) with or without piston
displacement mechanisms.
Pressure compensated transportation cylinders - these are needed for situations where
asphaltenes are suspected.
Sample chambers that are transportable and DOT certified, preferably that can remain
at the lab for extended periods of time. These sample chambers would be part of the
sampling tool that could be removed and transported to the lab without having to
perform an onsite transfer. Ideally, they would remain at the lab until the priority tests
are completed and verified, possibly 60 days or so. Some vendors currently offer this
service. Unfortunately, not all vendors offe r this type of equipment and the equipment
available is limited in quantity and size and priced at a level that makes storage at the
lab during analysis very expensive.
H-0806.35
4-37
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Single phase samplers - These samplers use a nitrogen cushion to maintain reservoir
pressure on a sample as it is brought to the surface and cools. These are available in
the international market but only on a limited basis in the domestic market.
Downhole fluid analyzers that can accurately detect the difference between
hydrocarbons and all mud systems including oil based muds and synthetic oil muds.
Safe methods of heating sampling tools to 300F at the surface for transfers Currently, safety concerns with uneven heating has prompted some vendors to limit
the level to which they will allow their tools to be heated at the surface. Heating
methods acceptable to the vendors and customers should be feasible.
Improved transfer systems are needed which address the concerns in the previous
item. Also remote transfer capability is attractive from a safety standpoint.
Improved probe/reservoir interface in open- hole sampling tools. This is one of the
more common points of failure in formation tester samples.
Ability to truly control drawdown - Formation testers are needed which provide for a
reliable, predetermined drawdown. It is desirable to fill all void spaces in the tool and
chamber with a non-contaminating fluid. Additionally, the ability to variably
pressurize the pathways and chambers in the tool prior to and during sampling is
desirable.
Enhanced wellsite analytical capabilities are needed to verify samples before the rig
and sampling company leave the wellsite.
Variable rate downhole pump with ability to vent to annulus above top packer for
cased hole formation testers - This would permit large quantities of reservoir fluid to
be pumped away from sampling point to minimize contamination.
Improved agitation systems for transfers (balls, etc.) - Often these are not available.
These are needed to promote homogeneous sample transfers, especially when paraffin
deposition in the sampling tool is a concern.
H-0806.35
4-38
1-Dec-00
4.6.9
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Well Conditioning
Proper well conditioning is necessary for obtaining representative samples. The following
includes a general discussion of fluid phase behavior. An understanding of reservoir
fluids and phase behavior will assist in preparing an appropriate well conditioning plan.
Type Of Hydrocarbon Reservoirs
Hydrocarbon fluids fall into two main categories at reservoir conditions: liquids or gases.
Liquid hydrocarbons are referred to as bubble-point oils, and gases are refe rred to as
dew-point fluids.
Bubble-Point Reservoirs
Reservoir hydrocarbon fluid types are determined by the location of the point
representing the initial reservoir pressure and temperature with respect to the P-T diagram
of the fluid contained therein. If the reservoir temperature is below the critical
temperature and the reservoir pressure is at or above the bubble-point curve, the fluids are
characterized as bubble-point oils. Bubble-point oils range from black oils with gravity
and GOR generally below 400 API and 2000 SCF/bbl, respectively, to volatile oils which
generally exhibit higher gravity and GOR The literature is not in full agreement
concerning the criteria that characterizes the transition from black oils to volatile oils.
Gas Reservoirs
If the reservoir temperature is above the critical temperature and the reservoir pressure is
at or above the dew point curve, the fluids are characterized as dew-point gases. Dewpoint gases range from gas-condensates which release liquid condensate in the reservoir
below the dew-point (retrograde condensation), to wet gases which require reduction in
both P and T for any liquid to drop out. Gas-condensates and wet gases are characterized
by progressively higher gravities and GORs. Dry gases do not yield hydrocarbon liquid at
surface conditions.
Saturation Pressure
Bubble-Point Reservoirs
Bubble point systems are characterized by the coexistence of a liquid phase and an
infinitesimal amount of gas phase in equilibrium. The saturation or bubble-point pressure
(Pb ) is the fluid pressure in a system at its bubble-point. Pb is a function of system
composition and temperature. Oil reservoirs which exist above their bubble-point are
referred to as "undersaturated." Oil reservoirs which are associated with a gas cap are
H-0806.35
4-39
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
saturated at the gas-oil contact. The gas-cap may or may not exhibit retrograde
condensate behavior. In a saturated reservoir, the oil becomes progressively
undersaturated with depth below the gas-oil contact.
Dew-Point Reservoirs
Dew-Point systems are characterized by the coexistence of a gas phase and an
infinitesimal amount of liquid phase in equilibrium. The saturation or dew-point pressure
(PD ) is the fluid pressure in a system at its dew-point, and is a function of system
composition and temperature. Above the PD , the fluid exists as a single gaseous phase,
and exhibits retrograde condensation as the reservoir pressure falls below the original
dew-point pressure.
Prediction of Pb or PD
Knowledge of the type of hydrocarbon reservoir and its saturation pressure (bubble-point
or dew-point) is important for successful design and implementation of the sampling
operation. Estimates of saturation pressure can be obtained by using one or more of the
following leads:
MER testing
Published correlations
Well Conditioning
Effect of Drawdown
Drawdown is defined as the difference between static reservoir pressure (Pe) and
bottomhole flowing pressure (Pwf), or delta p = Pe - Pwf . As long as Pwf is greater than or
equal to Pb or PD , single phase fluid will flow into the wellbore. Such fluid would be
representative of the original reservoir fluid.
Bottomhole sampling methods require that the fluid pressure at sampler depth be above
the saturation pressure.
H-0806.35
4-40
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Reservoirs where the drawdown will result in diphasic flow at or below sampling depth,
are best sampled at the surface separator.
Dry Gas Reservoirs
Constant gas composition with pressure drop prevails in reservoirs, tubing and at surface.
Gas well conditioning beyond cleanup stage for sampling is not necessary.
Adequate reservoir gas sample can be obtained at wellhead upstream (or downstream) of
choke.
It is advisable to determine "dry gas" state by sampling/analysis at high and low well
rates, and upstream (U/S) and downstream (D/S) of choke.
Wet Gas Reservoirs
Constant gas composition with pressure drop prevails in reservoirs, and possibly in
tubing and at surface U/S of choke.
As with dry gas reservoirs above, determine gas state U/S and D/S of choke. Generally,
wellhead sampling U/S of choke is representative.
The only well conditioning required involves initial well clean- up and flow at sufficiently
low choke to ensure high enough wellhead pressure for wellhead sampling.
If gas is two-phase U/S of choke, must sample gas and liquid at separator after reaching
constant GOR. Procedure would be similar to sampling gas condensate reservoirs.
Gas-Condensate Reservoirs
Pe substantially greater than PD with low drawdown assuring monophasic flow into the
wellbore:
Very rich gas: Can be sampled with bottomhole or surface sampling. Additional
sample may be needed to obtain sufficient liquid due to shrinkage when bottom hole
samples are taken.
H-0806.35
4-41
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Medium to lean gas: surface sample to ensure adequate size sample dire to very high
shrinkage.
Pe slightly above or equal to PD - Diphasic flow into wellbore and possible condensate
drop-out in wellbore region. Well conditioning should be performed as indicated for
monophasic flow. Surface sampling early in life of reservoir is recommended.
Oil Reservoirs
Pe > Pb with low drawdown assuring monophasic flow into the wellbore:
Pe slightly above or equal to Pb with finite drawdown causing diphasic flow in the
wellbore:
Condition well as indicated above and obtain surface oil and gas samples early in the
life of the reservoir.
Stabilized THP
H-0806.35
4-42
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Constant differential and static pressure readings on the gas offtake chart
It is preferred that sampling takes place when ambient temperature is not fluctuating and
is below that of separator temperature.
4.6.10 Tool/Cylinder Cleaning
All equipment, samplers, pumps, cylinders, lines, valves and fittings should be
thoroughly cleaned and free of hydrocarbons or other contaminants. The reader should
recognize that there are numerous methods, ma terials and chemicals that are acceptable.
Below we have listed some that are currently used by some DeepStar companies.
Valve packing glands should be limited to teflon, graphite, viton or vespel (polymide,
graphite, fluorocarbon putty) or other noncontaminating substances.
Flush with warm (~160F) toluene or other suitable solvent. Initially soak for 2
hours, agitate if feasible and drain. Continue process until effluent is visibly clear or
the refractive index as measured by light refractometer agrees with that for pure
toluene.
4-43
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 4-1: Example of apparatus for sampling wells cutting significant amounts of water.
H-0806.35
Raise pressure in bottle 1 by 1000-2000 psi above the estimated Pb. Agitate contents
during pressuring. A positive displacement pump is used to raise the pressure
utilizing and immiscible fluid for non-piston type containers, or any convenient fluid
for piston type containers.
4-44
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Heat bottle 1 to about 1800 F while maintaining the pressure above Pb.
Allow the bottle to stand in a vertical position overnight. This allows all water to
separate out at container bottom.
Connect bottle 2 as shown in the diagram incorporating a two way valve and about 20
ft. of line loop downstream of the valve. Evacuate line and valve.
Commence sample transfer from bottle 1 to bottle 2 ensuring Pressure is safely above
Pb. Initially fill valve and line loop with reservoir fluid and pressure up to transfer
pressure.
Sample the fluid stream (using the two-way valve between the bottles) every 20 ml.
The sample will consist of a drop or two only to test whethe r the line contains any
water. At the first sign of water in the transfer line, shut the two-way valve followed
by the top valve on bottle 2. Any overlooked water in the transfer line will be caught
in the loop.
H-0806.35
4-45
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Type of
Analysis
On-site
Description
Purpose
Minimum Qty
(cc)
Preferred Qty
(cc)
Flashed
or Dead
Flashed
or Dead
Live
Live
Other
Samples
Minimum Qty
(cc)
Visual Observation
verification
of
downhole
sample
Opening pressure
verification
Fingerprint for
contamination
10
250
250
To determine the
ability of production
to flow at various
temperatures and
pressures
100
200
To know fluid
properties at various
temperatures and
pressures
100
500
Compositional
analysis & GOR
Specific gravities
& API
Molecular weight
PVT
Constant-Mass
Expansion
Bubble point
Liberation of gas
Specific gravity
Compressibility
Viscosity
@ reservoir
conditions
Separator flash
Water
content in
live sample
ASTM (BS&W) D-96-88
container
Cloud
point
methodsSelect at
least one
H-0806.35
Microscopy
Fundamental test to
determine oil in
place and measure
further fluid
properties
10
production solids
50
Determine onset
temperature for wax
precipitation
Differential Scanning
Calorimetry (DSC)
4-46
10
10
10
10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
STANDARD ANALYSES
Type of
Analysis
Total
Sulfur
Nickel &
Vanadium
Total Acid
Number
Pour Point
Description
Minimum Qty
Preferred Qty
Other
(cc)
(cc)
Samples
Flashed
or Dead
Purpose
Live
Flashed
or Dead
Light Transmittance
200
200
Cold Finger
200
200
200
200
20
20
20
20
10
10
50
160
Determine value of
crude and limitations
for transportation
A
high
Live
Minimum Qty
(cc)
content
devalues crude. A
contaminant for the
refinery
Determine value of
crude,
affects
refinery,
transportation,
potential solids
&
Determine
temperature that a
ASTM D97-93 (IP 1567/86) crude will gel and no
longer flow in static
conditions
High Temp
Gas
Chromatography
(HTGC)
Provides information
for wax deposition
10
20
%
ASTM D-3279-90 (IP
Asphaltene 143/84)
Screening value to
estimate potential for
operational
problems.
Percent
asphaltene
also
affects crude value.
15
15
Elemental
Analysis
(C, H, N,
O, S)
Geochemistry? Input
data for value of
crude
20
20
H-0806.35
ASTM D-5291
4-47
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
STANDARD ANALYSES
Type of
Analysis
Description
Wax
Content
UOP 46-85
PNA or
SARA
Liquid Chromatograph
analysis
Purpose
Screening value to
estimate relative wax
problems. Low value
does not mean a wax
problem will not
occur
General information
of crude composition
H-0806.35
Minimum Qty
Preferred Qty
Other
(cc)
(cc)
Samples
Flashed
or Dead
Flashed
or Dead
50
50
10
100
825
4-48
Live
460
1035
Live
Minimum Qty
(cc)
960
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Table 4-2: Volume Requirements for Detailed Solids Formation Studies and Other
Analyses
Type of Analysis
Description
Purpose
Flashed
or Dead
Flashed
or Dead
Live
Live
Other
Samples
Minimum
Qty (cc)
Paraffin
Rate of
deposition
Yield
stress (high
pour point
Determine severity of
wax problem Restart
pressure requirements
Determine severity of
problem
crudes)
Asphaltenes
Stability tests
Experimentally
Hydrate
Formation
conditions
measure
formation
conditions. Especially
for liquid dominated
systems.
Hydrate
formation potential
can be modeled using
25
50
PVT
data
and
reservoir properties.
OTHER ANALYSES
Water
Compositional
Determine potential
analysis
(API
for scale, corrosion,
RP45 rev in '96).
and
formation
Organic
acid
concerns
content
150
Drilling fluid
Compositional
analysis
100
Determine extent of
contamination
inorganic
composition
Solids
H-0806.35
Organic/
chromat
ographic
analysis
If
available
production
4-49
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Compositional
analysis
Identify extent of
contamination
and
100
sample integrity
Identify extent of
contamination
and
sample integrity
100
H-0806.35
4-50
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
4-51
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
4-52
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
inhibitor in the field. Small scale laboratory testing will typically require
approximately 50 mls per test.
4. For large scale flow loop tests, much larger volumes are required. If you are
considering a large scale test, contact the flow loop operator to identify the exact
sample requirements.
5. For gas reservoirs, it may be possible to use a synthetic gas sample based upon the
compositional analysis from the PVT report for the hydrate measurements. For black
oil or condensate systems, actual samples should be used. Standard sampling
techniques used for obtaining samples for PVT measurements are sufficient. Please
see the DeepStar Fluid Sampling Guidelines for further recommendations.
Scale Samples
Samples from all potential water sources (both formation and injection waters) are
necessary to allow identification of scaling tendencies. Ideally, 150 mls of each water is
required. Some suggested procedures are:
1. Obtain water samples before any mixing of different waters or before any scale
precipitation occurs. This may require downhole samples.
2. Consider the reservoir implications in identifying where and what to sample. Which
waters will be mixing, where?
3. For separator samples, collect the samples in glass or plastic bottles filled to
overflowing, capped and sealed with tape.
4. It is recommended that the pH, carbonate, bicarbonate and sulfide concentrations be
measured on-site, as these components will change over time.
5. Ideally two identical samples should be collected at the same time. One should be
sampled as described above. The other should be acidified to a pH <2 in a glass or
plastic bottle filled to the top and taped shut. This preserves samples against solids
forming so an accurate analysis of dissolved cations can be obtained at the lab.
A source for additional water sampling guidelines is the ASTM standard D-3370.
4.7
Information Sources
Barrufet, M. A., A Brief Introduction to Equations of State For Petroleum Engineering
Applications, Harts Petroleum Engineer International, March 1998.
H-0806.35
4-53
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Chew, J. & Connally, C.A. "A Viscosity Correlation for Gas Saturated Crude Oils"
Trans. AIME, 216, p23, 1959.
Christensen, P.L., Regression to Experimental PVT Data, J. Can. Pet. Tech., Vol. 38,
No. 13, 1999.
Glaso, O. "Generalized Pressure-Volume- Temperature Correlations" J. Petrol. Technol.,
p785, May 1980.
Lasater, J.A. " Bubble Point Pressure Correlation", Trans. AIME, 213, p379, 1958.
Leontaritis, K. J., PARA-Based Reservoir Oil Characterizations, SPE 37252.
McCain, W. D., The Properties of Petroleum Fluids, PennWell Publishing Co., Tulsa,
OK, 1990.
Pedersen, K. S., Fredenslund, A., and Thomassen, P., Properties of Oils and Gas
Consensate Mixtures; Gulf Publishing Co., Houston, Texas, 1989.
Peng, D. Y. and Robinson, D. B., A New Two-Constant Equation of State, Ind. Eng.
Chem. Fundam., Vol. 15, pp. 59-64.
Soave, G., Equilibrium Constants from a Modified Redlich-Kwong Equation of State,
Chem. Eng. Sci., Vol. 27, pp. 1197-1203, 1972.
Standing, M.B. "A Pressure-Volume-Temperature Correlation for Mixtures of California
OIls and Gases," Drill. Prod. Practice, API, p247, 1947.
Vasquez, M. and Beggs, H. D., "Correlations for Fluid Physical property Prediction,"
SPE 6719, J. Petrol. Tech., p968, 1980.
H-0806.35
4-54
1-Dec-00
5.0
MULTIPHASE FLOW
5.1
Introduction
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The simultaneous flow of gas and liquid through pipes, often referred to as
multiphase flow, occurs in almost every aspect of the oil industry. Multiphase
flow is present in wellbore tubing, gathering system flowlines, and processing
facilities and has become increasingly important in recent years due to the
development of marginal fields and deepwater prospects. In many cases, the
feasibility of these prospects/fields hinges on cost and operation of the pipelines
and the associated equipment. Multiphase flow characteristics can have a
profound effect on both the design and operation of these systems. For example,
the type of flow regime (described in Section 5.2) can effect the pressure drop
along a pipeline. The amount of the pressure drop can affect either pipe size
and/or pumping requirements depending on the scenario.
Multiphase flow in pipes has been studied for more than 50 years, with significant
improvements in the state of the art during the past 15 years. The best available
methods can predict the type of multiphase flow characteristics much more
accurately than those available only a few years ago. The designer, however, has
to know which methods to use to get the best results.
The objective of this section is to present the basic principals of multiphase flow
and illustrate the current methods available to predict multiphase flow regimes,
pressure drop and liquid holdup. This chapter is arranged in the following order.
Flow regimes are discussed and described in Section 5.2. Section 5.3 describes
the flow models used to predict the flow regimes. The calculation of pressure
drop and liquid holdup based on the flow regime is discussed in Sections 5.4 and
5.5. Section 5.6 illustrates the effects of three phases.
5.2
Flow Regimes
In multiphase flow, the gas and liquid within the pipe are distributed in several
fundamentally different flow patterns or flow regimes, depending primarily on the
gas and liquid velocities and the angle of inclination. In general, flow regimes are
split into two major categories based on geometry: horizontal and vertical. The
term "horizontal" is used to denote a pipe that is inclined in a range between plus
or minus 10 degrees. The term "vertical" denotes upward inclined pipes with
angles from 10 to 90 degrees from horizontal.
H-0806.35
5-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Observers have labeled these flow regimes with a variety of names. Over 100
different names for the various regimes and sub-regimes have been used in
literature. In this guide, only four flow regime names will be used: slug flow,
stratified flow, annular flow, and dispersed bubble flow. Figure 5.2-1 shows the
flow regimes for near horizontal flow, and Figure 5.2-2 shows the flow regimes
for vertical upward flow. Descriptions of the flow regimes are as follows:
5.2.1
Stratified Flow
Stratified Flow generally occurs at low flow rates in near horizontal pipes. The
liquid and gas separate by gravity, causing the liquid to flow on the bottom of the
pipe while the gas flows above it. At low gas velocities, the liquid sur face is
smooth. At higher gas velocities, the liquid surface becomes wavy. Some liquid
may flow in the form of liquid droplets suspended in the gas phase. Stratified
flow only exists for certain angles of inclination. It does not exist in pipes that
have upward inclinations of greater than about one degree. Most downwardly
inclined pipes are in stratified flow, and many large diameter horizontal pipes are
in stratified flow. This flow regime is also referred to as stratified smooth,
stratified wavy, and wavy flow by various investigators.
5.2.2
Annular Flow
Annular flow occurs at high rates in gas dominated systems. In annular flow part
of the liquid flows as a film around the circumference of the pipe. The gas and
remainder of the liquid (in the form of entrained droplets) flow in the center of the
pipe. The liquid film thickness is fairly constant for vertical flow, but it is usually
asymmetric for horizontal flow due to gravity. As velocities increase, the fraction
of liquid entrained increases and the liquid film thickness decreases. Annular
flow exists for all angles of inclinations. Most gas-dominated pipes in highpressure vertical flow are in annular flow. This flow regime is also referred to as
annular- mist or mist flow by many investigators.
5.2.3
H-0806.35
5-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Various investigators have also referred to this flow regime as froth or bubble
flow.
5.2.4
Slug Flow
Slug flow for horizontal flow usually occurs at moderate gas and liquid velocities.
Slugs form due to high vapor shear causing the development of waves on the
surface of the liquid to grow to a sufficient height to completely bridge the pipe.
When this happens, alternating slugs of liquid and gas bubbles will flow through
the pipeline. This flow regime can be thought of as an unsteady, alternating
combination of dispersed bubble flow (liquid slug) and stratified flow (gas
bubble). The slugs can cause vibration problems, increased corrosion, and
downstream equipment problems due to its unsteady behavior.
Slug flow also occurs in near vertical flow, but the mechanism for slug initiation
is different. The flow consists of a string of slugs and bullet-shaped bubbles
(called Taylor bubbles) flowing through the pipe alternately. The flow can be
thought of as a combination of dispersed bubble flow (slug) and annular flow
(Taylor bubble). The slugs in vertical flow are generally much smaller than those
in near horizontal flow. Slug flow is the most prevalent flow regime in low
pressure, small diameter systems. In field scale pipelines, slug flow usually
occurs in upwardly inclined sections of the line. It occurs for all angles of
inclinatio n. Investigators have used many terms to describe parts of this flow
regime. Among them are intermittent flow; plug flow; pseudo-slug flow, and
churn flow.
H-0806.35
5-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
5-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
5-5
1-Dec-00
5.3
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
5.3.1
H-0806.35
5-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
regime. Correlations for a few key parameters are required to solve the equation
set. Mechanistic models extrapolate to field conditions much better than the
multiphase flow correlations because the mechanistic models account for the
effects of all the major variables.
Several mechanistic models have been developed in the past few years. Tulsa
University has developed models for near vertical flow (Ansari) and a general
model covering all inclinations (Xiao). The physics in these models are good, but
the correlations built into them are based on small diameter, low-pressure data.
The OLGA-S mechanistic model is based on a wider range of data (diameters
from 1 to 8 inches and pressures from atmospheric to 1400 psi), and it is generally
believed to extrapolate best to field conditions.
On occasion, the conditions for a simulation may cause otherwise good
multiphase flow methods to give erroneous results. It is always a good idea to
check the results by use of another method to ensure that the answers are
reasonable.
The mechanistic methods simultaneously and consistently solve for both pressure
drop and holdup and as a result, can predict trends more accurately over a wider
range of variables (pressure, temperature, CGR, pipeline length and diameter)
than correlation based methods. A general failing of mechanistic models is their
poor performance for slugging and other intermittent flow regimes. If available,
comparison with field data or the results of suitable correlation methods is usually
advisable.
5.3.2
H-0806.35
5-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The transitions between the flow regimes are frequently depicted in a flow regime
map, such as those shown in Figures 5.3-1 and 5.3-2. The flow regime map
typically has the superficial gas velocity (Vsg) on the X-axis and the superficial
liquid velocity (Vsl) on the Y-axis. The flow regime map is only valid for a single
point in the pipeline. As the angle of inclination, pressure and temperature
change with position in the pipeline, the flow regime map also changes.
Experimental studies of flow regime transitions have shown that each of the flow
regime boundaries reacts differently to changes in the system variables. Table
5.3-1 shows the sensitivity of the transitions to changes in the major system
variables.
Table 5.3-1: Sensitivity of Flow Regime Transitions to System Variables
Transition
Variable
Slug to
Dispersed
Bubble
Slug to
Annular
Slug to
Stratified
Stratified to
Annular
Angle of
Inclination
Small Effect
Moderate
Effect
Strong Effect
Strong Effect
Gas Density
Small Effect
Strong Effect
Strong Effect
Strong Effect
Pipeline
Diameter
Small Effect
Small Effect
Strong Effect
Moderate
Effect
Liquid Physical
Properties
Moderate
Effect
Small Effect
Moderate Effect
Moderate
Effect
The designer needs to carefully choose the method that will work best for the set
of conditions. The best methods are discussed in the remainder of this section.
H-0806.35
5-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
5-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
5-10
1-Dec-00
5.3.3
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
5-11
1-Dec-00
5.4
5.4.1
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The pressure drop along a pipeline is one of the most important factors relating to
its operation. Accurate calculation of pressure drop is essential for the proper
sizing of the pipeline. An under-sized pipe will suffer excessive pressure drop
due to high fluid velocities, which can limit its throughput. An over-sized pipe
can suffer from excessive holdup, which can lead to slugging and may require a
high pigging frequency.
The design of a multiphase flow line requires knowledge of the physical
properties of the fluid, its phase equilibrium, the flow regimes which exist within
it and the profile of the route which it will follow. The through- life pressure drop
will indicate whether compression will be required at some point, and at what
point in the life of the field. This can seriously affect the economics of the field.
Unfortunately, pressure drop is one of the most difficult pipeline parameters to
calculate accurately.
In single-phase flow, flow resistance in a pipe is due primarily to pipe friction and
elevation differences. In multiphase flow systems, additional complexity arises
because frictional energy is not only dissipated at the pipe wall, but also at the
interface(s) between liquid and gas phases, usually resulting in slip between the
phases. In addition, whereas for single-phase gas flow, the pressure drop will not
be as dependent on the pipe elevation, in multiphase flow, it will be. In
multiphase flow, the overall rise height of the pipeline, along with local gradients
must be accounted for in the design.
The overall pressure gradient is composed of three additive elements:
H-0806.35
5-12
1-Dec-00
5.4.2
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Frictional Losses
In multiphase flow, frictional losses occur by two mechanisms: friction between
the gas or liquid and the pipe wall, and frictional losses at the interface between
the gas and liquid. The friction calculations, therefore, are highly dependent on
the flow regime, since the distribution of liquid and gas in the pipe changes
markedly for each regime.
In stratified flow, there is wall friction between the gas and the pipe wall at the
top of the pipe, and wall friction between the liquid and the wall at the bottom of
the pipe. There is also friction between the gas and liquid at the gas-liquid
interface. The interfacial friction can be similar in magnitude to the wall friction
if the interface is smooth, or it can be considerably higher if waves are present.
In annular flow, there is friction between the liquid film and the wall. There is
also considerable interfacial friction between the gas in the core of the pipe and
the liquid film. The interfacial friction is usually the larger component.
In dispersed bubble flow, friction occurs between the liquid and the wall. There is
negligible interfacial friction between the gas and liquid.
Slug flow has several frictional components. In the slug, the friction losses are
caused by the friction between the liquid and the pipe wall. In the gas bubble, the
frictional components are the same as in stratified flow, namely gas and liquid
friction with the pipe walls and interfacial friction between the gas and liquid.
The friction loss in the slug is usually much higher than the losses in the bubble.
5.4.3
Elevation Losses
Elevational losses may be the major pressure loss component in vertical flow and
flow through hilly terrain. The calculation of elevational losses is governed by
the following equation:
g sin
dp
= mix
dx elev
144g c
where:
(dp/dx)elev = Pressure gradient due to elevation, psi/ft
mix
H-0806.35
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
= Liquid Holdup
= Angle of inclination
gc
Acceleration Losses
Although acceleration losses are present for all flow regimes, they are only
significant for two flow regimes: annular flow and slug flow. The mechanisms
for the losses in these two flow regimes are very different and will be discussed
separately.
In single-phase flow, acceleration losses can be calculated from Bernoulli's
equation. Acceleration losses represent the change in kinetic energy as the fluid
flows down the pipe. The expression for acceleration gradient is:
V dV
dp
dx accel 144g c dx
where:
= Density, lb m/ft3
V = Velocity, ft/sec
For multiphase flow, the same type of relationship holds except that it refers to
the flow of the mixed phase fluid. Most methods assume a no-slip mixture and
use the no-slip mixture density (ns) and the mixture velocity (Vm) in the
calculation of acceleration losses.
The kinetic energy acceleration losses are small for most oil industry applications.
The main exception is high velocity flow through low-pressure piping. Flare
systems would be an example of piping that has high acceleration losses.
Acceleration may account for 30 to 50 percent of the overall pressure loss in such
lines. For a typical high pressure gathering system line, acceleration is usually
less than 1 percent of the total drop and is frequently ignored.
H-0806.35
5-14
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
5-15
1-Dec-00
5.4.6
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Pipewall Roughness
The relative roughness used here is defined as the absolute pipe roughness (which
can be thought of as the surface-to-peak height of undulations on the metal
surface) divided by the pipe diameter. This is then usually applied to a Moody
friction chart to find the friction factor. The Moody chart gives the Fanning
friction factor as a function of Reynolds number and relative roughness.
A new steel pipe is usually reckoned to have an absolute roughness of about 50
micron. In a 24- inch pipe this converts to a relative roughness of about .00008.
An aged, corroded pipe will have a much rougher sur face and a corresponding
higher relative roughness value. There can be a factor of about two between the
pressure drop that can be expected between the new and the aged pipe. Since
flow rate is roughly proportional to the square root of pressure drop, this implies
that the new smooth pipe could have a capacity 40 percent greater than the very
rough pipe.
It is possible to generate a smoother surface than 50 microns by the use of
internally lining or coating the pipe. A roughness (smoothness?) of 10 microns is
feasible by this means, converting to a relative roughness of about 0.000016. The
Moody chart shows that at the maximum Reynolds number this produces a
friction factor of about 0.00115. The increase in capacity that might be expected
by coating or lining the pipe is therefore 6 to 7 percent.
5.4.7
H-0806.35
5-16
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
5.5.1
H-0806.35
5-17
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
No-Slip Holdup
The no-slip holdup is calculated by assuming homogeneous flow throughout the
length of the pipeline. If there were no slip between the gas and liquid phases,
both phases would move through the pipe at the mixture velocity. The liquid
would occupy the volume fraction equivalent to the ratio of the liquid volumetric
flow rate to the total volumetric flow rate. In multiphase flow terminology, this
equates to the liquid holdup being equal to the ratio between the superficial liquid
velocity and the mixture velocity:
Hl,ns
where:
Vsl = Superficial Liquid Velocity (actual ft3 /sec of liquid / pipe crosssectional area)
Vm = Mixture Velocity
In practice, no-slip conditions can only be achieved at extremely high gas
velocities where the pressure drops are uneconomic and there is a risk of erosion.
The no-slip holdup thus represents the minimum holdup possible in a multiphase
pipeline. At typical pipeline operating conditions of 4C and 70 barg, the no-slip
holdup can be estimated as 0.045 percent of the pipeline volume for each 1
BBL/MMscf of CGR.
H-0806.35
5-18
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Under most conditions, the liquid phase, which is more dense and viscous, moves
more slowly than the gas. When this occurs, the liquid holdup (Hl) is greater than
the no-slip holdup. Under these conditions, the actual gas velocity is greater than
the mixture velocity, and the actual liquid velocity is smaller than the mixture
velocity. The expressions for the actual gas velocity (Ug ) and the actual liquid
velocity (Ul) are:
Ug =
Ul =
5.5.3
Vsg
1- H l
Vsl
Hl
Annular
Flow
Stratified
Flow
Dispersed
Bubble Flow
Superficial Gas
Velocity
Strong
Strong
Strong
Strong
Superficial
Liquid Velocity
Strong
Strong
Strong
Strong
Gas Density
Moderate
Strong
Strong
Strong
Pipeline
Diameter
Moderate
Weak
Weak
Weak
Angle of
Inclination
Moderate
Weak
Very Strong
None
Liquid
Properties
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Weak
H-0806.35
5-19
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
As seen in Table 5.5-1, the influence of the major variables on the holdup is very
different for each of the flow regimes. As a result, it is impossible to develop a
general holdup correlation that will apply to all the flow regimes. Unfortunately,
almost all of the commonly used ho ldup models available in commercial software
try to do this. They work poorly over much of the operating range as a result.
The only way to accurately predict liquid holdup is to use mechanistic models for
each of the flow regimes.
5.5.4
5.5.5
Mechanistic Models
Mechanistic models calculate liquid holdup as part of their overall solution to the
flow condition in each section of a pipeline. These models work at a more
fundamental level than the correlation methods as discussed in the prediction of
flow regimes.
5.5.6
H-0806.35
5-20
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
5-21
1-Dec-00
5.7
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Information Sources
Agrawal, S.S., Gregory, G.A. & Govier, G.W. " An Analysis of Horizontal Stratified
Two Phase Flow in Pipes" Can. J. Chem. Engng. p280-287, 51, June 1973.
Baker, A. & Gravestock, N. "New Correlations for Predicting Press Loss and Holdup in
Gas/Condensate Pipelines" BHRA 3rd Int. Conf. on Multiphase Flow, The Hague
18-20th May 1987.
Baker, A., Nielsen, K. & Gabb, A. "Field Data Test New Holdup, Pressure- loss
Calculations for gas, Condensate Pipelines" O&G J. p78-86, March 21th, 1988.
Baker, A., Nielsen, K. & Gabb, A. "Holdup, Pressure- loss Calculations Confirmed"
O&G J. p44-50, March 28th, 1988.
Baker, A., Nielsen, K. & Gabb, A. "Pressure Loss, Liquid-holdup Calculations
Developed" O&G J. p55-59, March 14th, 1988.
Beggs, H.D. & Brill, J.P. "A Study of Two Phase Flow in Inclined Pipes"
Trans.Pet.Soc.AIME, p607, 256, 1973.
Beggs, H.D. and Brill, J.P., A Study of Two-phase Flow in Inclined Pipes, J. Pet. Tech.,
June 1967, P. 815.
Cunliffe, R.S. "Condensate Flow in Wet- gas Lines can be Predicted" O&G J. p100-107,
30th October. 1978
Eaton, B.A., Andrews, D.E., Knowles, C.R., Silberberg, I.H. & Brown, K.E. " The
Prediction of Flow Patterns, Liquid Hold- up and Pressure Losses Occurring during
Continuous Two-phase Flow in Horizontal Pipelines" J. Pet. Tech., p815-828, June
1967.
Gregory, G.A. "Comparison of Methods for the Prediction of Liquid Holdup for Upward
Gas- liquid Flow in Inclined Pipes" Can. J. Chem. Engng. p384-388, 53, August 1975.
Gregory, G.A. "Multiphase Flow in Pipes - Notes for a Professional Development
Course Neotechnology Consultants Ltd., Calgary 1991.
Gregory, G.A. & Fogarasi, M. "A Critical evaluation of Multiphase Gas- liquid Pipeline
Calculation Methods" BHRA 2nd Int. Conf. on Multiphase Flow, London, 19-21st June
H-0806.35
5-22
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Calculation Methods" BHRA 2nd Int. Conf. on Multiphase Flow, London, 19-21st June
1985.
Hansen, T.E. "The Northeast Frigg Full Scale Multiphase Flow Test" BHRA Multiphase
Production Conference, Cannes, 19-21st June, 1991.
Hughmark, G.A. "Hold-up in Gas- liquid Flow" Chem. Engng. Prog. P62, 58, 1962.
Lockhart, R.W. & Martinelli, R.C. " Proposed Correlation of Data for Isothermal
Two-phase, Two Compone nt Flow in Pipes" Chem. Engng. Prog. p45, 39, January
1949.
Mandhane, J.M., Gregory, G.A. & Aziz, K. "A Flow Pattern Map for Gas- liquid Flow in
Horizontal Pipes" Int. J. Multiphase Flow, p537, 1, 1974.
Mandhane, J.M., Gregory, G.A. & Aziz, K. "Critical Evaluation of Friction
Pressure-drop Prediction Methods for Gas- liquid Flow in Horizontal Pipes" J. Pet. Tech.
p1348-1358, October 1977.
McAllister, J.S., Hydrocarbons GB Ltd. memorandum and attached technical note dated
15th April 1988.
Minami, K. & Brill, J.P. "Liquid Hold-up in Wet Gas Pipelines" SPE 14535, SPE
Production Engineering, p36-44, February 1987.
Molyneux, P.D. "The Measurement of Multiphase Flow in a Pipeline Dip and
Comparison of the Results with PLAC Predictions" BG R&T Internal Report GRC R
1360, April 1996.
Mukherjee H. & Brill, J.P. "Liquid Holdup Correlations for Inclined Two-phase Flow
J. Pet. Tech., p1003-1008, May 1983.
Mukherjee, H. and Brill, J.P., Pressure Drop Correlation for Inclined Two-phase Flow,
J. of Energy Resources Te ch., Vol. 107, P.549, 1985.
Oliemans, R.V.A. "Modeling of Gas-condensate Flow in Horizontal and Inclined Pipes"
Proc. ASME, Pipeline Engng. Symp., ETCE, p73, Dallas, February 1987.
Oliemans, R.V.A., Two-phase Flow in Gas Transmission Pipelines, ASME paper
76-Pet-25, Sep. 1976.
H-0806.35
5-23
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
5-24
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
6.0
6.1
Introduction
The majority of pipelines are sized by use of three primary design criteria:
available pressure drop; allowable velocities; and flow regime Line sizing is
usually performed by use of steady state simulators, which assume that the
pressures, flowrates, temperatures, and liquid holdup in the pipeline are constant
with time. This assumption is rarely true in practice, but line sizes calculated from
the steady state models are usually adequate. Thermal considerations, including
steady-state temperature drop, and the effect on steady-state hydraulics is
discussed in Chapter 7, entitled Thermal Modeling.
For a more rigorous pipeline sizing, the simulations could be done using transient
simulators. Transient simulators allow changes in parameters such as inlet
flowrate and outlet pressure as a function of time, and calculate values for the
outlet flowrates, temperatures, liquid holdup, etc. as a function of time. If the line
is operating in slug flow, the line size calculated from the transient model might
be different from that calculated from a steady state simulator.
These
considerations will be discussed later in Chapter 8, entitled, Transient
Modeling.
This chapter is arranged as follows. Sections 6.1 and 6.2 discuss some general
guidelines for pressure drop and fluid velocity design criteria (The third design
criteria, flow regimes are discussed in Chapter 5). Section 6.3 presents some
general guidelines to follow when using steady-state simulators.
6.2
For plant piping, rule of thumb values for pressure gradients, such as a
frictional gradient of 0.2-0.5 psi per 100 ft. of equivalent length, are generally
used.
H-0806.35
6-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The pressure drop in the line should be compared with the allowable pressure
drop. It should be pointed out that pressure drop is not always a maximum at
the highest flowrate. If the pipeline contains inclined or vertical elements, it is
possible that the highest pressure drop may occur at a low flow condition due
to high elevational losses at low flows.
6.3
Velocity
The velocity in multiphase flow pipelines should be kept within certain limits to
ensure proper operation. Operating problems can occur if the velocity is either
too high or too low, as described in the following sections. It is difficult to
accurately define the point at which velocities are "too high" or "too low. This
section of the guide will try to quantify limits, but these limits should be
considered as guidelines and not absolute values
For the maximum design velocity in a pipeline, API RP-14E recommends the
following formula:
Vmax =
H-0806.35
C
Pns
6-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
( Pg V sg ) + ( PlV sl )
Vm
6-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Low velocities may cause terrain induced slugging in hilly terrain pipelines
and pipeline-riser systems.
It is not possible to give a simple formula quantifying the velocity when the
phenomena discussed above will occur. The minimum velocity depends on many
variables, including: topography; pipeline diameter; gas- liquid ratio; and
operating conditions of the line. A ballpark value for the minimum velocity
would be a mixture velocity of 5-8 ft/sec. The actual value of the minimum
velocity can only be quantified by simulation of the system using the methods
discussed.
6.4
H-0806.35
6-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
6-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Although it is possible to get good estimates of the phase equilibrium for 3-phase
(gas-oil- water) systems, the available software does not allow rigorous simulation
of three-phase flow. The models present in steady-state simulators can only do
two-phase (gas- liquid) flow calculations. Steady-state simulators average the
properties of the liquid hydrocarbon and liquid water, and use that average in the
two-phase flow methods. Volumetric averaging, however, may not give good
values for the viscosity and surface tension of the mixture. If the oil and water
form an emulsion, the viscosity estimate may be off considerably using simple
volumetric averaging, because the viscosity of an emulsion can be as much as 50
times as high as the viscosity of the oil or water. If it is likely that an emulsion
will form, the Woeflin method, which is available in steady-state simulators,
should be used to estimate the viscosity of the emulsion.
For lower gas-oil ratios, the choice of models is more difficult. Compositional
models should give more accurate phase equilibrium results, but the physical
property estimates from the compositional models may not be as good as the
black oil model. (Section 4 illustrates this point.) As a result, it cannot be stated
categorically that either the black oil model or the compositional model is
superior for low gas-oil ratio systems. General practice with Steady-State
Simulators has been to use the black oil model for lower gas-oil ratio streams.
If tests of the phase equilibrium and physical properties have been done as part of
the wellstream analysis, steady-state simulators allow the users of the black oil
model to adjust the model predictions for solution GOR, densities, and liquid
viscosity to match experimental values. The pipeline predictions after PVT
matching should be considerably better than those obtained with use of the
standard correlations.
6.4.2
H-0806.35
6-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
If the velocities in the line are high, the uphill and downhill holdups may be close.
As the mixture velocity decreases, there will be an increasing difference between
uphill and downhill holdups.
The following table illustrates how sensitive the liquid holdup is to mixture
velocity at various angles of inclination from horizontal. The feed stream is a
gas-condensate with about 4 bbl/MMSCF of liquid present. (The values shown
are predictions of the OLGAS model.)
Table 6-1:
PIPELINE
INCLINATION
ANGLE,
DEGREES
2.7
4.1
5.4
8.1
16.2
-2.0
0.0041
0.0053
0.0064
0.0091
0.0115
-1.0
0.0052
0.0068
0.0085
0.0108
0.0122
-0.5
0.0068
0.0087
0.0108
0.0124
0.0126
0.0
0.0224
0.0218
0.0198
0.0156
0.0131
0.2
0.5797
0.4134
0.2249
0.0179
0.0134
0.5
0.5961
0.4988
0.3846
0.0317
0.0135
1.0
0.5997
0.5000
0.4314
0.3023
0.0144
2.0
0.6009
0.5024
0.4337
0.3428
0.0158
Using the values in the table below, a comparison of two models for a given
section of a pipeline has been made. In the first model, the pipeline segment
consists of two equal length sections of -0.5 degree and +0.5 degree each. The
second model consists of a single horizontal pipeline segment. The liquid
holdups for the two models are:
H-0806.35
6-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Table 6-2:
MIXTURE
VELOCITY, FT/SEC
HOLDUP FOR
HORIZONTAL
MODEL
2.7
4.1
0.3015
0.2538
0.0224
0.0218
5.4
0.1977
0.0198
8.1
0.0221
0.0156
16.2
0.0131
0.0131
The liquid holdups are far apart at low velocities and are the same at higher
velocities. This comparison makes two points:
1. The pipeline profile must be realistic if the calculations of liquid holdup and
pressure drop are to be accurate.
2. Low velocities cause severe problems in prediction of the pipeline
performance.
For very low velocities, it would be necessary to know the pipeline elevation
profile within an accuracy of about one pipe diameter in order to get accurate
holdup predictions. This is generally not practical.
In many cases, the pipeline topography is not known when the preliminary
pipeline sizing calculations are run. Frequently, in offshore pipeline design, the
designer only knows water depths at subsea wells or platforms. Instead of
assuming a straight- line pipeline profile, it is recommended that the designer add
some terrain features to the pipeline profile to simulate hills and valleys that are
inevitably present in the actual profile.
To improve the accuracy of the simulation, many calculation segments should be
used in simulating the pipeline. Increasing the number of calculation segments
always improves the accuracy of the simulation, but it increases the computer
simulation time. The number of segments required depends on how rapidly the
temperature, pressure and holdup are changing in the pipeline. For a system with
rapid changes in pressure, e.g. flare systems; the number of calculation segments
H-0806.35
6-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
should be greater. If the temperature and pressure are changing slowly, a coarser
grid can be used to simulate the pipeline.
6.4.3
Interpretation of Results
When a multiphase simulator is run, the interpretation of the results can be
difficult. The following section provides assistance in understanding steady-state
simulators output, and ensuring that the design criteria for the line (velocities,
flow regime, and allowable pressure drop) are met.
The velocity in the pipeline should be kept within a limited range. Calculation of
the velocities from a steady-state simulators output is not straightforward. The
designers of steady-state simulators chose to include the actual gas and liquid
velocities in their output table rather than the superficial gas and liquid velocities,
which are needed in the erosional velocity calculations. The superficial and
actual velocities are related by simple formulas:
Vsg = Ug (1 H l )
and
Vsl = U l H 1
It is important to note that liquid holdup is generally shown to only two decimal
places in output tables. For gas-condensate lines, if the liquid holdup is below 0.5
percent, the printout will show 0.00 for the holdup. If there is a way to increase
the number of significant digits to be reported (based on simulator), this is
suggested.
A more accurate way of calculating the superficial velocities from the steady-state
simulators output tables which doesn't rely on reading the value for the liquid
holdup is:
Hl =
(U g Vm)
(U g U l )
Vsl = U l H l
H-0806.35
6-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Vsg = Vm Vsl
To calculate the C value in the API-RP14E equation, the value of the no-slip
mixture density must be known. The no-slip mixture density can be calculated
from the phase densities shown on the output table and the superficial velocities
calculated above:
ns =
( g Vsg ) + (l Vsl )
Vm
It is worthwhile to emphasize the point that the pipeline design should be checked
at off-design points as well as the no minal design point. For most pipelines,
worst-case conditions for liquid holdup and flow regime occur at turndown
conditions.
Some steady-state simulators allow the user to print a flow regime map based on
the selected correlations for horizontal and vertical flow. Some simulators have
some limitations. For instance, in PIPEPHASE, the flow regime map is printed
only for the last "device" in a "link. If the "link" contains several pipes with
different inclinations, the flow regime map for some of these sections may be
quite different from the map at the last "device. The only way to print the flow
regime map at specific points along the line is to make these points ends to
"links".
Most simulators also print the flow regime predictions for each pipeline segment.
The printout shows the predictions of the multiphase flow regimes and in some
cases, the correlation/model used (e.g. Beggs and Brill and Taitel and Dukler,
etc.).
Once the flow regime is determined, the designer needs to decide if this flow
regime is acceptable. This decision is more difficult than it may appear. Here are
some general rules/practice methods to follow:
H-0806.35
Ideally, the flow line should not be in the slug flow regime. In practice, it may
be very difficult to design a line to avoid slug flow under all anticipated flow
conditions. The only variables the designer can change are diameter and
operating pressure; the changes in these variables required to avoid slug flow
6-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
6.5
The flow regime analysis may show that the line is in stratified flow. In many
instances, this is an excellent flow regime in which to operate. At low
flowrates, however, slugging may occur in lines predicted to be in stratified
flow, induced by the terrain. Terrain induced slugs are generally much longer
than the slugs in normal slug flow and can cause severe operating problems.
Terrain slugging is discussed in more detail in Section 5.2.2.
If the pressure drop and velocities for lines in dispersed bubble or annular
flow are within acceptable limits, these flow regimes are usually good regimes
in which to operate.
6.5.1
H-0806.35
6-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
PIPESIM (Baker-Jardine)
OLGA (Scanpower)
HYSIM/HYSIS (Hyprotech)
H-0806.35
6-12
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In most cases, different flow models can be used to simulate each individual
flowline within a network. Commercial codes such as Pipesim and Pipeflow also
have add-in features allowing optimization of flow through gathering systems and
optimization of lifetime production from a gas field (or group of fields).
6.5.3
H-0806.35
6-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The resulting range of pressure drops will be associated with a range of liquid and
gas flow splits and will cover the range of possible pressure drops in the looped
line.
A further effect which must be checked for in looped systems with different
topographies is the possibility of one branch filling with liquid and acting as a
manometer leg (the liquid head balancing the pressure drop in the flowing line.
As well as increasing the pipeline pressure drop this phenomenon could result in
unexpected liquid slugs being received at the terminal when a subsequent flow
increase expels this liquid.
6.5.4
H-0806.35
6-14
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Neptane
Initial flow
Final flow
Mercury
30 Mmscfd
145 Mmscfd
Initial flow
Final flow
Neptane Node 1
Initial flow
30 Mmfscfd
Final flow
145 Mmscfd
Initial HU
1102 bbls
Final HU
273 bbks
Mercury Node 2
Initial flow
25 Mmfscfd
Final flow
25 Mmscfd
Initial HU
236 bbls
Final HU
236 bbks
Niode 1- Node 2
Initial flow
100 Mmfscfd
Final flow
215 Mmscfd
Initial HU
186 bbls
Final HU
48 bbks
Niode 2 Easington
Initial flow
125 Mmfscfd
Final flow
240 Mmscfd
Initial HU
1198 bbls
Final HU
431 bbks
Easington
Minerva
Initial flow
Final flow
25 Mmscfd
25 Mmscfd
Initial flow
Final flow
Liquid
70 Mmscfd
70 Mmscfd
125 Mmscfd
240 Mmscfd
1734 bbls
6.6
How Steady -State Hydraulic Simulation Fits into the Design Process
Steady-state hydraulic simulation fits under the umbrella of Flow System
Thermal Hydraulic Design and Fluid Behavior. The hydraulic design is also tied
in closely with the thermal analysis, which will be the subject of Chapter 7.
6.7
Information Sources
1) Eaton, B.A., Andrews, D.E., Knowles, C.R., Silberberg, I.H. & Brown, K.E.
"The Prediction of Flow Patterns, Liquid Hold-up and Pressure Losses
Occurring during Continuous Two-Phase Flow
2) Gregory, G.A. & Fogarasi, M. "A Critical Evaluation of Multiphase
Gas-Liquid Pipeline Calculation Methods" BHRA, 2nd Int. Conference on
Multiphase Flow, London, 19-21st June 1985.
H-0806.35
6-15
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
6-16
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
7.0
THERMAL MODELING
7.1
Ambient temperatures
With this information, appropriate heat transfer coefficients, which are then used to
determine the temperature profile in the pipeline, can be calculated. Usually, these
calculations are performed by the multiphase simulation software being use, though they
can be calculated manually.
H-0806.35
7-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In most multiphase simulators, heat transfer rates are calculated using homogeneous
mixture properties. Hence no attempt is made to account for the position of the liquid
and gas in the pipe. This approach has been found to be satisfactory for multiphase
pipelines operating under normal transportation conditions.
In some circumstances the homogeneous heat transfer model may not be adequate. For
instance, when investigating heat flow from a pipe or valves during a rupture or shut- in,
knowledge of the liquid content (and resultant heat transfer characteristics) at different
locations in the pipe may be important. Under some such circumstances, fluid
boundaries can be located by experience or calculation, appropriate heat transfer
coefficients can be estimated, and heat loss rates calculated by hand methods. For
others, it would be necessary to use a sophis ticated transient model.
7.2
The relative vapor/liquid split in the separator or flowline (which may affect the sizing
of the flowline or the separator).
The temperature profile at the inlet to the flowline affects the type of insulation and burial
requirements. If the temperature is high, then burial may be required to prevent upheaval
buckling. Conversely, if WHFT is very high, it may be necessary to cool the flow stream
before it enters the flowline.
This design guide discusses the factors, which affect the wellhead temperature, such as
watercut, flow rate, and completion details.
H-0806.35
7-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In the following, heat transfer within the tubing and the casings is not rigorously
calculated. Instead, the casings and annuli are approximated to an equivalent thickness of
cement (or another insulation material). This method provides accurate results
considering that information on the heat transfer through the completion details and the
thermal properties of the surrounding rock may not be readily available and/or of
questionable accuracy.
As an alternate, an unsteady-state well simulation program could be used to rigorously
model the temperature loss through the tubing, casing and the annuli with time. Such a
program can calculate the temperature profile in the well during start-up and as a result of
flow rate changes. Some believe that such a program should not be used to calculate
steady-state wellhead flowing temperatures but should only be used to give an indication
of the warm up rates or the thermal response to changes in the operating conditions such
as flow rate.
This section describes the method used to calculate the WHFT. The description of the
calculation will allow the reader to determine which factors most influence the WHFT.
Calculated Well Heat Transfer
The heat lost from a flowing well into the surrounding rock matrix is by time-dependent
heat transfer. As in the case of a flowline, the overall heat transfer coefficient, which
determines heat loss from the produced fluids, is obtained from a series combination of
three components:
The heat transfer coefficient for radiation is not included as its influence is usually small
compared with the other coefficients.
Heat Transfer Through Completion
The calculation of the heat transfer rate through the layers becomes quite complicated
when a large number of casings are employed. The numerous casings, annuli and cement
thicknesses each contribute to the overall resistance to heat transfer. To simplify the
H-0806.35
7-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
2T
[ln( D j +1 / Dj ) / K j ]
For a single layer of cement with an outer diameter of Dc, the equation becomes:
Q=
2K c T
ln( Dc / Dci )
Since Dc is the only unknown and the numerator is the same for both equations the
equations can be rewritten as below:
Dc = Dco exp( K c (ln DJ + 1 / D j ) K j )
The heat transfer coefficient through the completion can now be expressed (based on
tubing inside diameter) as:
hcoml =
2 Kc
Di ln( Dc / DCI )
At the bottom of the well there is normally only one tubing, one casing and one thickness
of cement (and one annulus). However, nearer the top of the well there may be numerous
casings, annulus, different annular fills and cement thicknesses.
Internal Heat Transfer
The internal heat transfer coefficient, hi, assumes the existence of homogeneous twophase flow. This assumption is usually acceptable since the resistance of the internal film
to heat transfer is low compared with the resistance of the casings and the external
medium.
The expression used for estimating the film coefficient is the same as that recommended
for single-phase turbulent flow.
H-0806.35
7-4
1-Dec-00
hi =
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
0.023k m
x Re 0.8 x Pr 0.3
Di
The physical properties are derived on a phase volume weighted basis. The subscript m
denotes a mixture property. For example, the mixture viscosity is determined by the
following:
m = ll + g (1 g )
(Since heat is usually lost from well fluids the exponent for the Prandtl number is set to
0.3.)
External Medium
Heat transfer to the earth is essentially transient radial heat conduction, with the effective
heat transfer coefficient varying with time. While the analysis of the problem is
relatively straightforward, a simple explicit solution is not available. However,
approximate asymptotic solutions for short and long flow times can be derived.
The effective heat transfer coefficient, referred to the tubing inner diameter, is given by:
hearth =
2 ke
Dif (t )
Steady state simulation software able to perform the above calculations may not provide
an accurate prediction of WHFT during start-up. Transient wellbore simulation software
should be used to calculate a more accurate well warm up time.
For flowing times of the order of 10,000 hours, the system can reasonably be assumed to
be approaching steady state. For times between 500 and 10,000 hours the well will
probably be approaching steady state, and the steady-state value will be a reasonable
approximation.
H-0806.35
7-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Geothermal Gradient
The undisturbed temperature of the surrounding soil will vary from the reservoir to the
sea/surface. The soil temperature is important since it affects the rate of heat loss from
the fluids. However, the geothermal gradient is not usually known and it is customary to
assume that the (unaffected) temperature varies linearly between the reservoir and the
seabed.
Overall Heat Transfer
Using the coefficients calculated above the overall heat transfer coefficient can now be
determined:
1 1
1
1
= +
+
u hi hcomp hearth
The heat transfer coefficients are based on the inside area. The heat loss from the fluid is
therefore:
Q = UA T
U is the overall heat transfer coefficient (OHTC). Both U and the temperature difference
vary up the tubing and therefore a calculation is best solved by computer simulation.
7.3
H-0806.35
7-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(Tin Tout ) 1/ M
Since Q and Cp can be taken as constant (or relatively insensitive to the flow rate),
increasing M (the mass flow rate) will reduce the temperature loss in the tubing.
Therefore, increasing the mass flow rate will resulting in an increase in the WHFT.
The equation above gives only a rough indication of the effect of flow rate since it fails to
account for the effect of the geothermal gradient. At very low flow rates the wellhead
temperatures tends towards the sea temperature as the fluid temperature tends towards the
geothermal gradient.
Effect of Water Cut
Increasing watercut increases the specific heat and mixture density of the fluid resulting
in an increase in the WHFT. With reference to the equation above, by assuming that the
heat lost from the well (Q) and the mass flow rate (M) to be relatively constant,
increasing water cut will raise the specific heat (Cp) which will reduce the temperature
loss and therefore result in warmer WHFT.
Effect of Gas Oil Ratio (GOR)
The gas phase in an oil well typically provides a relatively small part of the overall mass
of the mixture. Therefore a higher GOR only makes a minor contribution to the overall
enthalpy of the system. Since the rate of heat loss is dominated by the casings and the
external medium, the increased velocity in the tubing has little effect and the heat loss
remains reasonably constant. The effect of the gas oil ratio is less significant than the
watercut or the flow rate.
For example, predictions of WHFT for a range of GORs from 100 to 2,000 SCF/STB
have shown that, for a given flow rate, the WHFT only increased by roughly 2F (1C)
with increasing GOR. The range in WHFTs reduced with increasing flow rate and at 10
KBLPD, the predicted WHFT only varied by 0.13F between 100 and 2,000 SCF/STB.
Effect of Lift Gas
Lift gas greatly complicates the heat transfer model. To rigorously model heat transfer
would require counter flow calculations for the lift section.
For long well flowing times the overall heat transfer is dominated by the heat transfer
through the earth. As a result, the WHFT will be reasonably accurate without
H-0806.35
7-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
considering countercurrent flow, provided the mixture temperature of the gas lift gas and
produced fluids is calculated. In this simplified approach the temperature profile takes
place at the gas lift injection point.
Reliance in Predicted Results
As mentioned above, the calculation of the WHFT has a major impact in the design of the
topsides equipment such as the separator and the heat exchangers.
BP has performed a number of brief studies comparing actual WHFTs against predicted
WHFTs for gas wells (West Sole & Bruce) and oil wells (Gyda & Ula). In general, the
predicted results differed from the actual results by less than 5F. In most cases, these
calculations were performed using reasonably accurate measurements of flow rate, water
cut, and bottom hole flowing pressure and temperature taken while testing the well.
In most cases, the WHFT will be calculated using sketchy data from the appraisal wells,
which may not be suitable for the whole development. Usually, the most unreliable piece
of data is the reservoir temperature and the Bottom Hole Flowing Temperature (BHFT);
or FBHT (Flowing Bottomhole Temperature). This not only affects the initial enthalpy
of the wells fluids but also affects the geothermal gradient, which is usually assumed to
be linear between the reservoir and the surface.
Care must be taken when predicting WHFTs for gas wells since, although software
usually accounts for expansion cooling in the tubing, it cannot account for the cooling
between the reservoir and the perforations of the tubing. This may lead to the prediction
of a high WHFT.
The thermal conductivity of the surrounding rock also has a significant influence on the
calculated WHFT. Usually only limited data on the rock type is available and the thermal
conductivity is often assumed to be constant. It is advised that when calculating WHFTs,
the sensitivity to reservoir temperature, flowrate, water cut, rock thermal conductivity are
determined to provide a range of temperatures.
Unsteady-State Predictions
Before start-up, the rock surrounding the completion will be at (or close to) the
geothermal gradient. As the well starts to produce, the surrounding rock will start to
warm. Initially, there is a high temperature differential between the fluid and the
H-0806.35
7-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
surroundings and heat loss is high. With time, heat loss will reduce as the rock warms
and the WHFT will increase. The rate of this increase is dependent on the flow rate.
Well start-up can be of particular importance. Before the well is started- up, the
temperature of the fluids is at the geothermal gradient. On start- up, cold fluid will be
produced; if the fluids pass through a choke at the wellhead then the temperature
downstream of the choke may be very low since the initial temperature upstream was
low. This may result in hydrate formation with the potential for forming a blockage.
It is therefore important to know how quickly the well would warm to determine the
length of time that methanol/hydrate inhibitor injection will be required.
When production commences from a well the WHFT will rise quite quickly. Usually, the
wellhead temperature will approach the steady-state value within two residence times of
the well. Typically this is no more than a few hours.
7.4
Pipelines
The temperature of the gas and liquid phases can be computed by carrying out an
incremental heat (energy) balance along the pipe. This balance can be calculated by hand
or (probably more accurately and certainly more conveniently) by using a commercial
software package, which contains the proper physics simulations.
7.4.1
H-0806.35
7-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
A large number of temperature profiles could be reproduced here for the range of
conditions likely, but all are of the same type and it should be possible to express them by
a relatively simple mathematical relationship. The simplest possible expression of the
heat loss equation is:
Q = UA T
and in a discretized form, representing the rate of heat loss with distance:
dQ UD(t t c) dL
where Q is the heat flux, U the overall heat transfer coefficient, D the pipe diameter, T
the fluid temperature, A the pipe surface area, T0 the ambient (sea) temperature and L the
distance along pipeline form the inlet.
The equivalent change to the gas enthalpy is given by:
dQ = MCpT (due to reduction in enthalpy)
where m is the mass flow of fluid and Cp the fluid heat capacity. Combining the above
equations gives an expression for rate of change of temperature with distance:
dT / dL = UD( t To ) / mCp
Equation 4.6.4 can be integrated to give temperature as a function of distance:
ln[(T I 0 )/( 0 )] = UDL/mCp
where TI is the fluid inlet temperature. This can be simplified by collecting a number of
terms together for both fluids and expressing the mass flow in terms of volumetric flow,
area and density leads to:
ln[(T1 T0 )/(T - T0 )] = KL/VD
where K is a correlating constant and V the gas velocity.
For this approach to be valid, plotting the left-hand-side of the equation above against
L/(VD) should result in a straight line with gradient K. Test data has been analyzed in
this way and it has been found that K is, to within acceptable limits, independent of
pipeline length, diameter and velocity. It is only a function of CGR, and a simple
relationship between K and CGR has been derived.
H-0806.35
7-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
7-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
applied to the gas and liquid phases individually and the results combined to give an
overall value for hi.
For low flowrates a convection model is used for the gas heat transfer coefficient:
hi = 0.13k(r2 g|Tw-T|/m2 T)0.333Pr0.333
Tw is the wall temperature and T the fluid temperature. For low liquid velocities the
laminar heat transfer coefficient is used:
hi = 4k/Dh
7.4.2
Rules of Thumb
At early stages of a project, there may not be enough information to enable rigorous
calculation of the heat transfer coefficient. The following rule of thumb values for heat
transfer coefficients for subsea flowlines can be useful in these instances.
TABLE 7-1:
U Value, BTU/hr/ft2 /degF
Applications
H-0806.35
Wells
Risers
20-40
Buried Pipelines
1-3
3-5
5-50
7-12
1-Dec-00
7.4.3
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Maintain fluids at a sufficiently high temperature to avoid, or limit requirement for, feed
heating at the separation plant.
Marine pipelines and risers are provided with some form of coating for corrosion
protection and these offer varying degrees of thermal insulation. Risers on offshore
platforms are normally coated with coal tar enamel or a very thin layer of fusion bonded
epoxy (FBE). These offer little thermal insulation. Often risers are coated with ca. 12
mm of Neoprene to provide corrosion protection in the splash zone. Where thermal
insulation is required this coating may be used over the full length of the riser. Marine
growth on risers can add substantial thermal resistance.
Pipelines are normally protected against corrosion by FBE or coal tar enamel. For an
offshore pipeline requiring concrete weight coating (to provide negative buoyancy) coal
tar enamel is normally applied to the pipe to provide corrosion protection.
Offshore pipelines smaller than 16 inches in diameter are often trenched to avoid damage
by fishing trawl boards. Even if a pipeline trench is not mechanically backfilled (i.e. not
buried) some natural in- fill of the trench normally occurs so that the pipe becomes
partially buried. Under some conditions a trenched pipeline has to be covered by rocks to
provide stability or to protect it from upheaval buckling. This rock dump ing buries the
line; providing enhanced thermal insulation. On some occasions pipelines are buried
solely to provide enhanced thermal insulation.
In addition to the coatings referred to above, low thermal conductivity insulation
materials can be applied to minimize heat loss from a pipeline. Insulation systems can be
divided into two main categories:
Low strength polymeric based materials requiring protection from the environment by
encasing in an outer sleeve. This is the now- familiar Pipe- in-Pipe (PIP) configuration
where a layer of polyurethane foam (PUF) is sandwiched between the inner carrier pipe
H-0806.35
7-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
and a protective jacket pipe. For deep and cold water, this type of construction provides
effective and stable pipeline insulation.
Some pipeline coaters are now offering a system for subsea use consisting of PVC or
PUF foam sandwiched between an ethylene-propylene-diene monomer (EPDM)
corrosion coating and an EPDM outer layer providing protection from the environment.
Neoprene.
EPDM.
BTU/hr-ft-F
W/m-K
0.02
0.035
PPF (solid)
0.13
0.225
PPF (foam)
0.10
0.131
Neoprene
0.15
0.260
Epoxy
0.15
0.260
Notes:
(1) Values depend on water depth, temperature and age.
(2) Aging tests on Neoprene carried out in 1985 showed that the thermal conductivity rises
approximately 50 percent as water absorption occurs.
7.5
7.5.1
H-0806.35
7-14
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
TABLE 7-3:
Maximum
Temperature (C)
Coating
FBE (fusion bonded epoxy)
90
70
50
ca. 100
The coating specialists should be consulted if there is any possibility of operating near the
maximum allowable coating temperature. They can also advise on alternative coatings
for any particular application.
CO2 corrosion of pipelines increases with temperature but reaches a maximum at about
60C. In some cases it is necessary to cool the fluids prior to entry to the pipeline to
reduce corrosion rates to a level consistent with the use of carbon steel pipework.
An alternative to providing cooling offshore is to use corrosion resistant pipe for the
initial sections of the pipeline. At some distance downstream of the start of the line
natural cooling in the sea will reduce fluid temperatures to a level where carbon steel pipe
can be used.
7.5.2
Wax deposition
Hydrate formation
High viscosities, in some crudes, and under some circumstances, in oil/water emulsions.
In subsea and onshore multiphase pipelines, fluid temperatures may drop below the wax
appearance point with the result that small particles of wax form. Some of these wax
particles are carried along in the liquid and some are deposited on the pipe walls. In fact
because the walls of the pipeline are generally colder than the bulk fluid, wax deposition
H-0806.35
7-15
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
onto the pipe wall may occur while the bulk pipeline fluids temperature is still somewhat
above the wax appearance point.
7.6
7.6.1
Pipephase
Several concerns arise when using SimScis Pipephase for heat transfer calculations:
The default velocity of water flowing past a pipeline is 10 miles per hour in Pipephase.
This velocity is generally too high. More typical values are 1 to 3 ft/sec (0.7-2 mph).
The Pipephase viscosity routine does not estimate viscosities at temperatures below 60
degrees F. At lower temperatures, it uses the viscosity at 60 degrees F. This can lead to
errors for pipelines in deep water or cold climates.
The thermal conductivity for saturated concrete is much higher than that for dry
concrete. The saturated concrete value should be used for subsea pipelines with
concrete coating.
Unless a value is entered for Hrad, radiation is ignored in the heat transfer calculations.
For subsea or buried pipelines, radiation is negligible, but it can be a significant effect
for surface flowlines.
The convective heat transfer routines in Pipephase are not very rigorous. Errors in heat
transfer calculations can occur for systems in which convection is the prime source of
heat transfer.
H-0806.35
7-16
1-Dec-00
8.0
TRANSIENT OPERATIONS
8.1
Introduction
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Transient multiphase flow simulators have only been developed recently. The first
widely used commercial program, OLGA (marketed commercially by Scandpower),
began development in about 1983 and has been commercially available since 1990. One
of OLGA's current competitors, PLAC (now called ProFES and marketed by AEA), was
introduced to the market at about the same time. A transient simulator called Tacite,
which was developed by IFP and marketed by SimSci, is also available.
Steady state simulators assume that all flow rates, pressures, temperatures, etc. are
constant through time. Inherently transient phenomena, such as slug flow, are modeled
by use of their average holdups and pressure drops. Transient programs show the
variations in parameters such as pressure, temperature, and gas and liquid flow rates as a
function of time and can model phenomena such as slug flow. Transient simulators more
closely model the operation of pipelines and with more detail than do steady state
simulators.
Transient simulators solve a set of equations for conservation of mass, momentum and
energy to estimate liquid and gas flow rates, pressures, temperatures and liquid holdups
as a function of time. The programs utilize an iterative procedure that ensures that a set
of boundary conditions (such as inlet flow rates and outlet pressures as a function of
time) are met while solving the conservation equations.
Generally, the use of transient simulators will be more appropriate than steady state
programs whenever transient performance is highly important to the design process.
Such situations include startup and shutdown liquid and gas delivery, heatup and
cooldown temperature fluctuation, unsteady flow into receiving facilities (separators and
slug catchers), and pigging. In addition, the current version of OLGA2000 includes the
ability to estimate the flow of all three phases (oil, gas, and water). Particularly at low
production rates, liquid holdups (and the distribution of oil and water in the holdup
liquid) should be more accurately predicted when using three-phase simulation.
Use of Transient Simulators
Because of their utility, transient simulators have been used for a variety of purposes.
These uses include:
H-0806.35
8-1
1-Dec-00
8.2
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Pigging simulation
Operator training
H-0806.35
8-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
known about them. It is expected that competition in the market place will increase when
some of the other codes are commercialized.
8.2.1
OLGA
OLGA is a dynamic, one dimensional modified two fluid model for transient two-phase
hydrocarbon flow in pipelines and networks, in which processing equipment can be
included. The code has been developed by the SINTEF/IFE two-phase flow project
which commenced in 1984 and was based on the computer program OLGA 83. This was
originally developed for Statoil by IFE in 1983.
The two-phase flow project was aimed at improving OLGA by expanding an
experimental database from a high pressure 8- inch large scale test facility run by SINTEF
at Tiller in Norway. Extensive testing was carried out by IFE and by the projects
member oil companies which included Conoco Norway, Esso Norge, Mobil Exploration
Norway, Norsk Hydro, Petro-Canada, Saga Petroleum, Statoil, and Texaco Exploration
Norway.
The basic models in OLGA contain three separate mass conservation equations for the
gas, the continuous liquid and the liquid droplets, these are coupled with the interphase
mass transfer terms. Momentum conservation is applied to the gas-droplet field and to
the continuous liquid, hence giving two equations. The mixture energy equation is
written in conservation form, accounting for total energy balance in the system. OLGA
predicts as a function of time the pressure, temperature, mass flow of gas and liquid, the
holdup and the flow pattern. Closure laws are required for the friction factor and the
wetted perimeters of the phases and these are flow regime dependent. The droplet field
also requires an entrainment and deposition model. The two basic flow regimes adopted
are distributed and separated flow. The former contains bubble and slug flow and the
latter stratified and annular flow. The transition between the two regime classes is
determined according to a minimum slip concept.
Due to the numerical solution scheme, the original versions of OLGA are particularly
well suited to simulate slow mass flow transients. The implicit time integration applied
allows for long time steps which is important for the simulation of very long transport
lines, where typical simulation times are in the range of hours to days.
The necessary fluid properties (gas/liquid mass fraction, densities, viscosities, enthalpies
etc.) are assumed to be functions of temperature and pressure only, and have to be
supplied by the user as tables in a specific input file. Thus, the total composition of the
H-0806.35
8-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
two-phase mixture is assumed to be constant both in time and along the pipeline for a
given branch. The user may specify a different fluid property table for each branch, but
has to ensure realistic fluid compositions if several branches merge into one.
In 1989 Scandpower A/S acquired marketing rights to the OLGA program and
commercial use of the code increased considerably. The early versions of OLGA had a
simple data input and output file format which made the setting- up of problems very time
consuming. Later versions have user friendly interfaces which greatly enhances the use
of the code, PreOLGA is used for input data generation and PostOLGA is used for post
processing. Fluid properties are generated using a package called PVTOL. The newest
version of OLGA (OLGA2000) has further improved the user interface and has improved
calculation accuracy for high GVF flow situations.
In 1993 Statoil acquired the Tiller facility for 5 years and embarked on a substantial
research and development effort to improve OLGA, areas under development include:
Compositional tracking.
These areas also indicate where there are deficiencies in the present code.
In addition, OLGA has been interfaced with the Fantoft D-SPICE multi-compositional
dynamic process plant simulator to improve the modeling of equipment; however, this
interface only provides a dynamic exchange of data between the codes and is hence not a
fully integrated model.
Some of the other original two-phase flow project sponsors have also developed OLGA
for their own use, notably Conoco who have developed improved thermal modeling and
pigging simulation in their version called CONOLGA.
8.2.2
PLAC
The PipeLine Analysis Code (PLAC) was originally developed from the nuclear reactor
safety code TRAC (1986) under a four-year program sponsored by BP Exploration and
the UK Offshore Supplies Office. The major parts of that work were to remove the
redundant reactor specific components and to convert from steam/water physical
properties to multi-component hydrocarbon properties. More suitable models for
H-0806.35
8-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
interfacial friction and flow regimes were also introduced. The first release of PLAC was
available for use by AEA Petroleum Services and BP Engineering in mid 1990 though
commercialization of the code was not realized until the autumn of 1992. BP and AEA
conducted numerous validation tests on the code with good and bad experiences. Like
OLGA, the original versions of the code were cumbersome to use but ease-of-use has
been greatly improved by the development of interactive pre and post processors. PLAC
is now marketed by AEA.
PLAC solves mass, momentum, and energy equations for each phase using a onedimensional finite difference scheme. Six equations are solved: gas and liquid mass and
momentum conservation, total energy conservation, and gas energy conservation. Unlike
OLGA, PLAC does not have a separate equation incorporating a droplet field in the gas
stream. Appropriate flow pattern maps and constitutive relationships are provided for
wall and interfacial friction and heat transfer, and a model for multi- component phase
change is included. PLAC has flow regime maps for vertical and horizontal pipes and
switches to vertical flow if the angle of inclination is above 10 degrees. The horizontal
flow pattern map is based on the method of Taitel and Dukler (1976).
The fluid physical properties are calculated from a user-supplied mixture composition
using an internal PVT package, however this generates a table of properties similar to
OLGA, and hence still relies on simple equilibrium phase behavior predictions. PLAC
can only use one composition in a network. The current version of the code has the
capability to handle pipes, tees, and valves and is able to predict a range of phenomena
including flow rate and/or thermal transients, severe slugging, shutdown/restart problems,
and pipeline depressurization.
8.2.3
WELLTEMP
WELLTEMP was designed to examine temperature transients caused by flow in wells. It
can also be used to examine temperatures in pipelines. It handles heat flow through
tubing, casings, annuli, cement and formation. Various operations can be modeled such
as injection, production, forward and reverse circulation, shut-in and cementing. It
assumes steady state flow rates; although different flow periods can be entered (steady
within each period). It can handle dual or even triple completions (and co-bundled
flowlines). In dual completions it would allow injection down one string and production
back up the other.
It can be used to examine surface and downhole tubing temperatures during drilling or
simulated treatments. This is useful when considering fluid properties, cement
H-0806.35
8-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
characteristics etc. It can also help when considering corrosion, wax deposition, or
hydrate formation. It can be used to examine cool down times in pipelines. It could also
be used to refine the temperature profile in the annulus and wellbore during gas lift
operations.
WELLTEMP, marketed by Enertech Engineering and Research Company of Houston, is
primarily useful for evaluating warm- up of wells and flowlines. WELLTEMP can
usually run much faster than PLAC or OLGA and has been used to investigate
sensitivities before performing a detailed PLAC or OLGA simulation. The simple
composition treatment in WELLTEMP is a limitation to detailed transient two-phase
8.2.4
Tacite
(Information on Tacite to be added)
8.3
Startup
In normal operation hydrates can be controlled by maintaining the flowing temperature
above the hydrate formation point and/or by injecting a sufficient volume of inhibitor.
The required dosage is determined by using a appropriate program or the GPSA charts
for the prevailing conditions. During shut-down and start- up, conditions can occur which
increase the potential for hydrate formation, and therefore require additional quantities of
inhibitor. Figure 8.3-1 shows a typical hydrate disassociation curve. A pipeline
pressure/temperature profile is superimposed as line A representing conditions in a
pipeline from a subsea template to the slug catcher on a host platform, where hydrate
inhibition may not be required under normal operating circumstances. In some cases the
pipeline may be long and the fluids may cool to seabed conditions where some inhibition
may be required. This could also occur as a result of lower flow rates, and is shown as
curve B. Hence, in normal operation steady state analysis can be used to determine the
amount of inhibitor required.
H-0806.35
8-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The calculation has three main elements. These are: depressurization rate, JouleThompson cooling, and heat transfer from the surroundings.
The depressurizing rate is a critical aspect. The faster the depressurizing the lower the
temperature that will be experienced.
The venting rate can be fixed (e.g. 100 MMSCFD) by using a control valve and a mass
flow rate meter. Alternatively, the system can be vented through an orifice. In most
cases the flow through the orifice is critical, and therefore the depressurizing rate is
independent of the downstream pressure.
As the pressure decreases, the temperature of the system will drop due to JouleThompson cooling (auto-refrigeration). The expansion of the gas is normally considered
to be isentropic. As the gas expands it does work and the energy required to do this work
is removed from the gas in the form of heat. For an isentropic process, the autorefrigeration is not dependent on the duration of the depressurizing, only the physical
properties of the fluid. However, as discussed below, the process is not truly isentropic.
Depressurization of a pipeline system usually requires many hours, and in some cases
days. During this period, the heat input from the surroundings may be (for uninsulated
systems, usually will be) significant.
The Joule-Thompson effect is not time-dependent and is only dependent on the expansion
of the gas in the system. Heat transfer from the surroundings is time dependent. The
longer the depressurization, the greater the influence of the surroundings whilst the autorefrigeration aspect remains (roughly) constant. Therefore, increasing the depressurizing
time will result in less cooling and, therefore, in a higher minimum temperature.
Depressurizing Rate Calculation
It is usual to depressurize a system through an orifice or a valve. The equation for the
mass flow rate through an orifice is given below. The equation for a valve is of a similar
form with slightly different constants (not given here).
W = Cd KAP 1 M W / zT
where
Cd = Coefficient of discharge
H-0806.35
8-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
2
+1
K = [( )[(
)^ (
)]]^ 0.5
R +1 + l
where
P2
2 ( / 1)
<(
)
P1
+1
where P2 = Downstream pressure (N/m2 ).
The occurrence of critical flow greatly simplifies the calculation. If the system is
operating under critical flow then the flow rate is only dependent on the upstream
pressure.
It is normal to consider the depressurizing to be complete when the system pressure falls
below 2 bara. For a downstream pressure of 1 bara, critical flow exists down to pressures
of 1.83 bara (g = 1.3) and so therefore critical flow is usually assumed for the whole of
the depressurizing. Critical flow may not exist at the lower flow rates where the
downstream pressure is significantly greater than atmospheric,
While the pressure ratio satisfies the last equation, the flow rate (W) is independent of the
downstream pressure.
H-0806.35
8-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Heat Transfer
The temperature of the fluid is determined by the effect of Joule-Thompson cooling due
to isentropic expansion of the gas and warming of the gas by heat transfer from the
surroundings. The conservatism of the equation is described below:
The assumption of isentropic expansion means that the gas loses the maximum amount of
energy (i.e. heat) and therefore results in a conservative prediction of the minimum
temperature.
When the gas temperature drops below the ambient temperature the pipeline is warmed
by the surroundings. The influence of the surroundings must be reasonably estimated so
as to calcula te a conservative (i.e. low) minimum temperature.
The calculation of an accurate internal heat transfer coefficient is important since it
greatly influences the prediction of the minimum temperature. The method used must
calculate a conservative (i.e. low) heat transfer coefficient for at least the period that the
system is at its minimum temperature.
The correlation used to determine the heat transfer coefficient will depend on the type of
system and the method of depressurizing. Details of the equatio ns used to calculate the
internal heat transfer coefficient are given below.
H-0806.35
8-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Table 8-1:
Heat
Transfer
Equations
The calculation of an accurate internal heat transfer coefficient is important since it greatly influences
the prediction of the minimum temperature. The method used must calculate a reasonably
conservative (i.e. low) heat transfer coefficient for at least the period that the system is at its
temperature.
The correlation used to determine the heat transfer coefficient will depend on the type of system and the
method of depressuring.
The internal heat transfer coefficient is calculated using one of the following equations:
Stream Line Flow (Re < 2100)
If the flow is laminar (Reynolds number < 2100) then the following equation should be used:
1.86 k m d i u m m
hi =
d i m
c pm m
d i
1/ 3
1/ 3
)]
log 10 Re
[Process
Heat
H-0806.35
8-12
1-Dec-00
Gra =
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
d i3 m2 gT
m
0.023k m
hi =
di
du m m
c pm m
k m
0 .4
m = l + v (1 )
The velocity at which the heat transfer coefficient is to be calculated should be 75% of the exit
velocity. This allows for the fact that there is a velocity profile through the system. If possible
the velocity should also be based on the average velocity for the time step.
8-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
temperature. If the pipe is located in the sea, the overall heat transfer coefficient will be
higher and the minimum wall temperature will accordingly be higher (assuming, for this
comparison, that the air and sea temperatures are equal)
Minimum Pipe Wall Temperature
The objective of most depressurizing studies is the calculation of a minimum pipe wall
temperature, or the calculation of a depressurizing rate which prevents the system from
falling below the minimum tube wall temperature.
In a gas-only system the heat transfer rate between the gas and the pipe wall will be low,
and consequently the temperature difference between the fluid and the tube wall will be
relatively high. In order to be conservative, it is usual to assume that the fluid temperature
and the tube wall temperature are identical throughout the depressurizing. This
assumption will always result in the calculation of a conservative (i.e. low) minimum
tube wall temperature since it ignores the existence of a temperature profile between the
fluid and the wall.
In a two-phase system, the heat transfer rate between the liquid and the pipe wall will be
significantly higher than the heat transfer rate between the gas and the pipe wall. It is
reasonable to assume that where pools of liquid occur (in dips etc.) the high heat transfer
rate will result in the pipe wall cooling to the same temperature as the fluid. However the
effect of the fluid being warmed by the pipe wall is ignored and hence a conservatively
low pipe wall temperature is predicted.
Simultaneous Riser and Topsides Depressurizing
In most studies the riser and topsides pipework will be depressured simultaneously.
The majority of the length of the riser will be immersed in the sea and have the benefit of
the sea as a heat source. Riser pipework is generally much simpler than the Topsides
pipework.
The topsides pipework is more complicated (e.g. a large number of branches etc.), and
located in the air. The poor heat transfer properties of air coupled with the lower
minimum ambient temperature mean that the topsides pipework will drop to a lower
temperature relative to the riser. Because of this difference in heat transfer rates the
topsides and the riser should be modeled separately.
H-0806.35
8-14
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-15
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Blowdown Philosophy
A blowdown philosophy document defining relevant cases and the start conditions from
which blowdown occurs should be developed in the early stages of any design.
Code Requirements
API RP 521 provides general guidelines for determining the need for emergency
blowdown. There are, in fact, no mandatory blowdown requirements. However,
emergency blowdown has become accepted in the industry as being necessary for all
offshore installations, other than for some unmanned platforms. The BP Code of Practice
CP 37 clearly defines this philosophy.
CP 37 sets out the three basic reasons for providing emergency blowdown facilities as:
1. To reduce the risk of vessel or pipeline rupture in a fire.
2. To minimize the fuel inventory which could supply a fire.
3. To minimize the uncontrolled release of flammable or toxic gas.
Emergency blowdown facilities are not required for subsea pipelines. The platform
topsides section of the pipeline, including pig launcher/receiver and all pipework on the
platform side of the ESDV should be blown down through the platform blowdown
system. For pipelines fitted with subsea isolation valves (SSIVs) there is also a
requirement to provide for emergency blowdown of the riser and subsea pipework
situated between the SSIV and the top of the riser.
Effects of Blowdown
Blowdown of the contents of a vessel, pipework, or sections of a pipeline from high
pressure results in auto-refrigeration of the contained fluid due to expansion of the gas
and evaporation of the liquid. The resultant fall in the temperature of the pipe or vessel
wall metal can result in the need for costly materials to avoid brittle fracture. In addition
low fluid temperatures can result in the formation of hydrates, ice, or even solid CO2, and
these can lead to blockages.
Blowdown Times and Start Conditions
Blowdown must be at such a rate that equipment subject to high temperature does not
fail. API RP 521 sets out the basic requirements for blowdown times and these are
H-0806.35
8-16
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
8.5
8.5.1
H-0806.35
8-17
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
If it is assumed that no liquid is expelled from the pipeline outlet before steady state is
reached (the case for all but extremely unusual conditions or topographies) this is a
simple calculation. The results are most useful plotted as a Line Fill Nomograph as
shown in Figure 8.5-1, an example for a 125 km long, 24- inch diameter line.
The sloped section of the curve is the line filling, the gradient being proportional to the
gas flow rate. The flat section of the curve occurs once steady state has been reached. In
the case shown, the highest steady state holdup (25,000 BBL) occurs at a gas flow rate of
75 MMSCFD exceeded the existing slugcatcher capacity by nearly 20000 BBL.
However continuous operation at this low gas flow rate would be required for a period of
7 days to reach this liquid content.
Fill-time nomographs may also be of use in the general operation of lines for reckoning
of liquid contents following a series of flow rate changes as filling lines of the
appropriate gradient can be extrapolated for cases where the pipeline is already partially
full of liquid.
H-0806.35
8-18
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In general, decreases in gas flow rate, however dramatic, will not cause liquid production
(unless accompanied by a significant decrease in outlet pressure). Instead, liquid
production will cease following the reduction in flow until the liquid content of the
pipeline has been reached. Liquid production will then resume at a flow rate
commensurate with the gas flow and CGR. The period required for liquid accumulation
can be quickly estimated from a fill-time nomograph.
Liquid production during and after a flow increase will depend upon the initial liquid
content of the line, the initial and final flow rates, the rate at which the flow rate is
increased and the topography of the line.
8.5.2
8.5.3
Effect of Initial and final gas flow rates on Liquid Delivery Rates
Flow rates are important in determining the size of the peak in liquid production as
described above but will also add to the background liquid production rate during the
transient and the rate at which a peak in liquid production rate occurs. Various simple
calculation and estimation methods have been devised to predict liquid production during
transients based on initial and final flow rates and liquid holdups. Gregory (1994)
suggests that the two extremes in the time for a slug of liquid to appear and the rate at
which it appears can be estimated from the residence times of the liquid and gas phases in
the pipeline:
H-0806.35
8-19
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
f = L (1 - e) / V
f = L e / V
f is the residence time of the excess liquid in the line, V?the gas superficial velocity,
V the liquid superficial velocity, L the length of the pipeline and e the average voidage.
The first expression assumes the excess liquid moves as a slug and travels at the average
gas velocity. The second assumes that the liquid moves as a layer or film traveling at the
average liquid velocity. This approach then estimates the liquid production rate, Q,
during the transient as:
Ql = (vi - ve ) /
where vi is the initial liquid content of the line and ve the final liquid content. To Ql must
be added the steady state liquid production rate during the transient which is estimated as
the liquid flow rate associated with the increased gas flow.
This method was compared with field data for two gas-condensate lines (one 18-inch
diameter and 30 miles long, the second 20- inch diameter and 67 miles long) by Cunliffe
(1978) who obtained good results basing the residence time on the average liquid velocity
and predicting liquid holdups with the correlation of Eaton et al. (1967).
A slightly different approach was taken by Bevan (1992) who used analogy with a
conveyor belt to predict liquid production during and following flow rate changes.
Conveyor speed is dependent upon the inlet gas velocity and this determines the transport
of liquid out of the line. The amount of liquid "on" the conveyor at each point along its
length is determined by the gas velocity when that section of "conveyor belt" entered the
line. Changes in flow rate are thus modeled as fronts of different holdup which travel
through the line at a rate dependent on the instantaneous inlet gas velocity. Bevan backcalculated from the Eaton and other correlations and comparisons with experimental data
to produce holdup correlations for this model.
Both Gregory/Cunliffe and Bevan models have been shown to provide acceptable
estimates of transient liquid production but cannot easily allow for the effects of pipeline
topography or ramped increases in flow rate.
Again, a transient simulator will generally give a more accurate understanding of fluid
behavior during turn-down or ramp-up and, depending on the simulator being used and
on the fluid being modeled, may yield more accurate liquid and gas volumetric estimates.
H-0806.35
8-20
1-Dec-00
8.5.4
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
8.5.5
H-0806.35
8-21
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
represented on this plot by a line with maximum gradient equal to the processing capacity
(note however that this assumes that the liquids processing plant throughput can be
increased instantaneously). Since liquid can only be processed when it is present in the
slug catcher/separator the processing line follows the liquid production curve initially. At
point A, where the transient liquid production exceeds the processing capacity the
processing rate diverges at its maximum gradient. The processing line rejoins the liquid
production line at a later time, after the pipeline has reached steady-state, when the
backlog of liquid has been processed.
H-0806.35
8-22
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The most widely used method in these circumstances is to routinely pig the line using
spheres. This method is most suited to long pipelines with a high steady state liquid
holdup flowing low CGR fluids. The pigging interval is planned so that the liquid
accumulated in the pipeline is a conservative fraction of the available slugcatcher volume
(this interval can be estimated from the line- fill nomograph such as Figure 8.5-1). The
line is only allowed to reach steady state at high flow rates (when the holdup is low) and
any flow ramp can be accommodated as the line never contains more than the slugcatcher
volume of liquid. If high CGR fluids are flowed, sphering as a means of inventory
control may not be practical, as the pigging interval will be too short to allow normal
pipeline operation. Other disadvantages of this approach are the need to install pig
launching and receiving facilities, the need to design the pipeline to accommodate pigs,
the risk of pigs sticking in the line due to wax, hydrate or other debris, the need to
transport pigs back offshore following use and the risk of pig launcher and receiver
failures shutting down the terminal.
An alternative approach is to modify the pipeline operating procedures to reduce the
severity of transients. Williams (1996a & b) used transient simulations to define an
operating envelope, see Figure 8.5-3, for an export pipeline and for a proposed infield
flowline, operation of which is complicated by the flowing of fluids ranging from CGR
20 to 200 BBL/MMSCFD. LPDs were calculated from transients ramping the gas flow
from low values to the design maximum based on the existing slugcatcher, marginally
oversized liquid processing facilities and a ramp time of 24 hrs (based on the gas
processing plant turn- up rates). The envelope identified the operating conditions from
which the ramp to maximum flow rate could be performed. Operation outside the
envelope of flow rates requires more time for flow increases and the use of line fill time
nomographs to assess the accumulation of liquid in the line.
H-0806.35
8-23
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-24
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-25
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Mechanistic Model, less that swept out of the pipeline as a liquid film during the sphere
transit time. To determine the sphered liquid volume the growth of the slug in front of
the sphere must be calculated, using the mass balance equation, throughout the spheres
passage through the line.
The process involved with the passage of a sphere through the flowline is shown in
Figure 8.6-1.
H-0806.35
8-26
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
collecting liquid from the preceding film. Liquid leakage passed a sphere that does not
fully block the pipe can also be included.
Thus, a combination of three equations for:
The mass balance at the sphere (if liquid leakage passed the slug is modeled)
The growth of the slug due to the differential velocity between the slug front and
sphere
lead to the required method for integrating the slug length as the sphere passes through
the flowline.
For the special case of a horizontal flowline, zero pressure drop, no liquid leakage passed
the slug and a sphered slug holdup equal to unity, this equation reduces to:
Vprod = Vtot Vout
where:
Vtot = total liquid hold-up in the line prior to sphering
Vout = liquid volume leaving the line during passage of sphere
This approach assumes that the pig travels at the in situ mixture velocity, which is not
always the case in practice. The motion of the pig may vary as a result of the
compressible nature of the fluid in the pipeline, which allows pressure and velocity
excursions to arise from the variations in the pipeline inclination and the friction between
the pig/pig train and the pipeline. For example, the pig may require additional driving
pressure to push the slug over a hill or to compensate for an increasing frictional
resistance as the slug grows in length. If the system is spongy the slug ve locity may
decrease or even stop as the fluid packs behind the pig to provide the additional driving
pressure. In downward sections, head recovery can cause the pig to accelerate and
transfer excess pressure into friction loss.
If the pig stops, then it is possible to observe a stick-slip phenomena caused by static
and dynamic friction effects, where more pressure is required to get the pig moving than
is required to keep it moving. The additional pressure required for re-start can cause the
pig to accelerate due to the lower dynamic friction. This higher pig velocity can de-pack
the line resulting in less driving pressure and a tendency for the pig to stop again.
H-0806.35
8-27
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
These phenomena can have a large effect on the time required to pig a pipeline, on the
dynamic pressures generated, and on the fluids produced. This may affect the design and
operability of the system. In addition, it is sometimes important to predict how long it
takes to re-establish the liquid holdup behind the pig, and hence to re-distribute corrosion
inhibitors.
Simple pigging transients can be investigated using the OLGA and PLAC transient twophase flow codes, both of which allow for a variable leakage past the pig during the
pigging process. The PLAC model is a recent addition and has yet to be properly
validated, but is used here to demonstrate the transient effects caused by pigging
pipelines.
Transient pigging example-pigging a hilly terrain pipeline
Figure 8.6-2 shows the topography of a hypothetical hilly terrain pipeline which is 200
mm in diameter, 10 km long, and includes a 50 m high hill followed by a 50 m deep dip.
A high GOR composition was used and the simulation run to a steady state with an inlet
mass flow of 2 kg/s and a delivery pressure of 10 bara. A pig was launched into the
pipeline at time 20100 s and it was estimated that the pig transit time would be around
2900 s based on the average mixture velocity in the pipe. Figure 8.6-3 shows the pig
position with time, and indicates that the pig motion was not steady; and displaying three
regions of steady motion and two regions of slower motion, and in some cases reversal.
The actual pig transit time is 5900 s, which is almost twice as long as estimated from the
average mixture velocity. This discrepancy results from the fact that the pig slows down
in the uphill section as the pressure builds-up.
H-0806.35
8-28
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
60
Elevation (m)
40
20
0
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
-20
-40
-60
Distance (m)
H-0806.35
8-29
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 8.6-4 shows the holdup profile throughout the pipeline for various times and indicates that
before the pig is launched the holdup in the upward inclined sections is around 35 percent,
whereas in the horizontal and downward sloping sections it is around 2 percent. The pig slug is
shown just after the pig has passed the top of the first hill and indicates that the holdup is around
95 percent, and that the slug is less than 500 m in length. The holdup profile at 40,000 s
indicates that the liquid content of the pipeline is still building-up 4 hours after the pig has been
received. Figure 8.6-5 shows the pressure at the pipeline inlet and indicates that a pressure rise
of 1.3 bara is required for the pig to ne gotiate the first 50 m hill. The liquid full hydrostatic head
would be equivalent to 2.8 bara, hence the generated pressure is consistent with the observation
that the pig slug half fills the upward inclined section.
Time in sec
H-0806.35
8-30
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
8.7
H-0806.35
8-31
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
8-32
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
= fluid density
If the fluid is stopped instantaneously, the maximum head or so called Jacowski
pressure rise results. In a practical system the maximum head may be generated if the
fluid is brought to rest within the pipeline period. For example, consider a pipeline
discharging through an outlet valve which closes fully. The full Jacowski pressure rise
occurs if the valve closes within the time taken for the pressure wave to travel to the other
end of the pipeline and back. This is the pipeline period and is given by:
= 2L / a
where:
= period
L = length of the pipeline
This method may be used to check the potential for over pressuring the pipeline, but may
not give the maximum pressure if networks are involved due to amplification at the dead
ends.
There are several operating changes that can cause flow changes and hence pressure
transients. The most common are valve opening/closing and pump start/stop.
In the valve closure example the shape of the pressure/time variation will depend on the
flow/time change which caused it and thus on the characteristics of the valve. Typical
flow characteristics of ball, globe, and gate valves are shown in Figure 8.7-1. It is
important to note that the last 10 percent of the valve closure has the most significant
effect.
H-0806.35
8-33
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 8.7-1: Relative flow rate against percentage valve opening for typical gate,
ball, and globe valves
If the pipeline period is greater than the valve movement time then the type of valve
characteristic will not influence the total pressure rise, although the rate of pressure rise
will be important to any control devices and the mechanical load on supports. If the
period is less than the valve movement time then the shape of the characteristic will
influence the peak pressure. Special care should be exercised in specifying valves whose
effective closure time is only a fraction of the total movement, e.g. gate valves.
Pressure falls can be as damaging as pressure rises. Often the negative head changes lead
to theoretical pressures less than the fluid vapor pressure. In such cases a vapor cavity
forms. Large diameter lines are more susceptible to damage by reduced pressure
conditions. More commonly vapor cavities create damage by their collapse. This occurs
if there is a situation, which can re-pressure the line. This could be caused by refilling
from an elevated section of line or tanks or by re-starting a pump to continue operation.
Often this refilling occurs at a high rate because the pump discharge pressure is lower
than normal. When the cavity volume reaches zero the effect is of a truly instantaneous
valve closure. These positive pressures can be higher than with normal valve closure and
have step pressure changes. Therefore, they should be avoided if at all possible.
H-0806.35
8-34
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Pump start/stop has the capability of producing similar positive and negative pressure
waves with the attendant damage potential.
From the above, it becomes apparent that the significant factors in creating high surge
pressures are the wave speed and the rate of change of flow. The wave speed is fixed by
the fluids used, although it is sometimes possible to modify the rate of change of velocity
in a transient. This is particularly true of the effective valve closure time. Even valves
with the most suitable closure characteristics create most of the flow change over the last
quarter of their movement. Thus, two part closures, where the first part is fast and the
last part slow can be beneficial.
Where surge is a problem, it is particularly important to avoid smaller bore area ends.
When the surge pressure reaches a pipe junction it propagates along both lines. The
pressure reduces in ratio to the new area divided by the old area and induces a flow by the
pressure difference. At the instant of the wave arriving at the dead end the forward
velocity is stopped creating another surge effect on top of the pressure wave. This can
lead to a potential doubling of the pressure.
One solution to reduce surge pressures is to introduce surge accumulators into the system.
This is particularly effective with pump- generated surges. These accumulators are
vessels which contain a gas pocket connected as closely as possible upstream of the surge
generation device so that when the surge occurs, the excess fluid flows into the vessel
compressing the gas. By removing excess fluid (which is nearly incompressible) the line
pressure is reduced. The volumes and costs of such suppression equipment can be quite
small when the transients are rapid.
Wave speed in single phase flow
Calculation of the speed of pressure waves in the fluid medium is crucial to determination
of pressure surge. For a single phase system the pressure wave velocity is given by:
= (K/)1/2
where:
K = bulk modulus of elasticity
= density of the fluid
Hence for water at 15 C, K = 2.15 GN/m2 and = 1000 kg/m3 the speed of pressure
waves is 1466 m/s. For an ideal gas the bulk modulus is the ratio of the change in the
H-0806.35
8-35
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
pressure to the fractional change in volume and hence depends on whether the
compression is adiabatic or isothermal. For an adiabatic process PV = (constant) and
hence K = P. Since P/ = RT the expression for adiabatic compression of an ideal gas is:
= (K/)1/2 = (RT)1/2
For air at 15 C, = 1.4, R = 287 J/kg/K; hence the wave speed is 340 m/s. The
equivalent bulk modulus of elasticity is 141.7 KN/m2 and the density is 1.226 kg/ m2 .
The pressure wave velocity is modified when boundaries such as pipe walls, free
surfaces, gas bubbles and solid particles are present. The elasticity of the walls of the
pipe through which the fluid is travelling has the effect of reducing the pressure wave
speed by a factor dependent upon the size, cross-section shape, and pipe material. In
addition the method of pipe restraint may also affect the result. The general equation for
the wave speed in a fluid contained within a thin walled pipe of circular cross-section is:
a = 1 / [ (1/K + D/tE)]1/2
where:
D = internal diameter
t = wall thickness
= pipe restraint factor
For materials with a high elastic modulus such as steel or concrete, or for pipelines with
frequent expansion joints, F can be taken as unity. Hence for water at 15C in a steel
pipeline (E=207 GN/m2) of 200 mm diameter and 15 mm wall thickness, the wave speed
is reduced from 1466 m/s for rigid pipewalls to 1374 m/s.
Wave speed in two-phase flow
The wave speed in two-phase flow can be determined by simply replacing the single
phase bulk modulus and density with the two-phase equivalents, i.e.:
a = (Ktp / tp)1/2 for rigid pipewalls
and:
a = 1 / [ tp (1/Ktp + D tE)] 1/2
where:
H-0806.35
8-36
1-Dec-00
(1- )
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
= +
Ktp
KL
Kg
and:
tp = (1- ) L + g
= in-situ gas fraction
Using air and water as an example it is seen that the wave speed is rapidly reduced by the
introduction of only small quantities of gas. For example, a void fraction of only 1
percent is required to reduce the wave speed from 1446 m/s to 119 m/s. The table below
shows the wave speed for vario us gas fractions, also shown is the relative Jacowski head
rise possible compared with the liquid only case. It is hence seen that in two-phase flow
the wave speed and potential surge is much reduced by the combined high
compressibility and high density of the two-phase mixture.
Table 8-2:
Void
fraction
0.000
0.005
0.01
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.8
0.9
0.99
0.995
1.0
Two -phase
bulk modulus
(N/m2)
2.19e+9
2.80e+7
1.41e+7
1.42e+6
7.08e+5
3.54e+5
2.83e+5
2.36e+5
1.77e+5
1.57e+5
1.43e+5
1.42e+5
1.42e+5
Two -phase
density
(kg/m2)
1000.0
995.0
990.0
900.1
800.2
600.2
500.6
400.7
201.0
101.0
11.2
6.2
1.2
Wave
speed
(m/s)
1466.0
168.0
119.0
37.7
29.7
24.3
23.8
24.3
29.7
39.4
113.0
151.3
340.0
% potential head
rise
100.0
11.4
8.0
2.4
1.62
1.00
0.81
0.66
0.41
0.27
0.07
0.06
0.03
H-0806.35
8-37
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Topography Effects
8.8.1
H-0806.35
8-38
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Interactions with the terrain may cause additional effects. For example, the liquid
sloshing in a dip may cause perturbations in the gas and liquid flow rates downstream,
giving rise to flow regimes different to those expected from analysis with steady flow
rates. Flow rate fluctuations caused by slugs dissipated in a downward sloping section
may be sufficient to generate slugs in a following downstream section normally operating
in stratified flow.
By taking account of the hysteresis in the flow regimes and by tracking the local phase
flow rates it is easy to see how in practice flows may differ greatly from those predicted
by classical steady state methods. It is here that transient two phase flow simulators offer
considerable promise if interface tracking methods can be relied upon. However, one
must be caut ious about the application to real systems. It can be envisaged that, in a long
hilly terrain pipeline, a section may exist close to the slug/stratified boundary. A small
perturbation in the pressure or flow rate may be all that is required to trigger a slug and
change the characteristics of the whole pipeline.
In some cases it has been observed that the exit of a slug in a pipeline apparently triggers
the formation of another slug. Slugs occur regularly with one, two, or three in a line at
one time. This is due in part to the time taken for the liquid level to reestablish, and partly
due to the depacking effect as the slug exits, removing the high pressure drop over the
slug body. This causes an increase in the gas velocity which can trigger another slug.
This is illustrated in Figure 8.1-1 which shows the passage of slugs throughout a 400 m
long, 8-inch diameter, horizontal air/water test facility. The Y-axis shows the
identification number for 30 Light Emitting Diode (LED) slug detector probes, whic h are
located along the top of the pipeline, and give a binary on output when water wet and a
off signal when in air. As the number of slugs in the line increases the influence of
each slug exiting diminishes and slug formation becomes less orderly. The topography of
the pipeline can exaggerate this effect if uphill sections are present at the outlet. This can
increase the pressure fluctuations due to hydrostatic effects, and can lead to severe flow
rate fluctuations such as demonstrated by severe slugging. The random type of slugging
with considerable decay and coalescence is demonstrated in Figure 8.8-2 .
H-0806.35
8-39
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
8-40
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-41
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In some cases the bubble length is greater than the pipeline length. Here it can take some
time for the liquid level to be reestablished before the next slug is generated. Slugs
generated in this way can often have the longest lengths, as the equilibrium liquid content
in the pipeline can be high. The slug grows as it sweeps up the liquid in front of it,
leaving behind a thin film which may take a considerable time to reestablish. Such
phenomena ma y be well predicted by PLAC or OLGA when the slug tracking model has
been implemented. Otherwise, it may be reasonable to establish a simple maximum slug
length model to be use with steady state simulators. Some have observed this method to
give good agreement with the slugs generated in pipelines under these conditions (e.g.,
BPs Endicott pipeline).
The extrapolation of existing design methods to predict slug flow in hilly terrain pipelines
may be risky, and it is here that dynamic simulation may be of use. This is an area where
validation work is underway. PLAC has been compared with other Sunbury experiments
performed with a pipeline dip configuration on the 6- inch air/water rig, the rig set-up is
shown in Figure 8.8-3. In these tests a known quantity of water was poured into the dip
and allowed to settle. The air flow was then turned on at a constant rate and the flow
behavior observed. The tests were repeated for a range of initial liquid quantities and air
flow rates. At low gas flow rates the slugs are generated at the dip where the liquid depth
is the greatest and leads to a higher local gas velocity which is sufficient to produce
waves that grow into slugs. This is illustrated in Figure 8.8-4. At higher gas velocities
the slug generation point moves downstream of the dip and the slug generation is more
random. This is seen from the densitometer traces illustrated in Figure 8.8-5. The flow
pattern map generated by the matrix of liquid volumes and gas velocities is shown in
Figure 8.8-6, whe re the solid line shows the limiting gas velocity at which liquid is
removed from the dip. At this point the liquid is drained and measured and gives an
indication of the equilibrium liquid holdup. This is compared with a terrain induced slug
flow model, where the agreement is seen to be generally good.
H-0806.35
8-42
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-43
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 8.8-6: Pipeline dip experiments-flow pattern map and equilibrium holdup
Initial comparisons with PLAC have been encouraging as illustrated in Figure 8.8-7,
which shows that PLAC generally predicts the gas velocity at which liquid is removed
from the system and the equilibrium holdup, however PLAC tends to underestimate the
holdup at the higher gas velocities. Figure 8.8-8 shows that the predicted slug frequency
is generally lower than that measured. However, the results are still in reasonable
agreement. This is because PLAC simulates waves rather than slugs, Figure 8.8 -9 shows
the oscillations produced by PLAC for case of 317 liters of water with an air velocity of
0.5 m/s.
H-0806.35
8-44
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 8.8-7: Comparison between PLAC and measured liquid removal limit
H-0806.35
8-45
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 8.8-9: PLAC holdup oscillations for 317 l of water and 0.5 m/s air velocity
H-0806.35
8-46
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
OLGA is also reported to yield good comparison to experiment, though data supporting
this is not generally available; generally restricted to member companies of the OLGA
club; the group of companies actively supporting its development.
In practice oil and gas pipelines will usually reach or attain equilibrium first at the start of
the pipeline, hence slugs can be initiated near the pipeline inlet. It is possible for inlet
flow rate fluctuations to initiate slug formation. Such inlet flow rate oscillations may
result from slugging wells, gas- lift operations, and test well cha nges for example, and
should be suspected as possible causes for flow rate perturbations which generate slugs in
otherwise stratified flowing conditions. When using transient flow simulators it is
worthwhile to consider the effects of practical flow rate perturbations on the result.
8.8.2
H-0806.35
8-47
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-48
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
8-49
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-50
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
slug is produced into the separator it may accelerate due to the reducing gravitational
resistance and the reduced frictional length (Figure 8.8-12). This can cause large velocity
increases which can impact on the process plant control, and can also give rise to large
loads on the vessel internals. This is discussed more fully in Section 17 of this Guideline.
Process plant dynamics can be simulated by a number of codes. BPX Sunbury presently
uses the SPEEDUP code which has also been interfaced with a simple slug hydraulic
model to enable the simulation of slug effects on process plant to be investigated. The
slug size is an input to the simulation. However, it is possible to see the effect of the slug
catcher pressure on the passage of the slug. Classical control schemes generally reduce
the gas compressor speed if the separator gas flow is reduced, hence when the slug is
produced the compressor is decelerating. A better solution can be to increase the
compressor speed when the gas flow drops off, hence reducing the separator pressure and
sucking the slug up the riser. This has the effect of reducing the gas starvation period and
also means that the compressor is accelerating when the gas surge occurs.
A recent study using SPEEDUP to investigate control strategies to limit the impact of
slug dynamics on the process plant has shown that gas outlet flow control can reduce the
peak in the gas surge. As the slug is received the gas flow rate reduces. By opening the
gas outlet control valve, the pressure in the slug catcher is reduced, hence sucking the
slug in and allowing some scope for increase in the slugcatcher pressure to absorb some
of the gas flow rate surge.
8.8.3
H-0806.35
8-51
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
back pressure due to the hydrostatic difference in the levels. Figure 8.8-14 shows the
topography of the test rig as modeled by PLAC whereas Figure 8.8.-15 and Figure 8.8-16
show the PLAC simulations of the liquid draining and inlet pressure variation.
H-0806.35
8-52
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-53
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 8.8-16: PLAC simulation of back pressure due to liquid settling in dips
H-0806.35
8-54
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
While it is seen that PLAC can simulate the liquid settling behavior, the comparison with
the experimental results is not always good. This is because PLAC does not model slugs
properly and hence the holdup in the uphill sections is sometimes underestimated, hence
the initial condition is not always correct.
The highest back pressures can be generated when the flowline is restarted as it is
possible for the liquid in the dips to be displaced downstream before the gas is able to
penetrate the dip, and this increases the difference in the hydrostatic levels. Once the gas
penetrates, the pressure is reduced as the gas lifts the liquid out of the dip. One can
imagine that the start-up pressure can be large if all the liquid in the dips is displaced
simultaneously.
A simple method has been established to estimate the pressure rise during the start-up of
hilly terrain flowlines. For long hilly flowlines, the total uphill elevation changes may be
very large and hence the total theoretical hydrostatic head may lead to very conservative
start-up pressures. It is therefore recommended that the flowlines are started by unloading
the sections closest to the facilities first. The pressure can be estimated by summing the
uphill elevation changes and calculating the hydrostatic head for the section being started.
In practice experience with the start-up of Cusiana T pad indicates that the actual
hydrostatic pressure generated was around 2/3 of the maximum theoretical value,
however this is very dependant on the particular system.
If the analysis of start- up pressures is required to check the design pressure of the
flowline, then the topography should be investigated to determine if there are low points
where the pressure can be higher than at the well pad. This is the case with the T-Q
flowline where the maximum pressures are generated in the valley just downstream of the
wellpad.
8.8.4
Pipeline-riser interactions
A special topographical effect is the interaction between a pipeline and a vertical
platform riser. This can give rise to a phenomenon called severe slugging if the pipeline
inclination is downhill at the base of the riser and if flow rates are low enough (stratified
flow). Severe slugging is discussed in Section 17 and will not be described again here.
However, it is useful to demonstrate that dynamic simulation can be employed to
accurately predict the size of severe slugs and the cycle time, enabling topside process
plant to be sized.
H-0806.35
8-55
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
One of the validation cases for the PLAC code was a comparison with severe slugging
experiments carried-out by BP at Sunbury. The test rig consisted of a 45m flowline
inclined downhill at 2 followed by a 15m vertical riser. The rig operated at near
atmospheric conditions and the test fluids were air and water. A schematic of the rig is
shown in Figure 8.8-17 where the pipeline inner diameter is 2 inches. Figure 8.8.-18 and
Figure 8.8-19 show the measured slug size and frequency for a range of fluid superficial
velocities.
H-0806.35
8-56
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 8.8-20 shows the liquid holdup profiles predicted by PLAC for gas and liquid superficial
velocities of 0.44 m/s and 0.43 m/s respectively. The figure shows the liquid build-up and
blowdown.
H-0806.35
8-57
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-58
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 8.8-21: Figure 7.34 PLAC prediction of outlet liquid mass flow rate.
A similar type of severe slugging can also be observed when flexible risers are employed,
particularly if the lazy s configuration is adopted. The analysis of the flows in these
curved configurations is complicated by the possible bi-directional motion of the flow,
and the interaction with the complex geometry. Here transient simulators show promise
in being able to predict the flows, whereas the scale- up of laboratory simulations to
practical situations is uncertain..
The relationship below can be used to estimate the critical liquid velocity at which severe
slugging occurs in a pipeline-riser system. If the liquid superficial velocity is above this
value severe slugging is unlikely to occur.
Vsl = Vsg Psep / [L(l - g) g (1 - Hl) Sin ]
where:
Psep = pressure at flowline outlet (N/m 2)
H-0806.35
8-59
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-60
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
It is hence seen that the flow split at a simple tee may be very different from equal, and
hence the flow rates in the individual legs will be unequa l. However, since in a loop the
lines rejoin downstream, the number of possible solutions is reduced to those flow splits
that give rise to the same overall pressure drop in both pipelines.
Transient flows can result from the operation of looped pipelines since it is possible for a
number of solutions to exist for the flow split. For example, high flow in one leg causing
a high frictional pressure drop may be balanced by low flow in the other with a high
hydrostatic component and high holdup. Small inlet flow rate perturbations at the tee, or
changes in operating conditions, may cause the flowing conditions in each leg to change,
with the possible removal of excess liquid in the form of a slug. In the extreme it is
possible in pipelines with a large uphill elevation for a manometer effect to exist. Here
the flowing pressure in one leg is balanced by a static column in the other. A change in
operating conditions can cause the static liquid to be swept-out. This type of phenomena
has been known to give rise to operational difficulties with gas transmission pipelines
laid over hilly terrain.
Problems with parallel loops are well documented in the power generation industry,
where instabilities can occur in a bank of boiler tubes, for example. The total flow into
and out of the headers is normally constant, as is the pressure drop. However, flows in
the individual tubes can vary considerably. In such situations the analysis is complicated
by the addition of heat transfer effects and steam generation, which can give rise to
multiple solutions for the location of the boiling front. So called parallel channel
instability in the boiler tubes can cause corrosion problems or dry-out leading to
premature failure. Experience with such situations has shown that adding flow restrictors
to the inlet header has a stabilizing effect, whereas throttling the outlet can exacerbate the
problem.
The method proposed to analyze possible transient problems caused by operating looped
pipelines is along the lines outlined by Gregory and Fogarasi. This involves calculating
the two-phase pressure drop in each leg for a range of liquid and gas flow splits. A
graphical solution is employed to determine the conditions where the pressure drops in
each leg are equal, and hence the possible operating regimes of the loop. Allowance
should then be made for flow excursions between the parallel lines and the possible
displacement of liquid.
As an example consider the schematic shown in Figure 8.8-22.
H-0806.35
8-61
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
8-62
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 8.8-23 shows the locus of the possible solutions for a equal pipeline loop and
indicates that the 50/50 solution (a = 0.5) gives rise to the maximum downstream
pressure, and hence minimum pressure drop, however this is not always the case. For
other pressure drops there are two flow split solutions and hence it could be possible for
the flows to oscillate between the two solutions.
Gregory et al. suggests that the existence of a manometer leg effect can be checked if the
net elevation increase over the loop is such that the maximum possible hydrostatic head
that could result from the liquid phase static in the pipeline is greater than the pressure
H-0806.35
8-63
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
drop that will result from the total throughput of gas and liquid flowing in one of the
parallel lines. This may not be wholly true as a symmetrical hill would have a net
elevation change of zero. However the potential exists for the uphill section to contain
liquid and provide a manometer effect. It is hence recommended that the manometer
effect check be carried out using the sum of the uphill elevation changes. If one of the
legs contains static liquid it is obvious that the loop has in fact not increased the capacity
of the system as the flow only occurs in one leg.
In the above example the pipes in the loop are identical and hence the locus of possible
solutions is symmetrical. This is not the case when the pipes are different as illustrated in
Figure 8.8-24 for a 10- inch and 12- inch loop from Gregorys paper. Here the locus of the
possible solutions is not symmetrical and the minimum pressure drop occurs with a liquid
split of 65/35.
H-0806.35
8-64
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-65
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
3. Although the outlet flow rate from the loop may be steady at one condition, a small
change in the operating conditions can lead to transient liquid sweep-out as the new
operating point stabilizes.
4. A check should be made for manometer effects based on the sum of the uphill
elevation changes, although this may not give the maximum holdup change as a pipe
full flowing case may also exist. If manometer legs occur the loop will not increase
the flowing capacity.
5. Static liquid legs may have implications for corrosion.
8.9
Transient Modeling
In practice the worst transients can be deduced from relatively few simple calculations:
(a) Small diameter tie- ins from minor fields connected to long, large diameter trunklines
do not usually contain enough liquid, even at low flow rates to significantly contribute to
a transient.
(b) For a given total flow in a network, the highest holdup will generally be for that
combination of flows which has the lowest gas flow rate passing through the greatest
length of the largest diameter pipeline.
(c) For low CGR fluids, the maximum period of operation at low gas flow rate should be
considered and the amount of liquid deposited in the pipeline during the period
calculated. This figure may prove less than the steady-state liquid holdup at that flow
rate and if so should be used instead of the steady-state figure for determining the worst
case transients.
Having identified transient flow situations likely to cause problems, a more detailed
analysis can then be performed using a transient modeling code such as PLAC or OLGA.
8.10
H-0806.35
8-66
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
whereas if the changes are made slowly, the liquid can be gradually swept out within the
slug catcher capacity.
It is also interesting to note in this figure the wide variation in the predicted holdup
obtained from using the various methods. This may not be too much of a problem when
calculating the amount of liquid swept out during a transient because it is the difference
in the holdup that it most important. In this example the Eaton holdup correlation is
expected to give reasonable answers. However, one should be wary of using the
correlation approach rather than mechanistic models since they do not usually predict the
steep rise in holdup as the velocity and interfacial friction reduces hence a gross
underestimate can result when starting from low flow rates.
Figure 8.10-2 shows the liquid flow rate at the outlet of the Marlin gas condensate
pipeline during an increase in the flow rate from 155 MMSCFD to 258 MMSCFD.
During the test the gas rate was held constant at 155 MMSCFD for 52 hours in order to
reach equilibrium conditions. The rate was then increased to 258 MMSCFD in a period
H-0806.35
8-67
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
of one hour and held constant for a further 26 hours to obtain equilibrium conditions
again. It is seen that during the transient the outlet liquid flow rate is cons iderably higher
than the final equilibrium value.
Figures 8.10-3 to 8.10-5 are provided to illustrate the potential accuracy of transient
codes on the Marlin rate change data. This data has often been used as a test case as it is
one of the few transient field data sources available in the open literature.
H-0806.35
8-68
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-69
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
8-70
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Pigging gas condensate pipelines can also result in large slugs. However, in many cases
it is not feasible to design slug catchers of a sufficient size to handle the equilibrium slug
produced by running pigs at low throughputs. In this case pigs must be run frequently to
prevent the liquid holdup reaching equilibrium, which can incur high operating costs.
Sometimes gas rates can be reduced during the pig arrival to allow the produced liquids
to be processed, but in others the gas flow rate may be determined by the consumer, and
the pigging operation carried out at the prevailing gas rate. In some situations pigs are
only required on an infrequent basis for corrosion control or inspection, in which case the
pipeline liquid content may be high and a procedure must be put in place to handle the
liquid swept-out by the pig. One way of doing this is to stop the pig offshore and walk
it into the slug catcher at a rate compatible with the liquid processing capacity. This
approach was successfully carried out at the restart of pigging operations on the
Amethyst pipeline where a liquid vo lume of over four times the slug catcher capacity was
allowed to accumulate in the sealine when the offshore pig launcher failed. In some
instances it is possible to reduce the liquid content of the pipeline prior to pigging by
controlled rate increases to remove liquid. In other cases pigging is not possible, and flow
rate changes must be controlled to prevent overfilling the downstream plant.
With these factors in mind it is seen that for gas condensate systems at least, it is often
the transient slug that determines the slug catcher volume. For oil and gas pipelines
pigging may be required frequently for wax control etc, where the lines have reached
equilibrium, hence this may determine the size of the slugcatcher. However for some
developments, particularly subsea, pigging is required less frequently and can be
accomplished with some operating ingenuity. Here it is often the longest normal slug or
the transient rate change liquid sweep out that determines the required slug catcher surge
volume. The next section outlines a simple calculation method for estimating the liquid
outflow profile due to rate change transients.
8.10.2 Simple analysis methods for flow rate increases and reductions
The first step in considering the required surge volume for transient flow rate increases
can be made by considering the equilibrium holdup/flow rate profile.
H-0806.35
8-71
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
8-72
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The holdup profile shows a rapid rise in the liquid content at gas rates below 200
MMSCFD, hence operating in this region could cause problems even without pigging, as
relatively small gas rate perturbations can cause large quantities of liquid to be swept
from the pipeline. For example a 10 percent increase in the gas rate from 200 to 220
MMSCFD could remove 4750 BBL of liquid and, possibly, swamp the slug catcher.
Shortly after the start-up of the Amethyst pipeline system the pig launcher failed and it
was decided to investigate the consequences of cont inuing production, and allowing the
pipeline liquids to build up to equilibrium values. A decision was taken to limit the
minimum gas flow rate to 250 MMSCFD, and hence to avoid possible uncontrolled
sweep-out due to inherent flow rate fluctuations. The pipeline was operated without
pigging over the winter, where it took several months to obtain an equilibrium holdup,
which was estimated to be in the region of 18000 BBL from a mass balance. This is
within 17 percent of the value predicted by the old segregated flow mechanistic model in
MULTIFLO, but is 213 percent higher than the value predicted by the Eaton correlation.
Some of the simple transient analysis outlined below was used to investigate how to
resume pigging operations.
A simple approach to sizing a vessel to handle the liquid produced by a gas rate increase
would be to consider the change in the equilibrium holdup and ignore the effect of the
liquid pump-out rate. For example if the gas rate were increased from 250 MMSCFD to
350 MMSCFD the equilibrium liquid removed would be 15373 - 8018 = 7355 BBL.
Hence the gas rate could be increased in two steps from 250 MMSCFD to 300 MMSCFD
which would remove 3800 BBL and then 300 MMSCFD to 350 MMSCFD which would
remove 3555 BBL. A 7355 BBL surge volume would be required if the increase were
made in one step without taking account of the liquid pump-out rate. The maximum gas
flow rate available is 350 MMSCFD which gives a pipeline inventory of 8018 BBL, and
hence it is still necessary to walk in the first pig.
We will use the Amethyst case to illustrate a simple way of determining the effect of the
pump-out rate on the required surge volume. Consider the case of an increase in the gas
rate from 250 to 350 MMSCFD.
H-0806.35
8-73
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Next calculate the initial and final liquid production rates from:
Liquid rate = liquid loading x gas flow rate
hence:
Initial liquid flow rate = 250 MMSCFD x 7.04 BBL/MMSCF = 1760 BPD
Final liquid flow rate = 350 MMSCFD x 7.04 BBL/MMSCF = 2464 BPD
Calculate the duration of the transition time for the transient, which is the length of time
over which the high flow rate occurs. If it is assumed that all the liquid in the line
accelerates to the equilibrium liquid velocity corresponding to the final gas rate, then the
transition time is the same as the residence time at the final rate, i.e.:
Transition time = (final holdup / final flow rate) = (8018 / 2464) = 3.25 days
The transition flow rate is the sum of the final flow rate and the increase due to the rate
change and is given by:
Transition flow rate = Final flow rate + (holdup change / transition time)
= 2464 + 7355/3.25 = 4727 BPD
It is seen that based on this method the surge can easily be handled by using the 6000
BPD pump-out capacity of the Easington terminal. Figure 8.10-7 shows the predicted
liquid outflow profile.
H-0806.35
8-74
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
This approach can be extended to investigate the trade-off between the required slug
catcher surge volume and the pump-out rate using the relation below:
Surge volume = transition time x (flow rate in - flow rate out)
= Tt x (Qin - Qout)
If the pump-out rate is fixed at the final equilibrium value the required surge volume is:
Vs = 3.25 ( 4727 - 2464 ) = 7355 BBL
i.e. the change in equilibrium holdup.
If the pump-out rate is 4727 BPD then this method shows that no surge volume is
required. The solution to the equation is the linear relationship shown in Figure 8.10-8. It
can be seen that for a surge volume of 3800 BBL a minimum pump-out rate of 3550 BPD
is required.
H-0806.35
8-75
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The relationship shown in Figure 8.10-8 can be subject to large inaccuracies at the
extremes as the flow rate tends to zero and at the final transition flow rate. The reason
being is as follows; at zero pump-out rate the surge volume is equal to the transition flow
rate multiplied by the transition time, whereas in practice liquid continues to flow into the
vessel at the final equilibrium flow rate, hence the required surge volume becomes
infinite as the pump-out rate goes to zero. When the pump-out rate is equal to the
transition flow rate the above method indicates that no surge volume is required.
However, in practice, the flow rate during the transient is not usually constant, and
typically peaks at the start. Hence, the solution for a surge volume of zero is a pump-out
rate equal to the peak flow rate during the transient.
The same simple method can also be applied to the estimation of the outlet flow rate
profile during a flow rate decrease, as follows: Consider a reduction in the gas flow rate
of the Amethyst pipeline from 350 MMSCFD to 250 MMSCFD.
First calculate the residence time at the final flow rate, this is also assumed to be the
transition time:
Transition time = (final holdup / final flow rate) = (15373 / 1760) = 8.73 days
then:
H-0806.35
8-76
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Transition flow rate = Final flow rate (Holdup change / Transition time)
= 1760 (7355 / 8.73) = 918 BPD
Hence the hand calculation method predicts an initial flow rate of 2464 BPD falling to
918 BPD over a 8.73 day transition period after which the rate increases to 1760 BPD.
This is illustrated in Figure 8.10-9.
H-0806.35
8-77
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
maximum oil production from the subsea wells was expected to be 12 mbd and slug
catchers were required to be sized for the platform reception facilities.
The slugs produced by pigging the pipeline were to be handled by operational procedures
and were not used for sizing the slug catcher. The predicted mean and maximum normal
hydrodynamic slugs were 6 BBL and 16 BBL respectively, and were well within the
feasible slug catcher size, which was in the region 50100 BBL. It was hence necessary
to consider the slugs produced by flowline rate changes which could be quite frequent as
wells are switched to test and as turndowns are accommodated. A worst case was
considered to be start-up from 1 well to full production, giving a flow rate increase from
112 mbd. This was modeled with PLAC by running the simulation at 12 mbd for
13000s to give a steady state. The flow rate was then ramped down to 1 mbd over 60s,
left at this rate for 5000s, then increased to 12 mbd over 60s. The predicted outlet liquid
flow rate profile is shown in Figure 8.10-10 and indicates that the liquid flow rate drops
off when the flow rate is reduced after 13000s. The plot shows a large overshoot when
the rate is increased again at 18000s. The oscillations decay as the final equilibrium
production rate of 12 mbd (equivalent to 17.7 kg/s) is approached. The peak production
rate is 82 kg/s which is equivalent to 51 mbd, and is hence over four times the final
equilibrium production rate.
8-78
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The outlet gas rate is shown in Figure 8.10-11 and indicates that the main gas surge
occurs after the second slug.
The liquid holdup plot in Figure 8.10-12, shows that the initial holdup is around 40
percent in the inclined flowline (cells 118) and around 20 percent in the vertical riser
(cells 1939). During the low flow condition from 13000s the liquid drains from the riser
into the flowline and also builds up at the template end of the flowline. During the rate
increase the first slugs were due to the liquid drained from the riser. The liquid that
drained to the template is smeared out along the flowline to re-establish the equilibrium
holdup.
H-0806.35
8-79
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-80
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 8.10-13: Slug catcher level fluctuations with and without level control
The result is also plotted in Figure 8.10-14 for a pump-out rate of 12 mbd and shows that
the vessel would be swamped, even without low level control. Hence it is not possible to
H-0806.35
8-81
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
use a 50 BBL slug catcher if the liquid pumpout rate remains fixed at the maximum
subsea production rate.
It is possible by iteration to determine the vessel size vs pump-out rate relationship that
just handles the inlet flow transient. This is shown in Figure 8.10-15 and illustrates that if
the pump-out rate is to remain at the normal subsea production rate of 12 mbd, then a 275
BBL slug catcher would be required, but if the spare capacity of the platform process is
utilized to give a pump-out rate of 25 mbd, then the required slug catcher volume is
around 40 BBL.
H-0806.35
8-82
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 8.10-16: MULTIFLO holdup predictions for Pompano 6-inch subsea flowline
It is seen that for an initial rate of 1 mbd the equilibrium holdup is 770 BBL for 0 percent
water cut, reducing to 470 BBL at a final flow rate of 12 mbd.
The residence time is approximated by the equilibrium holdup divided by the liquid flow
rate, hence:
H-0806.35
8-83
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 8.10-17: Approximate outlet liquid flow rate profile and PLAC prediction
The slug catcher volume vs pump-out relationship is hence given by a simple linear
function since the flow rate during the transition is assumed to be constant, therefore:
Surge volume = 0.039 x (19692 - Qout)
H-0806.35
8-84
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
hence:
at 0 mbd,
at 12 mbd,
at 19.692 mbd,
The comparison between the simple method and the rigorous PLAC simulation is shown
in Figure 8.10-18 where it is seen that the agreement is close for pump-out rates similar
to the final equilibrium value. However, there are large discrepancies at the extremes for
the reasons outlined previously. For zero surge volume the pump-out rate predicted by
PLAC is 51 mbd compared to 19.7 mbd assuming a constant transition flow rate, hence
the simple method fails to take account of the liquid distribution in the pipeline and
consequently underestimates the peak outlet flow rates.
Figure 8.10-18: Comparison of slug catcher relationships derived from PLAC and hand
calculations
8-85
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Peterhead at 30 degree C and 25 bara. During shut-down and start-up there is the
possibility of liquid condensation and drop-out which may affect the size of the
downstream plant and operating procedures necessary to control the liquid outflow. The
combination of rate changes and associated cooldown gives rise to a more complicated
transient analysis than previously discussed.
In such a transient the amount of liquid formed is a function of the richness of the input
gas composition, the temperature gradient along the pipeline, Joule-Thompson effects,
transient cool-down, the topography, and pressure drops. Some of the interactions
between these effects can be complicated. For example, the pressure drop can cause
retrograde condensation which can give rise to higher pressure drops due to interphase
friction. This can lead to J-T cooling which produces more liquid dropout, and so on.
Once liquid is produced it may take time to drain into dips, and may produce slugs. On
start-up the liquid can re-evaporate in the pipeline before reaching the outlet.
The OLGA code was used to simulate the effects caused by the shut-down and
consequent cooling of the Miller landline. The start-up was also modeled in order to
study the complex transient multiphase effects taking place throughout the pipeline
system as a result of the introduction of warm gas into the cool environment. This study
formed part of the design stage of the pipeline project and provided a valuable insight
into the sizing requirements for slug-catching equipment at the power station delivery
point.
The transient simulations were performed in three stages:
1. Run to steady state at 215 MMSCFD with an inlet pressure of 30 bara and an inlet
temperature of 37C.
2. Shut-down with the outlet closed and the line allowed to pack up to 35 bara
throughout. The line is subsequently allowed to cool for 48 hours.
3. Start- up the pipeline with inflow and outflow of 60 MMSCFD and remain constant
for 13 hours. The inlet flowing gas temperature was the order of 80C. Finally, the
flow rate is ramped to 215 MMSCFD with an inlet temperature of 37C and the
simulation continued until the outlet temperature exceeds 30C.
The results of the simulation are best described with reference to the pipeline profile and
the relevant cell numbers illustrated in Figure 8.10-19
H-0806.35
8-86
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-87
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-88
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In the first phase of the start-up the gas flow rate is ramped up to 60 MMSCFD with an
inlet temperature of 80C. This has the effect of reducing the downstream pressure as the
hydraulic gradient is established, and warming the fluid temperature. The warm- up is
seen to be slow as the outlet gas temperature has only risen by a few degrees after 13
hours (Figure 8.10-22). The slow warm- up and flow rate increase produces liquid
sweepout at some of the dips. However the liquid fills subsequent dips and does not exit
the pipeline, hence there is still a net increase in the pipeline liquid content during the
first phase of the start-up (Figure 8.10-23).
H-0806.35
8-89
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure
8.10-23: Pipeline liquid content during first start -up phase
In the second start-up phase the gas rate is increased to 215 MMSCFD with the gas
flowing in at 38C and 35 bara. The further increase in the flow rate results in a higher
pressure gradient and hence a decrease in the outlet pressure. The increase in the cold gas
inflow rate causes the warm front to accelerate through the pipeline (Figure 8.10-24)
causing liquid to be flashed off, and sweeps out the residual liquid from the system
(Figure 8.10-25). As a result the total liquid content of the system drops sharply removing
around 110 m3 (690 BBL) of liquid from the pipeline (Figure 8.10-26), however around
30 percent of this liquid is evaporated and the remainder flows to the slug catcher.
H-0806.35
8-90
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-91
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 8.10-26: Pipeline liquid content during second start -up phase
8.10.6 PLAC analysis of severe slugging in a catenary riser
A comparison has been made between PLAC and some experimental results of severe
slugging in a Catenary riser. The experimental data was taken by BHRA in 1990
(Reference 1) and involves holdup, pressure, and velocity measurements in a 2-inch
diameter, 108 ft high catenary riser model using air and water as the test fluids. A 200 ft
length of 2 downhill inclined line was used before the riser and an air buffer vessel of
0.126 m3 was used in the air supply line to model a larger pipeline length. The test rig is
illustrated in Figure 8.10-27.
PLAC simulations have been performed by XFE for a test condition just in the severe
slugging region corresponding to gas and liquid superficial velocities of 2.3 m/s and 0.33
m/s respectively. The measured pressure at various points in the riser are shown in
Figure 8.10-28 where the top traces are for the transducers in the inclined flowline and at
the base of the riser. The experimental severe slugging cycle time is 183 seconds.
The test rig was modeled in PLAC as a TEE component with 86 cells, in which a 31m
horizontal section of pipe was used to simulate the air buffer vessel. The liquid is
introduced into the side arm of the TEE, which is located at the end of the horizontal
section. The topography is shown in Figure 8.10-29. The PLAC simulations begin with
H-0806.35
8-92
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
an empty pipe and hence some time is required for the severe slugging cycle to be
established. Figure 8.10-30 shows the pressure in the inclined flowline, which is in good
agreement with the measured data of Figure 8.10-28.
H-0806.35
8-93
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-94
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Cycle time
Slug build- up time
Slug production time
Bubble penetration time
Gas blowdown time
Slug length
Maximum pressure at riser base
Slug tail exit velocity
Experimental
measurements
183 s
124 s
24 s
14 s
21 s
59 m
47.5 psig
3.5 m/s
PLAC
predictions
172 s
127 s
11 s
9s
25 s
57 m
48 psig
4.5 m/s
From the above comparison it is seen that in most cases the PLAC predictions are in good
agreement with the measured values apart from the slug production time. This time is
however rela tively short and is difficult to accurately determine from the plots. The
experimental conditions were not tabulated by BHRA and hence the estimation of the
H-0806.35
8-95
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
flowing velocities could also be subject to some error. However, the predictions indicate
that the flowing conditions in the riser are close to the boundary for true severe slugging
as the riser is only full of liquid for a short period of time before the gas pressure is
sufficient to eject the slug. Figure 8.10-34 shows the test case point on the experimental
flow pattern map and confirms that the PLAC predictions are qualitatively correct.
H-0806.35
8-96
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-97
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-98
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-99
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The table below shows the calculated gas-oil ratios for a 70 mbd oil flow rate with a
producing gas-oil ratio of 2000 scf/stbo. At the inlet conditions to the loop of 600 psia
and 175F the calculated solution gas-oil ratio is 180.81 scf/stbo. a is the fraction of the
inlet liquid flow rate in line A and is the fraction of the inlet free gas flow rate in line A.
Table 8-3: Effective GORs for use in two -phase simulations
Liquid fraction ?
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.0
181
181
181
181
181
181
181
0.1
2000
1090
636
484
408
383
363
0.2
3819
2000
1090
787
636
585
545
0.4
7458
3819
2000
1394
1090
989
908
0.6
11096
5638
2910
2000
1545
1394
1272
0.8
14734
7478
3819
2606
2000
1798
1636
0.9
16554
8367
4274
2910
2227
2000
1818
1.0
18373
9277
4729
3212
2455
2202
2000
Qoa
14
28
42
56
63
70
The MULTIFLO predicted pressure drops for each gas and liquid flow rate combination
are shown in the table below where the pressure drops are calculated for a fixed value of
at each value of a and hence GOR and oil flow rate Qoa.
Table 8-4: Overall two -phase pressure drops for line A
0.1
0.2
Liquid fraction
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.0
0.1
0.2
163
118
91
162
130
101
163
123
95
164
109
96
167
122
112
169
129
120
171
135
128
0.4
0.6
68
65
83
78
75
80
94
104
114
127
124
138
134
149
0.8
0.9
1.0
68
71
75
82
86
91
92
99
108
118
127
137
144
154
165
157
168
179
170
181
193
H-0806.35
8-100
0.9
1.0
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The data can be plotted as pressure drop vs a for each value of . If the line sizes or
topographies of the loop are different the calculations must also be repeated for line B.
However, if both lines are the same the results will be symmetrical i.e. a = 0.9 and = 0.9
for line A corresponds to a = 0.1 and = 0.1 for line B. The result for the case considered
is shown in Figures 8.10-36 and 8.10-37, where the locus of possible solutions is shown
in Figure 8.10-37.
H-0806.35
8-101
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-102
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
For the example above the sum of the uphill elevations is 504 ft, which gives rise to a
hydrostatic head of 163 psi. Figure 8.10-38 indicates that manometer effects are possible
when the inlet flow rate is reduced below around 60 mbd since the flowing pressure drop
could be balanced by a static column of liquid in the other leg.
Figure 8.10-38: Pressure drop characteristic for total flow in the one leg
H-0806.35
8-103
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
It was required to estimate the loads produced by the pig-slug impacting on the PCV if it
closed during pig reception, and hence to determine the need to set the valve fully open
during pigging. The slug catcher is located 10m above ground level and it was required to
assess the structural loads that may be generated by the slug dynamics.
A simple dynamic model of the slug reception process indicated that the slug velocity
increases from a initial value of 7m/s to a final velocity of 21m/s as the tail passes the
PCV and the slug is discharged into the slug catcher. This acceleration is due partly to the
hydrostatic head loss and the reducing frictional length of the slug as it is produced.
Initial simulations using FLOWMASTER were based on the surge pressures generated
by closing the PCV during slug reception. A linear valve closure rate was assumed and
the effect of the valve closure time investigated. The results of a single phase surge
analysis are shown in Figure 8.10-40 indicating that surge pressure should not exceed 95
bar, which is well below the maximum allowed pressure of 150 bar. The valve closure
times of around 30s are too long to generate significant unequilibriated loads in the short
piping runs. What was of more concern was the impact of the slug front on a partially
open control valve, which is more difficult to assess.
H-0806.35
8-104
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
One of the major unknowns is the time over which the slug front impact occurs. The
worst case is to assume a vertical slug front and hence an instantaneous impact. The
results of using the primer component in FLOWMASTER to simulate this is shown in
Figure 8.10-41 for locations F, G, and H. The slug was in this case assumed to be
travelling at 6 m/s through a 20 percent open control valve. An all liquid slug was
assumed.
H-0806.35
8-105
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-106
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The reaction loads due to the unhindered slug passage are more easily calculated. These
are due to the change in the momentum between the liquid slug and the gas and are
related to the slug front and tail velocities. Ignoring elevation effects the slug front
velocity is constant and hence, the coming on load is fixed. However, the slug tail
accelerates during slug reception, and hence the largest loads are the coming off loads
produced by the passage of the slug tail. These loads are shown in Figure 8.10-43 and
indicates that the maximum load is of the same order as that produced by a 50ms impact
surge.
H-0806.35
8-107
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Information Sources
Bevan, D.J. "Correlation more accurately predicts two-phase pipeline holdup" Oil & Gas
Journal, p81 - 88, 20th Apr. 1992.
Cunliffe, R.S. "Condensate flow in wet- gas lines can be predicted" Oil & gas Journal,
p100 - 108, 30th Oct. 1978.
Eaton, B.A. Andrews, D.E., Knowles, C.R., Silberberg, I.H. & Brown, K.E. "The
Prediction of Flow Patterns, Liquid Holdup, and Pressure Losses Occurring during
Continuous Two-phase Flow in Horizontal Pipelines" Journal of Petroleum. Tech., p815
- 828, June 1967.
Gregory, G.A. "Multiphase Flow in Pipes - Prediction of Delivered Liquid Flow Rate for
Changes in Total Flow Rate in a Two Phase Pipeline" Notes for Course Presented by
Neotechnology Consultants Ltd., Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1991.
Gregory, G.A and Fogarasi, M Estimation of pressure drop in two-phase oil- gas looped
pipeline systems, Pipeline Technology, March-April 1982, pp75-81.
H-0806.35
8-108
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
8-109
1-Dec-00
9.
HYDRATES
9.1
Introduction
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Natural gas hydrates are crystals formed by water with natural gases and associated
liquids, in a ratio of 85 mole % water to 15% hydrocarbons. The hydrocarbons are
encaged in ice- like solids, which do not flow, but rapidly grow and agglomerate to
sizes, which can block flow lines. Hydrates can form anywhere and anytime that
hydrocarbons and water are present at the right temperature and pressure, such as in
wells, flow lines, or valves and meter discharges. Appendix A gives hydrate crystal
details at the molecular level, along with similarities and differences from ice.
The low temperatures and high pressures of the deepwater environment cause hydrate
formation, as a function of gas and water composition. In a pipeline, hydrate masses
usually form at the hydrocarbon-water interface, and accumulate as flow pushes them
downstream. The resulting porous hydrate plugs have the unusual ability to transmit
some degree of gas pressure, while they act as a flow hindrance. Both gas and liquid
can frequently be transmitted through the plug; however, lower viscosity and surface
tension favors the flow of gas. Depressurization of pipelines is the principal offshore
tool for hydrate plug removal; depressurization sometimes prevents normal production
for weeks.
This handbook was written to provide the offshore facilities/design engineer with
practical answers to the following four questions:
What are the safety problems associated with hydrates? (Section 9.2)
What are the best methods to prevent hydrates? (Section 9.3)
How are hydrate plugs best removed? (Section 9.4)
What are the economics for prevention and remediation? (Section 9.5)
Field case studies, pictures, diagrams, and example calculations are the basis for this
handbook. Less pressing questions regarding hydrate structures, plug formation
mechanism, etc. are considered as background material in Appendix A. A computer
program disk and Users Guide (Appendix B) are provided to enable prediction of
hydrate conditions. Appendix C is a compilation of Case Studies not in the handbook
body. A Russian hydrate perspective is presented in Makogons (1981, 1997) books.
An in-depth, theoretical hydrate treatment is given by Sloan (1998).
H-0806.35
9-1
1-Dec-00
9.2
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Hydrate densities are like that of ice; a dislodged hydrate plug can be a projectile
with high velocities. In the 1997 DeepStar Wyoming field tests, plugs ranged
from 25-200 ft with velocities between 60-270 ft/s. Such velocities and masses
provide enough momentum to cause two types of failure at a pipeline restriction
(orifice), obstruction (flange or valve), or sharp change in direction (bend, elbow,
or tee) as shown in Figure 9.2.1-1. First, hydrate impact can fracture pipe, and
second, extreme compression of gas can cause pipe rupture downstream of the
hydrate path.
2.
Hydrates can form either single or multiple plugs, with no method to predict which
will occur. High differential pressures can be trapped between plugs, even when
the discharge ends of plugs are depressurized.
3.
Hydrates contain as much as 180 volumes (STP) of gas per volume of hydrate.
When hydrate plugs are dissociated by heating, any confinement causes rapid gas
pressure increases. However, hydrate plug heating is not an offshore option due to
the difficulty of locating the plug and economics of heating a submerged pipeline.
Field engineers discuss the hail-on-a-tin-roof sounds when small hydrate particles
hit a pipe wall. Such small, mobile particles can accumulate to large masses
occupying a considerable volume, often filling the pipeline to tens or hundreds of feet
in length. Attempts to blow the plug out of the line by increasing upstream pressure
(see Rule-of-Thumb 18) will result in additional hydrate formation and perhaps
pipeline rupture.
When a plug is depressurized using a high differential pressure, the dislodged plug can
be a dangerous projectile which can cause pipeline damage, as the below three case
studies (from Mobils Kent and Coolen, 1992) indicate.
9.2.1
H-0806.35
9-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 9.2.1-1
9.2.3
H-0806.35
9-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In the above three case studies several common equipment circumstances existed. The
systems:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The Chevron Canada Resources Hydrate Handling Guidelines (1992) suggest that the
danger of line failure due to hydrate plug(s) is more prevalent when:
long lengths of pressurized gas are trapped upstream,
low downstream pressures provide less cus hion between a plug and restriction, and
restrictions/bends exist downstream of the plug.
9.2.4
9.2.5
H-0806.35
9-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-7
1-Dec-00
9.3
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Free water and natural gas are needed. Gas molecules ranging in size from
methane to butane are typical hydrate components, including CO2 , N2 , and H2 S.
The water in hydrates can come from free water produced from the reservoir, or
from water condensed by cooling the gas phase. Usually the pipeline residence
time is insufficient for hydrates to form either from water vaporized into the gas,
or from gas dissolved in the liquid water.
2.
3.
The above three hydrate requirements lead to four classical thermodynamic prevention
methods:
H-0806.35
1.
Water removal provides the best protection. Free water is removed through
separation, and water dissolved in the gas is removed by drying with tri-ethylene
glycol to obtain water contents less than 7 lb m/MMscf. Water removal processing
is difficult and costly between the wellhead and the platform so other prevention
schemes must be used.
2.
Maintaining high temperatures keeps the system in the hydrate-free region. High
reservoir fluid temperature may be retained through insulation and pipe bundling,
or additional heat may be input via hot fluids or electrical heating, although this is
not economical in many cases.
3.
The system may be decreased below hydrate formation pressure. This leads to the
concept of designing system pressure drops at high temperature points (e.g.
bottom- hole chokes). However, the resulting lower density will decrease pipeline
efficiency.
9-8
1-Dec-00
4.
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Two kinetic means of hydrate inhibition have been added to the thermodynamic
inhibitor list and are being brought into common practice:
1.
Kinetic inhibitors are low molecular weight polymers and small molecules
dissolved in a carrier solvent and injected into the water phase in pipelines. These
inhibitors work by bonding to the hydrate surface and preventing crystal
nucleation and growth for a period longer than the free water residence time in a
pipeline. Water is then removed at a platform or onshore.
2.
The above methods are used individually or jointly for prevention. The prevention
section of this handbook provides a method to use the six above methods to prevent
hydrates in the design of an offshore system.
Hydrates form in offshore systems in two fundamental ways: (a) slow cooling of a
fluid as in a pipeline or (b) rapid cooling caused by depressurization across valves as
on a platform.
Section 9.3.1 provides typical offshore system examples of hydrate formation in a
well, a flowline, and a platform. Offshore design for hydrate thermodynamic
inhibition with slow cooling of a pipeline is the topic of Sections 9.3.2, 9.3.3, 9.3.4,
and 9.3.5. Design practices are provided in Section 9.3.6 fo r hydrate prevention with
rapid cooling across a restriction like a valve. Section 9.3.7 gives procedures for
prevention of hydrates through inhibition and heat management. Section 9.3.8
provides general design guidelines for hydrate prevention in an offshore system.
9.3.1
H-0806.35
9-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
prevent hydrate formation, and after the platform export lines have dry gas and
oil/condensate with insufficient water to form hydrates.
In Figure 9.3.1-1, two unusual aspects of the system should be noted: (1) the water
depth is shown as 6,000 feet but it may range to 10,000 feet, and (2) the distance
between the well and the platform may range to 60 miles. Such depths and distances
provide cooling for the pipeline fluids to low temperatures, which are well within the
hydrate stability region.
The system temperature and pressure at the point of hydrate formation must be within
the hydrate stability region, as determined by the methods of Sections 9.3.2 through
9.3.4. The system temperature and pressure enters into the hydrate formation region,
either through a normal cooling process (Example 2 and Figures 9.3.1-4 and 9.3.1-5)
or through a Joule-Thomson process (Section 9.3.6).
A typical plot of the water temperature in the Gulf of Mexico is shown in Figure
9.3.1-2 as a function of water depth. The plot shows a high temperature of 70 o F (or
more) occurs for the first 250 feet of depth. However, when the depth exceeds 3,000
feet the bottom water temperature is very uniform at about 40 o F, no matter how high
the temperature is at the air-water surface. This remarkably uniform water
temperature at depths greater than 3,000 feet occurs in almost all of the earths oceans,
(caused by the water density inversion) except in a few cases with cold subsea
currents.
The ocean acts as a heat sink for any gas or oil produced so that, without insulation or
other heat control methods, any flowline fluid cools to within a few degrees of 40 o F,
no further than a few miles of the wellhead. The rate of cooling with length is a
function of the initial reservoir temperature, the flow rate, the pipeline diameter, and
other fluid flow and heat transfer factors. However, as shown in Section 9.3.2, the
ocean bottom temperature of 40 o F is low enough to cause hydrates to form at any
typical pipeline pressure.
H-0806.35
9-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-11
1-Dec-00
9.3.1.1
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-12
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-14
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Davalath and Barker (1993) provide a comprehensive set of conditions for dealing
with hydrates in deepwater production and testing, including two case studies of
problems (summarized in Appendix C Case Studies C.23 and C.24) and four case
studies of successful hydrate management. Typically methanol injection capability is
provided in the well at two places: (1) at the subsea tree, and (2) downhole several
thousand feet below the seafloor. The injection location and amount of methanol
injection are specified using the procedure indicated in Section 9.3.7.1 on methanol
injection.
In offshore well drilling, frequently a water-based drilling fluid is used that can form
hydrates and plug blow-out preventors, kill lines, etc. when a gas bubble (or kick)
comes into the drilling apparatus. This represents a potentially dangerous situation for
well control. Hydrate formation on drilling is an area of active research with several
joint industrial projects underway. While a brief overview is given here, the reader is
referred to Sloan (1998, Section 8.3.2) for a detailed discussion.
Barker indicated the following rules-of-thumb used by Exxon in considering hydrate
formation with drilling fluids.
Drilling hydrate problems frequently occur, but have only been recognized in recent
years.
When hydrates form solids, they remove water from the mud, leaving a solid barite
plug.
One should not design a well to operate outside the hydrate region only if flow
conditions are maintained. If the well will be in the hydrate formation region at static
conditions, flow will stop at some period and the well operation will be jeopardized.
Several hours may be required for hydrate formation and blockage to occur.
As of October 1988 Exxon used salt at the saturation limit range of 150 to 170 g/l to
prevent hydrate formation.
As general guidelines concerning hydrate formation at various water depths, the
summary given below in Table 3.1-1 by Barker may be used.
H-0806.35
9-15
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Water Depth
(ft.)
<1000
1500
2000
3000
By 1988 Shell had drilled 16 wells in the Gulf of Mexico at water depths between
2,000 and 7,500 feet, using muds with 20 wt% sodium chloride (NaCl) and partially
hydrolyzed polyacrylamide (PHPA). In each well Shell experienced an average of
more than one gas kick per well, which signaled the possibility of hydrate formation.
Only one instance in 2900 ft of water involved the possibility of hyd rate formation,
when Shell experienced difficulty disconnecting the drill stack.
Barker and Gomez (1989) documented two occurrences (see Case Studies C.21 and
C.22 of Appendix C) of hydrate formation in relatively shallow waters off California
and the Gulf of Mexico, where losses in drill times were 70 days and 50 days,
respectively. Recently, the number of hydrate problems have increased dramatically
as drilling has moved to deeper water. In several cases where safety was an issue
(plugged blow out preve ntors, stack connectors, etc.) the well was abandoned. Much
remains to be done in this area.
Downstream of the well and choke, the fluid flows through a pipeline of considerable
length before reaching the platform. Example 2 represents flow conditions in the
pipeline.
9.3.1.2
H-0806.35
9-16
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(e.g. 7 miles) the flowing stream retains a high temperature from the hot reservoir gas
at the pipeline entrance. The ocean cools the system, and at about 9 miles a unit mass
of flowing gas and associated water enters the hydrate region (shaded region to the left
of the line marked 0% MeOH), remaining in the uninhibited hydrate area until mile
45. Such a distance may represent several days of residence time for the water phase,
so that hydrates would undoubtedly form, were not inhibition steps taken.
In Figure 9.3.1-4, by mile 25 the temperature of the pipeline system is within a few
degrees of the ocean floor temperature, so that approximately 23 wt% methanol is
required in the free water phase to prevent hydrate formation and subsequent pipeline
blockage. Methanol injection facilities are not available at the needed point along the
pipeline. Instead methanol is injected into the pipeline at the subsea wellhead. In the
case of the pipeline shown in Figure 9.3.1-4 methanol is injected at the wellhead so
that in excess of 23 wt% methanol will be present in the free water phase over the
entire pipeline length.
As vaporized methanol flows along the pipeline in Figure 9.3.1-4, it dissolves into any
produced brine or water condensed from the gas. Hydrate inhibition occurs in the free
water, usually at accumulations with some change in geometry (e.g., a bend or
pipeline dip along an ocean floor depression) or some nucleation site (e.g., sand, weld
slag, etc.).
Hydrate inhibition occurs in the aqueous liquid, rather than in the vapor or condensate.
While most of the methanol dissolves in the water phase, a significant amount of
methanol either remains with the vapor or dissolves into any liquid hydrocarbon phase
present as calculated using the methods shown later in this section.
In Figure 9.3.1-4, Notz showed that the gas temperature increases from mile 30 to mile
45 with warmer (shallower) water conditions. From mile 45 to mile 50 however, a
second cooling trend is observed due to a Joule-Thomson gas expansion effect.
Methanol exiting the pipeline in the vapor, aqueous, and condensate phases is usually
not recovered, due to the expense of regeneration.
Todd (1997) provided simulations with a different behavior from the pipeline in
Figure 9.3.1-4. In Todds simulations, typical gas pipeline pressure drops are small
relative to the overall pressure, resulting in an almost constant pressure cooling,
providing a straight, horizontal line between the pipeline end points on a plot like
Figure 9.3.1-5. Pipeline pressure drops are functions of several variables, and
individual systems should be simulated for best results.
H-0806.35
9-17
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
FIGURE 9.3.1-4: OFFSHORE PIPELINE PLOTTED ON HYDRATE FORMATION CURVES (FROM NOTZ 1994)
H-0806.35
9-18
1-Dec-00
9.3.1.3
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
to separate the gas, water, and oil, providing an oil phase which has a very low
vapor pressure, and providing water discharge to the ocean.
4.
to dehydrate the gas to a water content below 7 lb m/MMscf before injection into
the pipeline to shore, and
5.
Note that water separation and gas dehydration are vital for hydrate prevention, so that
even if the system cools into the hydrate pressure-temperature region shown in Figure
9.3.1-5, hydrate formation is prevented due to insufficient water. The export pipeline
gas water content is below its water dew point (9 lb m/MMscf) at the lowest
temperature (39 o F) so free water will not condense from the gas phase.
The oil is stabilized by flow through a series of four separators, operating at 1000 psig,
300 psig, 55 psig, and 2 psig before the export oil pipeline, so an oil pipeline pressure
greater than 15 psia will prevent a gas phase. Hydrate formation is not a significant
problem in the oil export pipeline because relatively few hydrate formers (nitrogen,
methane, ethane, propane, butanes and CO2 ) are present and the water content is low.
The gas from each separator is compressed, cooled, and separated from liquid again
before re-combining the gas with the previous separators gas for injection into the
export gas line. The additional oil obtained after cooling the compressed gas amounts
to about 1.5% of the total oil production.
H-0806.35
9-19
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-20
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
FIGURE 9.3.1-6:TYPICAL OFFSHORE PLATFORM SCHEMATIC (FROM MANNING AND THOMPSON 1991)
H-0806.35
9-21
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-22
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-23
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In the process shown, 4310 bhp compressors represent the largest cost on the platform,
with capital cost on the order of $800-$1500 (1990 dollars) per installed horsepower.
These compressors are powered by fuel gas, which operates at a low pressure (about
200 psig), usually fed from the inlet gas passing through a control valve with a
substantial pressure reduction.
Pressure reductions after the fuel gas takeoff cause cooling, so that point is very
susceptible to hydrate formation, particularly in winter months. Also instrument gas
lines require similar pressure reductions from a header. Texacos Todd et al. (1996.
pp. 35-42) observe that when fuel and/or instrument gas lines are blocked due to
hydrates, the process frequently shuts down, resulting in pipeline cooling and
significant hydrate blockages in the production line at restart.
Hydrate limits to pressure reductions through restrictions such as valves and orifices is
shown in Section 9.3.6.
9.3.2
H-0806.35
9-24
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Hydrate formation data were averaged for 20 natural gases (from Sloan, 1998, Chapter
6) with an average formation pressure of 181 psia. Of the 20 gases, the lowest
formation pressure was 100 psig for a gas with 7 mole % C3 H8 , while the highest
value was 300 psig for a gas with 1.8 mole % C3 H8 .
Rule-of-Thumb 1 indicates that most offshore pipeline pressures greatly exceed the
hydrate formation condition, indicating:
gas drying and/or inhibition is needed for ocean pipelines with temperatures
approaching 39 o F,
a more accurate estimation procedure should normally be considered, and
hydrate formation pressures are dependent upon the gas composition, and are
particularly sensitive to the amount of propane present.
It should be reiterated here that hydrates can form at temperatures in excess of 39 o F
when the pressure is elevated, as in the case of warmer temperatures in shallower
water. More accurate estimations of hydrate formation conditions over a broad
temperature range are made by the method in the following section.
9.3.3
2.
The intersection of the above two lines determines the pressure and temperature at
which hydrates will form in a pipeline. As we have seen in Exa mple 2 of Section
9.3.1, it is very likely that a long offshore pipeline will have hydrate formation
conditions with free water present. The engineer then needs to specify the amount of
inhibitor needed to keep the entire pipeline in the fluid region, without hydrate
formation.
Step 1 in this calculation, the flow simulation of the pipeline, is beyond the scope of
this handbook and should be considered as a separate, pre-requisite problem, perhaps
H-0806.35
9-25
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
done by the engineering staff at the home office. As an alternative if a pipe flow
simulation is not readily available, the engineer may wish to assume that contents of a
long offshore pipeline will eventually come to the ocean bottom temperature at the
pipeline pressure.
Step 2, enabling estimations of hydrate formation pressures and temperatures, is one
of the principal goals of this handbook, as discussed in this and in the following
section. The methods below (Sections 9.3.3 and 9.3.4) may then be used directly to
determine the amount of MeOH (methanol) or MEG (monoethylene glycol) needed to
prevent hydrate formation at those conditions.
9.3.3.1
9.3.3.2
Example 4: Calculating Hydrate Formation Conditions Using the Gas Gravity Chart
Find the pressure at which a gas composed of 92.67 mol% methane, 5.29% ethane,
1.38% propane, 0.182% i- butane, 0.338% n-butane, and 0.14% pentane form hydrates
with free water at a temperature of 50 o F.
H-0806.35
9-26
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
FIGURE 9.3.3-1: HYDRATE FORMATION CURVES FOR VARIOUS GAS GRAVITY (FROM KATZ 1959)
H-0806.35
9-27
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Solution:
The gas gravity is calculated as 0.603 by the procedure below:
COMPONENT
MOL
FRACTION
yI
MOL WT
MW
AVG MOL WT
IN MIX
yI @MW
Methane
0.9267
16.043
14.867
Ethane
0.0529
30.070
1.591
Propane
0.0138
44.097
0.609
i-Butane
0.00182
58.124
0.106
n-Butane
0.00338
58.124
0.196
Pentane
0.0014
72.151
0.101
1.0000
Gas Gravity =
17.470
H-0806.35
9-28
1-Dec-00
T =
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
CW
M(100 - W)
(1)
where:
T = hydrate depression, (Teq - Toper) o F,
C =
constant for a particular inhibitor (2,335 for MeOH; 2,000 for MEG)
The Hammerschmidt equation was generated in 1934 and has been used to
determine the amount of inhibitor needed to prevent hydrate formation, as indicated in
Example 5. The equation was based upon more than 100 natural gas hydrate
measurements with inhibitor concentrations of 5 - 25 wt% in water. The accuracy of
the Hammerschmidt equation is surprisingly good; tested against 75 data points, the
average error in T was 5%.
For higher methanol concentrations ( up to 87 wt%) the temperature depression due to
methanol can be calculated by a modification of Equation (1) by Nielsen and Bucklin
(1983), where xMeOH is mole fraction methanol in aqueous phase
T = 129.6 ln(1 x MeOH )
9.3.3.4
(1a)
H-0806.35
9-29
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
100 M T
100 32 11
=
= 131
.
M T + C 32 11 + 2335
2.
3.
The amount of the free water phase is multiplied by the wt% inhibitor from the
Hammerschmidt equation, just as the inhibitor concentrations in the gas and
condensate are multiplied by the flows of the vapor and condensate. Because hydrate
inhibition occurs in the water phase, inhibitor concentrations in the gas and condensate
phases are usually counted as economic losses. Methanol recovery is done only rarely
on platforms and is typically too expensive at onshore locations.
Amount of Water Phase
The water phase has two sources: (a) produced water and (b) water condensed from
the hydrocarbon phases. The amount of produced water can only be determined by
data from the well, with an increasing amount of water production over the wells
lifetime.
Water condensed from the hydrocarbon phases may be calculated. The water content
of condensates is usually negligible, but water condensed from gases can be
H-0806.35
9-30
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
substantial. The amount of water condensed is the difference in the inlet and outlet
gas water contents, multiplied by the gas flow rate.
Rule-of-Thumb 2: For long pipelines approaching the ocean bottom temperature of
39 o F, the lowest water content of the outlet gas is given by the below table:
Pipe Pressure, psia
Water Content, lbm/MMscf
500
15.0
1000
9.0
1500
7.0
2000
5.5
An inlet gas water content analysis is used, if available. Then the water content of the
outlet gas (Rule-of-Thumb 2) may be subtracted from the inlet gas to determine the
water condensed per MMscf of gas. When an inlet gas water content is not available a
water content chart such as Figure 9.3.3-2 may be used to obtain the water content of
both the inlet and outlet gas from the pipeline.
In Figure 9.3.3-2 the temperature of the pipeline inlet or outlet is found on the x-axis
and water content is read on the y-axis at the pipeline pressure, marked on each line in
Figure 9.3.3-2. The engineer is cautioned not to use the water content chart at
temperatures significantly below 38o F. At lower temperatures the actual water content
deviates from the line due to hydrate formation. An illustration of condensed water
calculation using Figure 9.3.1-6 is given in Example 6 (Section 9.3.3.6).
H-0806.35
9-31
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
FIGURE 9.3.3-2: WATER FORMATION CURVE (FROM MC KETTA & WEHE, 1958)
H-0806.35
9-32
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-33
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-34
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-35
1-Dec-00
9.3.3.6
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
COMPONENT
MOL
FRACTION
yI
MW
AVG MOL WT
IN MIX
yI @MW
Methane
07160
16.04
11.487
Ethane
0.0194
44.09
0.855
Propane
0.0194
44.09
0.855
n-Butane
0.0079
58.12
0.459
n-Pentane
0.0079
72.15
0.570
Nitrogen
0.0596
28.01
1.670
Carbon Dioxide
0.1419
44.01
6.245
1.0000
Gas Gravity =
H-0806.35
MOL WT
22.708
9-36
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Reading the gas gravity chart Figure 9.3.3-1, the hydrate temperature is 65 o F at 1000
psia.
Step 2) Calculate the Wt% MeOH Needed in the Free Water Phase
The Hammerschmidt Equation is: T =
CW
100M - MW
100 M T
100 32 27
=
= 27
M T + C 32 27 + 2335
The weight percent of methanol needed in freewater phase is 27.0% to provide hydrate
inhibition at 1000 psia and 38 o F for this gas.
Step 3) Calculate the Mass of Liquid H2 O/MMscf of Natural Gas
Calculate Mass of Condensed H2 O
In the absence of a water analysis, use the water content chart Figure 9.3.3-2, to
calculate the water in the vapor/MMscf. The inlet gas (at 1050 psia and 195 o F) water
content is read as 600 lb m/MMscf. Rule of Thumb 2 states that exiting gas at 1000
psia and 39 o F contains 9 lb m/MMscf of water in the gas. The mass of liquid water
due to condensation is:
600 lb m _
MMscf
9 lbm
MMscf
= 591 lb m
MMscf
H-0806.35
9-37
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
day
lb H O
= 27.4 m 2
MMscf
Total Mass of Water/MMscf Gas: Sum the condensed and produced water
591 lb m + 27.4 lb m = 618.4 lb m
MMscf
MMscf
MMscf
Step 4) Calculate the Rate of Methanol Injection
Methanol will exist in three phases: water, gas, and condensate. The total mass of
methanol injected into the gas is calculated as follows:
-Calculate Mass of MeOH in the Water Phase
27.0 wt% methanol is required to inhibit the free water phase, and the mass of
water/MMscf was calculated at 618.4 lb m. The mass of MeOH in the free water phase
per MMscf is:
27wt% =
M lb m MeOH
100%
M lb m MeOH + 618.4lbm H2 O
= 228.7 lbm/MMscf
9-38
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
MeOH in Gas
= 27 lbm/MMscf
MeOH in Condensate
= 11.7 lbm/MMscf
= 267.4 lbm/MMscf
H-0806.35
1.
2.
3.
4.
9-39
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
5.
Gas Gravity - Gas gravity, calculated by the steps in Section 9.3.3.1 and Example
4.
6.
7.
8.
Formation Water Rate - Produced water flowing into the pipeline (bbl/d).
Once the above values are input, HYDCALC displays calculations for both
Intermediate Results (in black) and the amount of methanol or glycol to be injected (in
blue on a color screen). In the below example, the User Input and Calculations are
both listed in black, due to printing restrictions. A prescription for the use of this
method is shown in Example 7.
9.3.3.8
H-0806.35
9-40
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-41
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Solution:
Figure 9.3.3-5 on the next page is a copy of HYDCALC, highlighting the data input
that is needed to run the program. All required data are provided in the example, with
the exception of gas gravity. Gas gravity was calculated using the method described
in Example 4 to be 0.784. Figure 9.3.3-5 on the next page displays all input data and
results. The amount of methanol injected is 42.2 gal/MMscf and the amount of glycol
injected is 59.4 gal/MMscf.
For ease of use, the engineer will turn to HYDCALC to perform the second
approximation calculation. The following section provides accuracy and limitations of
both HYDCALC and the hand calculation methods, which are vital to their use.
9.3.3.9
Calculated Quantity
Water Condensed, lbm/MMscf
MeOH in Water, lb m/MMscf
MeOH in Gas, lb m/MMscf
MeOH in Condensate, lb m/MMscf
Total MeOH Injection, lbm/MMscf
Total MeOH Injection, gal/MMscf
HYDCALC
Result
591
228.7
27
11.7
267.4
40.3
619.8
239.7
24.7
11.7
276.25
42.2
While the hand calculation and the computer program provide only slightly different
results, both include inaccuracies. For example, while it is possible to obtain more
significant figures with HYDCALC than with the charts in the hand method,
HYDCALC inaccuracies are those of the charts upon which HYDCALC is based.
Using HYDCALC it was estimated that 27 wt% methanol was required in the water
phase to inhibit the pipeline, while measurements by Robinson and Ng (1986) show
that only 20 wt% methanol was required for inhibition at the same gas composition,
temperature, and pressure of Examples 6 and 7.
The major inaccuracies in the second estimation method are in the gas gravity hydrate
formation conditions, which are only accurate to 7 o F or to 500 psia. The
Hammerschmidt equation, the inhibitor temperature depression T is accurate to
H-0806.35
9-42
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
5%. With such inaccuracies, the amount of methanol or glycol injection could be in
error by 100% or more. The principal virtue of the second estimation method is ease
of calculation rather than accuracy.
A second limitation is that the method was generated for gases without H2 S, which
represents the case for many gases in the Gulf of Mexico. A modification of the gas
gravity method was proposed for sour gases by Baillie and Wichert (1987).
9.3.4
9.3.4.1
H-0806.35
9-43
1-Dec-00
9.3.4.2
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
From Windows or in the proper directory, click on, or type HYDOFF; press Enter.
2.
3.
At the Units screen, press 1 (to choose o F and psia) then Enter
4.
At the FEED.DAT question screen, press 2 and Enter if you wish to use the data in
FEED.DAT, or 1 and Enter if you wish to enter the gas composition in HYDOFF
by hand. The remainder of this example is written assuming that the user will
enter the gas composition in HYDOFF rather than use FEED.DAT. The use of
FEED.DAT is simpler and should be considered for multiple calculations with the
same gas.
5.
The next screen asks for the number of components present (excluding water).
Input 7 and Enter.
6.
The next screen requests a list of the gas components present, coded by numbers
shown on the screen. Input 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, and 9 (in that order, separating the
entries by commas) and then Enter.
7.
The next series of screens request the input of the mole fractions of each
component
Methane
H-0806.35
0.7160 Enter.
9-44
1-Dec-00
Ethane
Propane
n-Butane
Nitrogen
Carbon Dioxide
n-Pentane
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
0.0473
0.0194
0.0079
0.0596
0.1419
0.0079
Enter.
Enter.
Enter.
Enter.
Enter.
Enter.
8.
9.
At the screen asking for the required Temperature, input 38, and Enter.
10. Read the hydrate formation pressure of 229.7 psia, (meaning hydrates will form at
any pressure above 230 psia at 38 o F for this gas.)
11. When asked for another calculation input 1 for No then Enter.
12. At the Options screen input 2, then Enter.
13. At the screen asking for the required temperature, input 38, and Enter.
14. At the screen to enter the WEIGHT PERCENT of Methanol, input 22.
15. Read the resulting hydrate condition of 22 wt% MeOH, 38 o F, and 1036 psia.
It may require some trial and error with the use of the program before the correct
amount of MeOH is input to inhibit the system at the temperature and pressure of the
example. One starting place for the trial and error process would be the amount of
MeOH predicted by the Hammerschmidt equation (27 wt%) in Example 6. Ng and
Robinson (1983) measured 20 wt% of methanol in the water required to inhibit
hydrates at 38 o F and 1000 psia. A comparison of the measured value with the
calculated value (22 wt%) in this example and through the Hammerschmidt equation
provides an indication of both the absolute and relative calculation accuracy.
HYDOFF can also be used to predict the uninhibited hydrate formation temperature at
1000 psia at 58.5 o F, through a similar trial and error process, as compared with 65 o F
determined by the gas gravity method. No measurements are available for the
uninhibited formation conditions of the gas in this example.
In using HYDOFF, if components heavier than n-decane (C 10 H22 ) are present, they
should be lumped with n-decane, since they are all non-hydrate formers.
H-0806.35
9-45
1-Dec-00
9.3.4.3
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
9.3.4.4
(3)
H-0806.35
9-46
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(4)
Similar measurements by Ng and Chen (1995) are shown in Figure 9.3.4-2 to specify
the solubility for monoethylene glycol (MEG) in the condensate, via KLMEG defined as
the MEG mole fraction in condensate relative to water ( xMEG in HC/xMEG in H2O). Note
that the KLMEG values are two orders of magnitude lower than KLMeOH values. No
pressure dependence is observed, and the line for MEG solubility in methane, propane,
and n- heptane (or methylcyclohexane) is recommended, since toluene is not in
condensate:
KLMEG = exp (4.20 - 7266.4(1/T(o R))
(5)
9.3.4.7
H-0806.35
9-47
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-48
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-49
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
9 lbm
MMscf
= 591 lb m
MMscf
day
H-0806.35
9-50
lb H O
= 27.4 m 2
MMscf
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Total Mass of Water/MMscf Gas: Sum the condensed and produced water
591 lb m
MMscf
27.4 lb m = 618.4 lb m
MMscf
MMscf
M lb mMeOH
100%
M lb mMeOH + 618.4lb mH 2O
N lb m MEG
100%
N lb m MEG + 618.4lb m H 2 O
The mole fraction MeOH in the water phase is xMeOH in H2O = 0.137. The distribution
constant of MeOH in the gas is calculated at 38 o F (497.7 o R) by Equation (3), relative
to the methanol in the water
H-0806.35
9-51
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(3)
where o R = o F + 459.69
The mole fraction of MeOH in the vapor is yMeOH = Kv MeOHxMeOH in H2O or
yMeOH = 0.00296 0.137 = 0.0004055
The daily gas rate is 8432 lbmol (= 3.2 106 scf / (379.5 scf/lbmol), where an scf is at
14.7 psia and 60 o F), so that the MeOH lost to the gas is 3.42 lbmol (= 0.0004055
8432) or 109.4 lb m/day. Since the calculation basis is 1 MMscf/d, the amount of
MeOH lost is 34.2 lbm/MMscf (= 109.4 lb m / 3.2 MMscf).
(b) MEG Lost to Gas. In Figure 9.3.3-4 use the 50 wt% MEG line to determine the
MEG lost to the gas is 0.006 lb m/MMscf at 38 o F and 1000 psig; such an amount is
negligible. Ng and Chen (1995) measured a negligible concentration of MEG in the
gas phase at conditions similar to those of this problem.
Calculate Amount of (a) MeOH and (b) MEG Lost to the Condensate
(a) MeOH lost to the condensate. The distribution of MeOH in the condensate is
calculated via equation (4)
KLMeOH = exp (5.90 - 5404.5(1/497.7 o R)) = 0.00702
(4)
where o R = o F + 459.69.
The mole fraction MeOH in condensate is xMeOH in HC = KLMeOH xMeOH in H2O or
xMeOH in HC = 0.00702 0.137 = 0.0009617
The condensate rate is 26.0 lbmoles/MMscf (= 25 bbl/d300 lb m/bbl1 lbmol/90
lbm1d/3.2 MMscf) so that the amount of MeOH in condensate is 0.025 lbmol/MMscf
(= 0.0009617 26 / ( 1 - 0.009617)) or 0.8 lbm/MMscf)
(b) MEG Lost to Condensate. The mole fraction MEG in the water phase is calculated
as
mole fraction MEG =
H-0806.35
9-52
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The mole fraction MEG in the water phase is xMEG in H2O = 0.128.
The distribution of MEG between the aqueous liquid and condensate is given by
KLMEG = exp (4.20 - 7266.4(1/497.7 o R)) = 3.04 10-5
(5)
In Water, lbm/MMscf
In Gas, lbm/MMscf
In Condensate, lb m/MMscf
Total, lb m/MMscf
Total, gal/MMscf
MeOH
MEG
174.4
34.2
0.8
209.4
31.5
313.1
0.006
0.0061
313.11
33.3
The example illustrates that for this gas condition, the injection amounts of MeOH and
MEG are comparable. The more precise calculation shown here however, represents a
considerable savings in the amount of MeOH injected (31.5 gal/MMscf versus 42.2
gal/MMscf in the second estimation method.)
9.3.5
H-0806.35
9-53
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
1.
Burying the Pipeline. Some of the Dog Lake pipeline was built over a stretch of
marsh. The exposure to winter ambient temperatures caused rapid reductions in
the gas temperature.
Burying the pipeline would protect it from low
environmental temperatures due to the higher earth temperatures. Figure 9.3.6-1
displays the temperature increase in the pipeline after exposed areas were buried
relative to the exposed pipeline in Figure 9.3.5-2. With pipeline burial, the need
for methanol in the water phase was reduced from 26 wt% to less than 19 wt%.
2.
Wellhead Heat Addition. Catalytic in- line heaters could be installed at the
wellhead to increase the gas temperature to 125 o F. Figure 9.3.6-2 shows the
pipeline temperature increase caused by the combined prevention methods of
burial and wellhead heating. Use of these two methods permitted the methanol
concentration to be reduced to approximately 14 wt% to prevent hydrate formation
in the line. It should be noted that heating may increase the amount of corrosion in
the line.
3.
Insulation. Insulation of exposed areas near the wellhead and battery would
maintain higher pipeline temperatures, thereby reducing the amount of methanol
needed for hydrate inhibition. Figure 9.3.6-3 displays the temperature increase in
the buried and heated pipeline when exposed pipes were insulated. The pipeline is
now outside the hydrate formation region, and methanol addition is no longer
needed.
4.
9-54
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-55
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-56
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
This case study illustrates how combinations of pipeline burial, insulation, heating,
and methanol injection can be used to prevent hydrates. The selection of the hydrate
prevention scheme(s) is then a matter of economics, as considered in Section 9.5.
9.3.6
H-0806.35
9-57
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-58
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-59
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
FIGURE 9.3.6-3: DOG LAKE FIELD WITH BURIAL, HEATING, AND INSULATION
H-0806.35
9-60
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Cooling curves such as the two in Figure 9.3.6-4 were determined for constant
enthalpy (or Joule-Thomson) expansions, obtained from the First Law of
Thermodynamics for a system flowing at steady-state, neglecting kinetic and potential
energy changes:
H = Q - Ws
(6)
H-0806.35
9-61
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-62
1-Dec-00
9.3.6.1
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-63
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-64
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-65
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-66
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-67
1-Dec-00
9.3.6.3
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
T(o F)
32
P(psia) 119
35
149
40
213
45
303
50
368
55
551
60
718
65
1117
68
1624
71
2509
77
4046
A semi- logarithmic interpolation of the above values gives the hydrate formation point
at 70 o F when the pressure is 2180 psia. Therefore the initial condition of 68 o F and
2180 psia is within the hydrate formation region, but the initial conditions of 77 o F and
2180 psia remains in the fluid (vapor-liquid water) region.
If the system at 68 o F and 2180 psia has formed hydrates, consider two means of
depressurization. If the system pressure is lowered to 1450 psia slowly and
isothermally (with substantial heat input) hydrates will dis sociate at 1537 psia. A
second, isenthalpic (H=0) depressurization without heating from the surroundings,
results in much colder gas at 1450 psia. Using XPAND on the disk accompanying this
handbook (see the Users Manual prescription in Appendix B) the following
isenthalpic line is obtained:
P (psia)
T (o F) for H=0
H-0806.35
2100
68.0
2000
62.4
9-68
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
As shown in Figure 9.3.6-8, the isenthalpic expansion system extends further into the
hydrate region. Only with subsequent heating at a constant pressure of 1450 psia, will
the system become hydrate-free at 66.6 o F.
A similar calculation for the system initially in the fluid region at 77 o F and 2180 psia
shows the problem with isenthalpic expansion. The result, plotted as line ABC in
Figure 9.3.6-8shows an isenthalpic intersection with the hydrate formation boundary
at approximately 70.5 o F, 1990 psia. To prevent expansion into the hydrate region
four options may be considered, as illustrated in Example 12:
1.
limit the final expansion pressure to a higher value than 1990 psia,
2.
3.
4.
Pipeline hydrate plugs are frequently porous, so that depressurization from one
(downstream) side can result in Joule-Thomson cooling as gas flows through the plug.
Expansion across a hydrate plug yields identical results to expansion across a valve.
In the initial part of the above example, it was seen that expansion from a condition
which has a hydrate plug (e.g. 68 o F and 2180 psia) will only cause the downstream
portion of the plug to progress further into the hydrate region. Heat must be put into
the system from the surroundings to dissociate hydrates. The field tests which confirm
the above discussion are given in Case Studies C.15 and C.17 in Appendix C.
There are several limitations to XPAND. First, it is limited to the vapor phase and
will not account for expansion of a fluid containing any liquid amount. If there is a
question whether the system might contain a liquid either at the inlet or discharge, the
engineer should calculate the hydrocarbon dew point, and an isenthalpic flash should
be performed to obtain the cooling curve, using a process simulator package like
HYSIM, ASPEN , or PROCESS. Secondly, XPAND was generated only for the
first five common paraffins (methane, ethane, propane, normal butane, iso-butane, and
normal pentane) so XPAND cannot be used with nitrogen, acid gases (H2 S or CO2 ), or
with significant amount of heavy components. With the above restrictions, the
engineer may group components larger than pentanes into the pentane plus fraction
of the gas.
H-0806.35
9-69
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-70
1-Dec-00
9.3.6.4
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
9.3.6.5
2.
3.
4.
9-71
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
9-72
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
transfer before the second valve. The following calculations provide the pressure and
temperature conditions in the system shown in Figure 9.3.6-7.
In our example, the pressure ratio (Pin /Pout ) will be arbitrarily set at a value
approximately equal across each control valve, providing 675 psia as the intermediate
pressures after the first control valve. Using XPAND the temperature of the gas at
675 psia is predicted to be 58 o F at the first valve discharge. Figure 9.3.6-11 shows
the gas expansion conditions and the HYDOFF hydrate formation curves,
demonstrating that the gas is outside the hydrate formation region after the first
pressure drop (line 1).
In Figure 9.3.6-11, heat is added to the system (line 2) to raise the temperature to
prevent hydrates upon gas expansion across the second control valve (line 3). The
heat duty in the exchanger was defined by the temperature increase (T3 -T2 ). XPAND
was used to estimate a value of T3 at the second valve inlet, which provided a
discharge value T4 outside the hydrate formation region. For this example, a T3 of
68 o F is required to maintain the final temperature at 44 o F, just above the hydrate
formation region at the required pressure of 300 psia.
Figure 9.3.6-11 suggests that heating before expansion through a single control valve
may provide a more economical method to prevent hydrates on expansion. A single
control valve and heater would save the capital cost of one control valve and may be a
better alternative to prevent hydrates on expansion.
Ex12.B.2. Methanol Addition. Methanol can be injected into the fuel supply line
upstream of the control valve to prevent hydrate formation downstream of the valve.
Figure 9.3.6-9 shows that more than 10 wt% methanol is needed in the free water
phase to prevent hydrate formation. A better estimate of 12 wt% methanol in the
water phase was obtained through interpolation using XPAND and HYDOFF. The
total amount of methanol required for upstream gas injection is calculated through
methods of Section 9.3.4.
H-0806.35
9-73
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-74
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In-Line
Heater
P1 = 1500 psia
T1= 100oF
T2= 58oF
2nd
Valve
P3= 670 psia
T3= 68oF
Control
P4= 300 psia
T4= 44oF
Estimated Using
HYDXPAND
H-0806.35
9-75
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-76
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Ex12.B.2.a. Water condensation with expansion. Gas flows into the fuel line at a rate
of 0.02 MMscf/d. Since the gas is saturated with water, one can calculate the mass of
free water in the pipeline due to dewpoint condensation from Figure 9.3.3-2 (45 lb m
H2 O/MMscf in the vapor at 1500 psia and 100 o F and 16 lb m H2 O/MMscf in the vapor
at 350 psia and 33 o F). The amount of free water that forms from the vapor is
45 lbm/MMscf- 16 lbm/MMscf = 29 lbm/MMscf.
Consequently, the total amount of water (W) condensed per day is:
29 lbm H 2O 0.02 MMscf
0.58lbm H2 O
=
MMscf
day
day
Ex12.B.2.b. Mass of MeOH Required in the Water Phase. The mass of MeOH can be
found by using the definition of weight percent
wt % =
M (lbm MeOH)
X 100%
M (lbm MeOH) + W (lbm H 2 O)
The mole fraction MeOH in the water phase is xMeOH in H2O = 0.071. The distribution
coefficient of MeOH in the gas is calculated at 33.03 o F (492.7 o R) by Equation (3),
relative to the methanol in the water
KvMeOH = exp (5.706 - 5738(1/492.7 o R) = 0.00263
(3)
H-0806.35
9-77
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-78
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Control
Valve
Gas Inlet of
0.02 MMSCF
per day
P1=1500 psia
P2=300 psia
T1=100oF
T2=33oF
H-0806.35
9-80
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-80
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The study of gas expansion without hydrate formation suggests two additional Rulesof-Thumb, stated below.
Rule-of-Thumb 8. It is always better to expand a dry gas than a wet gas, in order to
prevent hydrate formation in unusual circumstances, e.g. changes in upstream
pressure due to throughput changes.
Rule-of-Thumb 8 is illustrated by the previous example, which typifies instrument or
fuel gas applications. To use this Rule-of-Thumb it is necessary to be able to dry the
gas, using either a glycol dehydrator or a molecular sieve adsorption process.
Rule-of-Thumb 9. Where drying is not a possibility, it is always better to take a
large pressure drop at a process condition where the inlet temperature is high.
One application of Rule-of-Thumb 9 is the bottom hole choke, provided in Texacos
Reliability Engineering: Gas Freezing & Hydrate Study, a handbook for field
personnel by Todd et al. (1996). A bottom hole choke is a device with a restricted
opening, placed in the lower end of the tubing string to cause a large pressure drop to
be taken deep in the wellbore. The warm downhole reservoir heats the gas before it
expands, thus preventing hydrates from forming across the expansion. The majority
of bottom hole chokes are installed in high pressure gas wells that producer a low
amount of liquids.
9.3.7
6.
7.
8.
Two additional, new inhibition techniques have been commercialized and are gaining
industrial acceptance:
1.
H-0806.35
the kinetic inhibition method of preventing sizable crystal growth for a period
exceeding the free water residence time in a pipeline, and
9-81
1-Dec-00
2.
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-82
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
pipelines is about 20 wt%, while offshore methanol concentrations can exceed 50 wt%
if the pressure is high.
A recent finding is that under- inhibition with MeOH is worse than no inhibition for
two reasons, as measured by Yousif et al, (1996): (1) under- inhibited systems form
hydrates faster than systems without inhibitors, and (2) hydrates stick to the pipe walls
more aggressively when insufficient methanol is injected.
While hydrate inhibition occurs in the water phase, significant amounts of methanol
are also dissolved in the vapor and oil/condensate phases. Proportions of methanol
dissolved in the vapor or oil/condensate phases are calculated via the methods of
Sections 9.3.3 and 9.3.4, and are usually taken as operating expense losses. Methanol
loss costs can be substantial when the total fraction of either the vapor or the
oil/condensate phase is very large relative to the water phase. Sample economics for
methanol are provided in Sectio n 9.5 and in the following Case Study 7.
Makogon (1981, p. 133) noted that in 1972 the Soviet gas industry used 0.3 kg of
methanol for every 1000 cubic meters of gas extracted. Norsk Hydro workers (Stange
et al. 1989) indicated that North Sea methanol usage may surpass the ratio given by
Makogon by an order of magnitude. The use of methanol in the North Sea has
become so expensive that alternatives to methanol injection are considered.
Case Study 7. Methanol Recovery from the Water Phase
Paragon Engineering (1994) performed a study for DeepStar (DSII CTR 221-1) of the
impact of methanol recovery on offshore systems. As an evaluation scenario, a
conventional, shallow water platform was designed solely for methanol recovery in
100-150 feet of water, with methanol return lines 40-60 miles to deepwater subsea
wells. Figure 9.3.7-1 shows a block flow diagram for methanol recovery and
injection.
Costs were determined for methanol recovery on the platform for eight cases of
methanol in the produced water. Table 9.3.7-1 shows results for four cases: 20wt%
and 30wt% methanol in the free water phase, for (a) high water production in late field
life, and (b) low water production in early field life.
H-0806.35
9-83
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
13,188
14,593
15
7,797
6,412
0.29
2,176
0.10
13,191
14,498
15
4,537
4,430
0.35
1,456
0.11
48,813
3,196
57
1,668
23,443
4.72
7,914
1.59
48,802
3,188
57
960
15,977
5.53
5,224
1.81
9-84
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(MMSCF
(BPD
(BPD
(BPD
(%
Max.
Rec.
MeOH
15.
13,20
14,60
7,80
99.
Dehydratio
Compressio
&
Min.
Rec.
MeOH
56.
48,80
3,38
20
9
Oil/Gas/Wat
Separatio
Wate
50
12
miles
Pipelin
Oi
Oil
Pumpin
Meterin
Water
to
Production
4
Methanol
injection
Methan
Storag
Re-
H-0806.35
to
Methan
Recover
Facilitie
Water
9-85
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In all cases methanol was recovered as the overhead product from a 40 tray distillation
column. The bottoms methanol concentration was less than 1000 ppm so that water
could be dumped overboard.
Paragon Engineering also reported methanol losses which were greater than
anticipated in North Sea recovery systems from three Conoco facilities (4-5 gal MeOH
lost/MMscf), a Norsk Hydro recovery unit (29% MeOH losses), and an Amoco
Netherlands recovery unit (12% MeOH losses).
Methanol recovery is possible from the vapor phase, using a cryogenic recovery
process, but this is seldom done due to the expense involved. Methanol can be
recovered from the condensate via a water-wash and subsequent distillation, but this is
also seldom done. Environmental concerns have a major impact on recovery.
Monoethylene Glycol
Of the glycols, mono-ethylene glycol (MEG) dominates pipeline injection over diethylene glycol (DEG) and tri-ethylene glycol (TEG) because MEG has a lower
viscosity and is more effective per pound. MEG also has a higher molecular weight
and a lower volatility than methanol, so MEG may be recovered and recycled more
easily on platforms. In addition MEG losses to the vapor and oil/condensate phases
are very small relative to methanol. Consequently, MEG is most applicable for small
water fractions when gas and oil/condensate fractions are very high. The MEG
injection amount may be calculated using methods in Sections 9.3.3 and 9.3.4.
Rule-of-Thumb 10. Monoethylene glycol injection is used when the required
methanol injection rate exceeds 30 gal/hr.
Rule-of-thumb 10 was obtained from Manning and Thompson (1991, p. 86).
Unlike methanol, MEGs low vapor pressure requires that it be atomized into a
pipeline. After injection, MEG is retained with the water phase and provides no
hydrate protection above the water level. Due to its high viscosity and density, MEG
is seldom used to dissociate a hydrate plug unless the injection point is vertically
above a hydrate plug (as in a riser or a well); methanol is normally used for flowline
plugs.
Figure 9.3.7-2 shows a MEG recovery unit that appears very similar to the methanol
recovery block diagram in Figure 9.3.7-1. However in the methanol column the
H-0806.35
9-86
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-87
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
overhead may be almost pure methanol, while in the glycol regenerator MEG is
recovered with water (typically at 60-80 wt%) at the bottom. Salt also concentrates in
MEG regenerator bottoms (due to low salt vapor pressure) when salt water is produced
in the well stream inhibited by MEG. The salt solubility limit in MEG is frequently
exceeded, resulting in salt precipitation and fouling of column trays, exchangers, and
other equipment.
Comparison of Methanol and Glycol Injection
In a comprehensive set of experimental studies, Ng et al. (1987) determined that
methanol inhibited hydrate formation more than an equivalent mass of glycol in the
aqueous liquid.
Methanol usage (principally in flowlines and topside on platforms) predominates in
the Norwegian sector of the North Sea; MEG is principally used for hydrates in wells
and risers. In contrast, MEG dominates BPs inhibition use in the North Sea. Major
problems with use of MEG are high viscosity in long lines and salt precipitation upon
regeneration. Methanol use is much more prevalent than MEG in the United States.
While there is no robust strategy to discriminate between the use of methanol and
MEG, the choice seems to depend upon (a) plug location, (b) fluid effects, and (c)
properties of the plug in question. The table below provides a summary.
TABLE 9.3.7-2: METHANOL AND MONOETHYLENE GLYCOL
ATTRIBUTES COMPARISON
Hydrate
Inhibitor
Methanol (MeOH)
Advantages
-easy to recover
-for plugs in wells and risers
-low gas &condensate solubility
Disadvantages
-costly to recover
-high gas & condensate losses
-too little is worse than none
-costly in condensate product
(See Table 13 Section IV.B.1.a)
H-0806.35
9-88
1-Dec-00
9.3.7.2
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-89
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
is attributed to the type and amount of natural surfactants present in the oil or
condensate. In general oils with little tendency to form stable emulsions have been
observed to form hydrate plugs more easily than oils more prone to form stable
emulsions.
Rule-of-Thumb 11. Use of anti-agglomerants requires a substantial oil/condensate
phase. The maximum water to oil ratio (volume basis) for the use of an antiagglomerant is 40:60 on a volume basis.
The above rule-of-thumb is founded on two bases:
At higher WOR than 40:60, the water- in-oil emulsion may invert to an oil- in-water
emulsion. If the water phase is external, hydrates will grow beyond small droplets.
Coal slurry transport technology provides a maximum ratio of coal : liquid vehicle
of 40:60. Higher ratios increase the risk of having a non-transportable hydrate
phase, similar to a non-transportable coal slurry.
At the French Petroleum Institute, Behar et al. (1994) provided three performance
examples of an anti-agglomerant inhibitor in a two inch pilot loop, for a recombined
crude, a gas saturated oil, and a gas saturated condensate with WOR ratios of 0.3, 0.3,
and 0.1 ft 3 /ft3 respectively. The last case is shown with and witho ut anti-agglomerant
inhibition in the Figure 9.3.7-5 and Figure 9.3.7-6 respectively.
The gas consumption increases in both cases, indicating hydrate formation even with
anti-agglomerant inhibition. However the loop pressure drop (an indicator of hydrate
formation in a closed system) remains at a low value with inhibition (Figure 9.3.7-6),
while it increases rapidly without inhibitor in Figure 9.3.7-5. A low pressure drop
indicates that the effective viscosity is small and that the fluid components flow
readily.
Small amounts of surfactant are required relative to traditional inhibitors like
methanol. Behar et al. (1994) indicate that 1 wt% of an emulsifier is equivalent to 25
wt% methanol. Economics should include such factors as surfactant cost, emulsion
breaking, and recovery, and environmental considerations.
H-0806.35
9-90
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Without Anti-Agglomerantes
Condensat
e
Hydrate Plug
Condensat
e
With Anti-Agglomerantes
Hydrates in
Suspension
Condensat
e
H-0806.35
9-91
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-92
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Specific surfactants must be formulated and tested as emulsifying agents for each
composition of condensate. Many surfactants have been shown to promote hydrate
formation. Significant technology was transferred from earlier studies of enhanced oil
recovery.
Undocumented reports from Shell report an inhibition chemical which provides
inhibition at an order of magnitude lower concentration than the IFP chemical, without
being condensate specific. Reportedly, this additive allows the hydrates to form
before taking them into the condensate phase; some environmental concerns persist.
There is not a published commercial example of the use of an anti-agglomerant in an
offshore hydrates application. Yet the method holds great promise, especially for
deep, highly subcooled systems and shutdown with cold restart situations.
Weaknesses of the method include toxicity concerns, the need to break emulsions, and
the need to recover the expensive dispersant additive. Anti-agglomerant chemicals are
proprietary and chemical structures, properties, and performance are not in the open
literature. The next decade will undoubtedly see major advances in these chemicals.
Kinetic Inhibition
Kinetic inhibition of hydrate growth has a different mechanism than that of antiagglomerants. While there is evidence that the presence of a liquid hydrocarbon phase
aids inhibition, kinetic inhibitors prevent hydrate crystal nucleation and growth
without emulsifying in a hydrocarbon phase. Prevention of nucleation prevents
hydrate crystals from growing to a critical radius. Growth inhibition maintains
hydrates as small crystals, inhibiting progress to larger crystals.
Figure 9.3.7-7 shows the most common measure of kinetic inhibitor performance. The
line marked Lw-H-V represents the hydrate formation line, as predicted by the gas
gravity curve (9.3.3) or by HYDOFF (Section II.D), with hydrate formation to the left
and non- hydrate conditions to the right of the line. The horizontal line in Figure 9.3.77 represents a cooling curve for hydrate forming mixtures, such as may occur in a
pipeline (Figure 9.3.1-5). The object of kinetic inhibition is to maintain the operating
condition of a pipeline as far as possible to the left of the Lw-H-V line without
formation of hydrate plugs during the residence time of the fluids in the flow line.
H-0806.35
9-93
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-94
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-95
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-96
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In Figure 9.3.7-7, subcooling (T) is the measure of the lowest temperature that the
system can be operated relative to the hydrate formation temperature at a given
pressure. The maximum value of T is determined by a laboratory and/or pilot plant
experiment, and the pipeline is operated at a smaller value of T. The value of T
appears to be pressure independent; however T does depend upon the polymer,
molecular weight, and the amount of salt, glycol, and alcohol present. Recent results
suggest that water residence time can be as long as 30 days without hydrate formation,
when the lowest temperature of the pipeline is at least 3oF less than the maximum
subcooling (Tmax) with a good kinetic inhibitor.
Kinetic inhibitors are commonly polymers with several chemical formulas shown in
Figure 9.3.7-8. Each of the chemicals has a polyethylene backbone, connected to
pendant groups typically containing an amide (-N-C=O) linkage, frequently within a
five- or seven- member ring. As the inhibitor adsorbs on the hydrate crystal, the
pendant group penetrates specific sites (cages) of a hydrate crystal surface while the
polymer backbone extends along the surface. In order to continue growing, the crystal
must grow around the polymer; otherwise crystal growth is blocked.
Figure 9.3.7-9 is a schematic of one type of kinetic inhibition. Adsorption of three
kinetic inhibitor polymer strands are shown on a hydrate crystal surface. The filled
stars on each polymer strand represent the pendant groups which dock at the empty
star sites on the hydrate crystal surface. As indicated on the figure, the subcooling
T is directly proportional to the liquid-crystal surface tension (), but inversely
proportional to the length (L) between polymer strands.
If the amount of polymer adsorption increases, the distance L between the strands
decreases, resulting in an increased subcooling T performance. Conversely, if the
amount of inhibitor adsorption decreases (due to depletion by multiple small hydrate
crystals) the distance L between polymer strands increases, resulting in a smaller
subcooling T.
One of the first kinetic inhibitors developed was polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP), a
polymer whose structure is shown in Figure 9.3.7-8. Several companies have adopted
the use of PVP in onshore fields with a small subcooling (T) and short residence
time.
Initial field tests of kinetic inhibitors were reported by ARCO (Bloys et al., 1995) and
Texaco (Notz et al., 1995). Bloys reported the effectiveness of 0.3-0.4 wt% VC-713
in a 17 day test in a North Sea pipeline. The pipeline (8 in. diameter, 9.4
H-0806.35
9-97
1-Dec-00
DEEPS TAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-98
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-99
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
km long) had a flow rate of 20 MMscf/d, 0.5 bbl/MMscf condensate and 0.2
bbl/MMscf condensed water at a subcooling between 1 o C and 9 o C. Bloys suggested
that economics were very favorable for new developments, but marginal for retrofits
of systems with traditional inhibitors such as monoethylene glycol.
Texacos Notz et al. (1995) indicated successful use of polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) in
several wells and flow lines in Texas and in Wyoming, concluding that PVP was in
routine use in some Texaco fields. Notz further reported that PVP (at less than 1 wt%)
was effective in replacing methanol (at concentrations from 10 to 60 wt% in free
water) resulting in savings of as much as 50%. See Texaco Case Studies C.13 and
C.14 in Appendix C.
Rule-of-Thumb 12. PVP may be used to inhibit pipelines with subcooling less than
10 o F for flow lines with short gas residence times (less than 20 minutes).
Rule-of-Thumb 12 comes from Texacos Reliability Engineering: Gas Freezing &
Hydrate Study, a handbook for field personnel by Todd et al. (1996) which reflects
Texaco operating kinetic inhibitor practice with approximately 30 flow lines from
their Brookeland field.
Kinetic inhibitors more effective (but more expensive per pound) than PVP (illustrated
by the other chemical formulas in Figure 9.3.7-8) have a seven- member ring pendant
group in place of the five- member PVP pendant ring. The better kinetic inhibitors
provide additional subcooling with long water residence times.
Rule-of-Thumb 13: VC-713, PVCap, and co-polymers of PVCap can be used to
inhibit flow lines at subcooling less than 18 o F, with water phase residence times up
to 30 days.
Rule-of-Thumb 13 comes from commercial use of kinetic inhibitors, as indicated in
the below case study.
Case Study 7: North Sea Use of New Inhibitors
On July 22, 1996 British Petroleum (BP) initiated continuous commercial use of
kinetic inhibitors (called threshold hydrate inhibitors, THI) in flowlines in the West
Sole gas export lines (Argo et al, 1997). This followed from an extensive set of field
trials carried out in the Ravenspurn to Cleeton wet gas line (Corrigan et al., 1996).
H-0806.35
9-100
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
BP began THI use in a 16 inch I.D., 13 mile long pipeline from three Ravenspurn
platforms to Cleeton. At the time of the trial the maximum flow rate was 195
MMscf/d. For the purpose of the trial the flow rate was cut back to 90 mmscf/d to put
the line as far into the hydrate region as possible (16 o F of subcooling). Three trials
were carried out, all of which were successful. The trials included extensive periods
of shut-in, up to 7 days with successful restart. A typical water production rate was
1.6 bbl/MMscf with a line pressure of 1088 psia and a low temperature of 48 o F. The
THI dose rate was 3000-5000 ppm based on the free water phase. See Corrigan et al.
(1996) for further details.
Currently two lines (24 inch and 16 inch I.D., 35 miles long) from West Sole A, B,
and C and Hyde are being inhibited with THI. Water residence times can be as long
as 2-3 weeks, and the lines are 11 o F inside the hydrate region at operational
conditions. The gas is very lean produc ing very little condensate. Water content is
low and free water comes mainly from condensation. Due to the low amounts of
water and condensate, this is an atypical case, but nonetheless represents a severe test
for kinetic inhibitors.
Water production from all four West Sole platforms is 150-200 bbl/d, or about 0.3
bbl/MMscf with 250 MM scf/d total produced from the 3 West Sole platforms and the
remainder from the Hyde platform. The condensate rate is also 0.3 bbl/MMscf. The
THI pumping rate per platform is 2-3 liters/hr of solution which contains about 15
wt% active ingredient. The target injection rate is 3000 ppm based on the free water
phase.
9.3.7.3
H-0806.35
9-101
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
If the field is mature, record the current hydrate prevention strategy. Record the
existing or planned procedures for dealing with an unplanned shutdown. Provide a
generic description of the chemistry of the scale and corrosion inhibitors used.
2.
Obtain an accurate gas, condensate, and water analyses during a field drill test.
Estimate how these compositions will change over the life of the field. Estimate the
production rates of gas, oil, and water phases over the life of the field.
3.
4.
5.
Consider the pipeline topography along the ocean floor to determine where water
accumulations will occur at dips, resulting in points of hydrate formation.
6.
7.
Determine the water residence times in all parts of the system, especially in low points
of the pipeline.
8.
Estimate the subcooling T (at the lowest temperature and highest pressure) relative to
the equilibrium line over all parts of the system, including fluid separators and water
handling facilities. List the parts of the system which require protection.
9.
If T < 14 o F, consider the use of kinetic inhibitors. If T > 14o F, consider the use of
standard thermodynamic inhibitors or anti-agglomerants (no one has used antiagglomerants commercially as of January 1, 1998).
10. Perform economic calculations (capital and operating expenses) for four options (a)
drying, (b) methanol, (c) monoethylene glycol, and (d) kinetic inhibitors.
11. Determine if inhibitor recovery is economical.
12. Design the system hardware to measure: (a) temperature and pressure at pipe inlet and
outlet (b) water monitor for rates at receiving facility, and (c) the below chemical check
list
a) Has the inhibitor been tested with systems at the pipeline temperature and pressure?
b) Consider the environmental, safety, and health impact of the chemical.
c) Determine physical properties such as flash point (should be < 135F), viscosity
(should be <200 cp at lowest T), density, and pour point (should be >15F).
d) Determine the minimum, maximum, and average dosage of inhibitor.
e) Determine the storage and injection deployment methods.
f) Determine the material compatibility with gaskets, seals, etc.
g) Determine compatibility with other production chemicals.
h) Determine the compatib ility with the process downstream including cloud point,
foaming, and emulsification tendencies.
H-0806.35
9-102
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
1.
At the beginning of field life, water production may be low, so that only a small
amount of condensed water can be responsible for hydrate problems. The field
may be operating with a large subcooling T, but low dosages of chemicals are
required by low amount of water production. However, there are counter
examples of fields which begin producing water early in their life. Only fluid
measurements can assess this difference.
2.
At field mid- life, water produced down the line (if there is no upstream separation
facilities) will increase. Both produced water and condensed water may be
substantial. Total water may double or triple, but the condensed water amount
may be sufficient to dilute the solution to low salt concentrations, so that
maximum inhibitor injection rates may be required. Over a field lifetime, typical
salt concentration from produced water may vary from 0% to the reservoir
concentration.
3.
At the end of field life there may be 10 times as much water, but it is mostly saline
production. Both the increase in water salinity and the pressure decline of the field
may take the production fluids outside the hydrate P-T region.
4.
As an example, one BP field is forecast to dip into and out of the hydrate
formation region over its life.
9-103
1-Dec-00
9.3.7.4
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Heat Management
The discussion in this section has been excerpted from DeepStar reports CTR A601-a,
b, c, d, CTR 223-1, from Aarseth (1997), and from discussions with Statoil
researchers.
The retention of reservoir heat is one of the most efficient means of hydrate
prevention. Because all reservoirs contain water and because water acts as a heat sink
due to a high heat of vaporization, fluids at the wellhead are typically at temperatures
from 175 o F to 212 o F. When the reservoir fluid flows through a deep ocean pipeline
with an outer temperature at 40 o F, the temperature can quickly cool into the hydrate
region as determined by the heat transfer coefficient (U) between pipe and ocean.
Case Study 8. Pipeline Temperature with Heat Loss
Figure 9.3.7-10 (from DeepStar Report CTR 223) shows an offshore pipeline
temperature as a function of length, at various values of U, between the pipeline inlet
temperature (140 o F) and a separator 50 miles away. The pipeline in the figure was
assumed to be 50% buried and had a water flow of 1,527 bbl/d, a gas flow of 30.76
MMscf/d, and an oil flow of 22,723 bbl/d.
In Figure 9.3.7-10 the lowest, dashed line shows the temperature of the ocean with
length. The upper lines represent the pipeline temperature with no heat loss through
the pipe wall, with the temperature drop being due to expansion. However, with heat
loss through the pipewall, the temperature drops dramatically. With overall heat
transfer coefficients of U = 0.17 and U = 3.3 BTU/hr-ft2 - o F, the separator temperature
is 70 o F or 50 o F, respectively. Hydrates can easily form at these temperatures,
particularly at the higher pressures (densities) necessary to make pipeline transport
economical. It is concluded that a lower heat transfer coefficient is needed to prevent
hydrate formation.
The temperature profiles in the above case study are for a flowing pipeline. If the
pipeline were shut- in, the system would rapidly cool to the ambient conditions
represented by the dashed line at the bottom of Figure 9.3.7-10. At the low ambient
temperatures, hydrate problems are particularly severe and blockages may occur,
particularly when the system is re-started.
If hydrates form in an insulated pipeline, the pipeline may be depressurized to achieve
a hydrate equilibrium temperature just above 32 o F, so that heat will flow into the
hydrates from the ocean, which has a temperature around 40 o F. In such cases, the
H-0806.35
9-104
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
insulation is a hindrance or barrier which prevents heat flow from the ocean, making
hydrate dissociation much more difficult. As a consequence it is good operating
practice to inject large quantities of MeOH or MEG into the pipeline before a planned
shut-in.
Hydrates can be prevented in pipelines by three types of heat control:
1.
burying the pipeline to provide heating and insulation by the ocean floor,
2.
insulating the pipeline, using non-jacketed insulation, pipe- in-pipe systems, and
bundling systems, or
3.
Pipeline burial is a good means of providing pipeline insulation and protection. The
degree of insulation depends upon the thermal gradient in the earth along the pipeline
route, the pipeline depth, and the water temperature. Expenses for providing a trench
and burial system for pipelines may be very high, particularly at great depths. On the
other hand, heat control systems through pipeline insulation or heating may be laid
with the pipeline from a barge. Pipeline insulation and heating methods are given
consideration in design, but insulation alone offer no protection for long-term shut- ins.
Insulation Methods
Figure 9.3.7-11 shows the three categories of insulated pipelines: (a) non-jacketed, (b)
pipe-in-pipe, and (c) bundled flowlines. The non-jacketed system (Figure 9.3.7-11 a)
consists of an insulated pipe with a coating. The minimum overall coefficient
achievable with a non-jacketed system is 0.3 BTU/hr- ft2 - o F (CTR A601-a) and costs
are typically $50-$300/ft. for pipes with diameters between 8 inches and 12 inches.
The pipe- in-pipe (PIP) system (Figure 9.3.7-11 b) is the most thoroughly tested of the
three types. In this system the flow pipe is within an outer pipe, with either insulation
or vacuum between the two pipes, sometimes aided by a reflecting screen in the
annulus. With a 3-4 inch insulation layer, the PIP system can provide an overall heat
transfer coefficient (U) of 0.14 - 0.6 BTU/hr- ft2 - o F.
H-0806.35
9-105
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
TR H-0806.35
9-106
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-107
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-108
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 9.3.7-11c, shows a bundled line with two or more flowlines and a start-up
water line with an insulator, all in an outer casing. Bundles are fabricated on shore in
lengths up to 10 miles and towed to their offshore position, currently at water depths
of up to 5,000 feet Overall heat transfer coefficients as low as 0.1 BTU/hr- ft2 - o F can
be achieved.
Figure 9.3.7-12 (from DeepStar Report II CTR 223) shows the increase in temperature
at the platform riser as a function of insulation thickness, with two pipelines flowing
together compared to an individual flow, when each line has a water flow of 1,527
bbl/d, a gas flow of 30.76 MM scf/d, and an oil flow of 22,723 bbl/d. The addition of
a second flowline can reduce the insulation thickness required to obtain a given riser
temperature, or the second flowline will provide a higher riser temperature for a given
insulation.
Figure 9.3.7-13 and Figure 9.3.7-14 (from DeepStar Report CTR A601-a) compare the
cost of the three above types of insulation for water depths of 6000 feet over 60 miles
at oil production rates of 25,000 and 50,000 bbl/d, respectively. If an average U = 0.3
BTU/hr-ft2 - o F is required with a flowline pressure of 4000 psia, bundled flow lines are
more cost effective.
Pipeline Heating Methods
DeepStar Report CTR A601-b concludes that, where pipeline depth precludes
depressurization below the hydrate formation pressure, heating may be the only option
to clear a hydrate plug. Yet as noted in Section I, heating a hydrate plug can be very
dangerous. DeepStar Report CTR A601-c concludes that pipeline heating will be very
expensive, at least 1MW of power is required for a 20 o C (36 o F) increase of a 10
inch pipeline 15 miles long.
1.
H-0806.35
In the future Statoil will use heating more extensively in order to reduce the
amount of methanol or other chemicals used. Bundles will be used in 1998, and
direct heat thereafter. The Chevron/Conoco Britannia project will start in the
North Sea in 1998 using a bundled line to heat fluids. The three common means of
heat management are (a) bundling hot water lines (for 10 km and return) in
production lines to prevent hydrate formation (b) Combipipe (shown in Figure
9.3.7-15) for induction heating, with current flowing through 3 cables outside of
pipe but within insulation, with corrosion protection,), (c) direct electrical heating
for 50-60 km long lines (shown in Figure 9.3.7-16) in which the pipeline is the
primary conductor with a current return line at 1m
9-109
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-110
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-111
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Hot
Water
Input
A)
Pipeline
Bundled
B) Combi- Pipe
Thermal
Insulation
Insulation
Flowline
Pipelin Pipelin
e
e
Insulation
Cold
Water
Return
H-0806.35
Heating
Cables
9-112
Pipewall with
Corrosion Protection
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Electric
Current
Pipeline
Electric
Current
1 meter
Current Return Wire
H-0806.35
9-113
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-114
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DES IGN GUIDELINE
in parallel to the pipeline. It should be noted however, that such heating tools are in
the planning stage and commercial use has yet to be documented.
9.3.8
H-0806.35
1.
2.
Simulate the pressure-temperature profile in the well, flow lines and platform at
the worst case (usually during winter months) over the life of the field. Estimate
the water residence times at all points in the system. Account for both normal
cooling (e.g. in pipelines as in Example 2) and Joule-Thomson expansions across
restrictions (e.g. in wells, chokes, and control valves.
3.
Estimate the subcooling T (at the lowest temperature and highest pressure) at
each point in the process relative to the hydrate equilibrium curve. Hydrates may
form in systems with subcooling Ts less than 2-4 o F.
4.
5.
6.
Design large pressure drops with either dry gas or expansions at high temperature
points in the process. Where large expansions of wet gas are unavoidable, (e.g. at
choke valves) provide methanol injection capability upstream of the restriction.
7.
8.
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DES IGN GUIDELINE
particles might accumulate, such as at blind flanges at turns, elbows, screens and
filters, upstream of restrictions etc. Avoid unnecessary bends. Bend radii less
than 5 times the pipe diameter should be avoided to facilitate coiled tubing entry.
A riser tube radius should be from 20-80 feet
9.
With a high probability hydrates will form over the system lifetime. Provide
hydrate remediation methods (see Section 9.4 for justification) in the design.
a) For pipelines, safe remediation often implies depressurization from both ends
of a hydrate plug. Optimally, multiple access points in a pipeline (see b) are
invaluable in locating and remediating hydrate and paraffin plugs.
Alternatively dual production lines should be used to provide for
depressurization of wellheads from the upstream side of a pipeline plug.
As a second best method, provide for depressurization through a wellhead
service line (for corrosion, paraffin, or hydrate inhibitor injection) with bypass
capability for check valve(s) at the point of injection. As a minimum a spare
flange and valve should be provided at the wellhead or manifold, so that
depressurization can be done via connection to offshore production vessel (see
ARCO Case Study 14. Technology is not yet available for location of the end
of plugs or the safe heating of plugs in ocean pipelines.
b) Subsea access points should be considered at the well manifold and at 4 mile
intervals along the pipeline, as shown in Figure 9.3.8-1. Such access points
will facilitate (a) the location of a hydrate (b) venting of excessive fluid head
from plugs in deep sea lines, (c) injection of hydrate inhibitors, (d) coiled
tubing entry, and (e) pig launching.
c) In wells, hydrate remediation occurs by approaching one end of a plug via
chemical injection, depressurization, heating, or coiled tubing. Case Study 16
in Section 9.3.3.5 indicates that normal well lubricators can be used at the
swab valve with careful balancing of pressure.
d) On the platform hydrate plugs may be located using tools such as a
thermocamera. With the accurate location of the plug ends, remediation may
be done through chemical injection, heating, or depressurization.
H-0806.35
9-116
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-117
1-Dec-00
9.4
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
An exception was the LASMO Staffa subsea field in the North Sea, which was abandoned in 1995 due to low
production problems with combined waxes and hydrates. See Case Study C.6. for further history on this field,
which included a 1 mile flowline replacement.
H-0806.35
9-118
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Case/Operator
1. Placid
Field/
Region
GC 29
2. Chevron
Wyoming
3. Chevron
GOM
4. Chevron
Oklahoma
5. Chevron
6. Lasmos
7. Texaco
8. Texaco
H-0806.35
Line
Line
Size
Type
16" Gas Cond.
4"
Gas Cond.
WD
(ft)
200 ft
Gas Lift
Inj. Lines
4"
Gas Sales
Canada
6"
Gas cond.
Export
North Sea
8"
Multiphase
GB 189
GC 6
23/4"
3/4"
Gas
Gas
725 ft
600 ft
Time
Winter Complete
Winter Complete
1995
Partial
Winter Complete
1994
1995
1992
Complete
Complete
Partial
9-119
Heating Tape
&
Insulation
Flowing
None
Flowing
Depressurize
Current
Prev. Method
Gas Dehydration
MeOH Inj.
MeOH Inj.
Heat MeOH
Inj. MeOH
Inj. MeOH
Vary Flow Rate
None
Depressurize
Inj. MeOH
Heat Gas
Remove Restriction
@ Flow Meter
MeOH during
Winter
None
Depressurize after
24 Hours S/I
MeOH
None
None
Flowing
Flowing
Flowing
Replaced
2km
blocked
section
Same as before
Planning to abandon
Depressurize
Inj. MeOH
Inj. MeOH
Gas Dehydration
Depressurize
Inj. MeOH
Inj. MeOH
Gas Dehydration
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Case/Operator
Field/
Region
Line
Size
Line
Type
WD
(ft)
9. Texaco
North Sea
N.E. Frigg
16
Instrament
Valve
Gas Cond.
11. Marathon
EB 873
Gas Export
800 ft
12. Philips
Cod N. Sea
16
13. Texaco
14. Texaco
Wyoming
Removed?
Current
Prev. Method
Complete
None
Flowing
Inj. MeOh
1990
Partial
MeOH
Flowing
Depressurize
Inject MeOH
MeOH Injection
1995
partial
Inadequate
MeOH
Flowing
Inject more
MeOH
Maintain
MeOH Inj.
1978
Complete
MeOH
Pigging
Pig Stuck
Depressurize
MeOH Inj.
MeOH Inj.
Dehydrate Cond.
Gas
1995
Complete
MeOH
Field Test
Depressurize
Comb. Of KI
and MeOH
Gas
1995
Complete
MeOH
Field Test
Depressurize
Comb. Of KI
and MeOH
Gas Cond.
1994
Complete
MeOH Inj.
Flowing/
Shut-in/
Re-start
Depressurize
Inj. MeOH
Continue
MeOH Inj.
15. Statoil
Tommeliten
(Experimental) North Sea
Time
16. Statoil
Tommeliten
Gas
Cond.
11.5 km
1994
Complete
MeOH
17. Statoil
Tommeliten
Gas
Cond.
11.5 km
1994
Complete
None
H-0806.35
9-120
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Field/
Region
Line
Size
Line
Type
WD
(ft)
Time
Case/Operator
Removed?
Current
Prev. Method
18. Oxy
North Sea
Gas
Cond.
Complete
MeOH
Flowing
Depressurize
MeOH Inj.
Ensure Proper
MeOH Inj.
19. Amoco
North Sea
Complete
None(Dry)
Flowing
Depressurize
MeOh Inj.
Ensure
Dehydration
20. Petrobras
Brazil
Manifold
Complete
Ethanol
Start-up
Depressurize
Ethanol Inj.
Drain Manifold of
Water before Start-up
21. Exxon
California
Well
1989
Complete
None
Drilling
22. Exxon
Gulf of
Mex.
Well
1989
Complete
None
Drilling
23. Exxon
S. America
Well
1993
Complete
None
Testing
Coiled Tubing
Hot Glycol
24. Exxon
Gulf of
Mex.
Well
1993
Complete
Methanol
Shut-In
Hot CaBr2
Abandonment
H-0806.35
9-121
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
9.4.1.1
H-0806.35
9-122
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
hydrate particles have water as an occluded phase. Infrequently, when gas is bubbled
through water, gas is the occluded phase within a hydrate shell.
In an turbulent system such as a pipeline, high agitation rates provide for surface
renewal, which can form hydrate particles and agglomerations to build up and obstruct
pipe flow. Such a build-up is one major concern of this section.
Rule-of-Thumb 15: In gas-water systems hydrates can form on the pipe wall. In
gas/condensate or gas/oil systems, hydrates frequently form as particles which
agglomerate and bridge as larger masses in the bulk streams.
Rule-of-Thumb 15 was obtained through multiple studies on flow loops/wheels at
Statoils Research Center in Trondheim, Norway. In gas systems, water may splash or
adsorb on the pipe wall where hydrate nucleation and growth may occur. In an
oil/condensate system, the light hydrocarbon liquid above the water prevents splashing
and causes hydrate particle formation and agglomeration at the liquid- liquid interface.
In a black oil system, often only a small amount (less than 5 volume %) of water
forms hydrates, but all the water and condensate are trapped in the open, porous
system and can form a blockage (Urdahl, 1997). In Statoils Tommeliten Field
blockages formed from a hydrate slurry with < 1 volume % of the water present. Such
results are fluid dependent; while some oil/water systems convert to hydrates almost
immediately with fairly low water conversion, other oil systems are more difficult to
convert, but practically all water might be transformed to hydrates.
Rule-of-Thumb 16: Agglomeration of individual hydrate particles causes an open
hydrate mass which has a high porosity (typically >50%) and is permeable to gas
flow (permeability to length ratio of 8.7 - 11 10-15 m). Such an open hydrate mass
has the unusual property of transmitting pressure while being a substantial liquid
flow impediment. Hydrate particles anneal to lower permeability at longer times.
Rule-of-Thumb 16 was obtained through both field and laboratory studies at Statoils
Tommeliten Gamma field and SINTEFs research center (Berge et al., 1996). Plug
porosity is determined by forming conditions and fluid effects; some plugs can have
porosities considerably higher than 50% while other plug porosities can be
considerably lower. Because liquid surface tension is much higher than that of gas by
about a factor of 1000, hydrate plugs are much less permeable to liquid than to gas.
H-0806.35
9-123
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 9.4.1-1 from Lingelem et al. (1994) of Norsk Hydro is a schematic of the case
of hydrate formation along the wall periphery in a gas system. This slow buildup of
hydrates along the wall may be characterized by the gradual increase in line P
witnessed in 2 of 3 DeepStar field tests in a Wyoming gas-condensate line (Hatton et
al., 1997).
Figure 9.4.1-2 shows the case of hydrate formation as agglomerating or bridging
particles in a condensate or oil system, providing the open, porous structure. The
Statoil experience suggests that Figure 9.4.1-2 represents the more common case in
hydrate formation. However, there are two schools of thought about hydrate
formation; (1) the gradual buildup of hydrate formation on the walls, resulting in the
less porous plugs seen in a few, thoroughly instrumented DeepStar field tests (See
Case Studies C.25, C.26, and C.27) and the multitude of Statoil studies which suggests
a high porosity, bridging hydrate structure may be the norm (See Case Studies C.15,
C.16, and C.17).
The state-of-the-art of hydrate studies in field pipelines is too small to determine the
causes and frequency of either type of hydrate buildup. It is apparent from the small
number of studies however, that a wide range of hydrate porosities may be attained.
The porosity/permeability of hydrate plugs largely determines their remediation. For
example, if a hydrate plug is depressurized from only one end, flow through the plug
will cause Joule-Thomson cooling just as in Example 11, so that the downstream side
of the plug may be in the hydrate formation region at the lower temperature. This
effect has been observed at the Tommeliten field (Berge et al., 1996) and provides
both technical and safety reasons for depressuring a plug from both sides. However,
Case Studies C.25, C.26, and C.27 detail safe techniques for depressuring one side of a
hydrate plug in DeepStar Wyoming field studies by SwRI (Hatton et al., 1997).
Figure 9.4.1-3 shows two types of pressure drop (P) increases which occur with
hydrate blockage of lines. At the left, Figure 9.4.1-3 (Atypical) shows the gradual
increase in P which would occur if hydrates formed an ever-decreasing annulus as
shown in Figure 9.4.1-1. Figure 9.4.1-3 (Typical) shows the more typical case of
multiple spikes in P before the final plug forms; these spikes indicated that particles
are forming blockages and releasing, as depicted in the agglomeration of particles in
Figure 9.4.1-2.
H-0806.35
9-124
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
FIGURE 9.4.1-1: HYDRATE ACCUMULATION IN GAS PIPELINE (FROM LINGELEM ET AL,, 1994)
H-0806.35
9-125
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
FIGURE 9.4.1-2: HYDRATE ACCUMULATION IN CONDENSATE PIPELINE (FROM LINGELEM ET AL, 1994)
H-0806.35
9-126
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-127
1-Dec-00
9.4.1.2
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
9.4.2
H-0806.35
9-128
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(with a typical pressure drop schematic in Figure 9.4.1-3 Atypical), hydrates usually
cause a series of sharp spikes (Typical) in pressure as hydrate masses form,
agglomerate, and break, prior to final blockage. With paraffins the pressure buildup is
more gradual, as deposition on the periphery of the pipe wall causes a gradual increase
in line pressure drop. Pressure changes immediately before the blockage should be
studied in addition to such things as fluid slugging, gas/oil ratio, water cut, reservoir
pressure, and choke setting, all of which can affect the flow and pressure drop.
When blockages occur in wells it may be difficult to distinguish the cause. Frequently
only heating or mechanical means are available to detect the plug source. In flowlines
and in wells, solid blockages of scale, rust, sand, etc. are less readily detected and
removed than hydrates or paraffins, so treatment for the more solid plugs should be
considered as when hydrate and wax treatments fail.
In this section on detection of hydrate blockages Section 9.4.2.1 considers early
warning signs of hydrates, and Section 9.4.3.1 considers methods to determine the
center and length of the plug. A significant amount of material in this section was
obtained from DeepStar IIA Report A212-1, Paraffin and Hydrate Detection Systems,
by Paragon Engineering and Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) (April 1996).
Another major resource was the Statoil Hydrate Research/Remediation group, who
contributed through in-depth interviews (July 13-15, 1997); this group has more field
experience in hydrate remediation than any other at present, perhaps by an order of
magnitude.
9.4.2.1
H-0806.35
9-129
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Early warning methods in the subsea pipeline (9.4.2.1A) and platform (Section
9.4.2.1B) are discussed independently below. However, even with the methods listed
in this section, there is a significant need for better hydrate detection.
Early Warnings in Subsea Pipelines
There are four methods for warnings of hydrate formation in a subsea pipeline: (1)
pigging returns, (2) changes in fluid rates and compositions at the platform separator,
(3) pressure drop increases, and (4) acoustic detection. Each method is discussed in
the following paragraphs.
Pigging Returns. Periodically a flexible plastic ball or cylinder called a pig is
pressure driven through pipelines to clear them of condensed matter. The pigs trip is
initiated via a pig launcher and ended by a pig catcher or receiver, with the debris
swept from the pipeline into a pig trap. A detailed DeepStar II CTR 640-1,
Pipeline/Flowline Pigging Strategies, by H.O. Mohr Research and Engineering, Inc.
(August 1994) provides a tutorial of this technology.
Frequently hydrate particles are found in pig traps before hydrate blockages occur in
pipelines, providing notice of the need for corrective action, e.g. increased methanol
injection. For example hydrate particles may occur when they have been suspended in
an oil or condensate with a natural surfactant, such as the Norsk Hydro oil shown in
Figure 9.3.9-4 and accompanying discussion in Section 9.3.9. Statoils Gullfaks
subsea installation may have undergone several start- ups with hydrate present, but
without problems (Urdahl, 1997) before a blockage in January 1996.
Rule-of-Thumb 17. A lack of hydrate blockages does not indicate a lack of
hydrates. Frequently hydrates form but flow (e.g. in an oil with a natural surfactant
present) and can be detected in pigging returns.
Pigging returns should be carefully examined for evidence of hydrate particles.
Hydrate masses are stable even at atmospheric pressure in a pig receiver or catcher
discharge. The endothermic process of hydrate dissociation causes released water to
form an ice shell, which provides a protective coating to inhibit rapid dissociation
(Gudmundsson and Borrehaug, 1996).
However, it may be very expensive to provide pigging, either via a mobile pigging
vessel over the well or from the well head without round-trip pigging capability. Such
costs make examinations of pigging returns an infrequent luxury.
H-0806.35
9-130
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-131
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Pressure Drop Increases. Pressure drop (P) will increase and flow rate will decrease
if the pipe diameter is decreased by hydrate formation at the wall in a gas line. Since
P in pipes is proportion to the square of turbulent flow rates, the change in P is
more sensitive than the change in flow. With hydrates however, a large restriction
may be necessary over a long length before a substantial pressure drop occurs. For
example, if a hydrate decreased the effective pipe diameter from 12 to 10 inches over
a 1000 foot section, the P would only increase 0.05 psi with 10 MM scf/d of gas
operating at 1000 psia and 39oF. In addition, the P trace usually contains substantial
noise, making it difficult to observe trends.
Statoils Austvik (1997) suggested that, while a gradual pressure increase in hydrate
formation will occur for gas systems, a gradual pressure increase is not typical for a
gas and oil/condensate system. In gas and oil/condensate systems, Statoils experience
is that, without advance warning the line pressure drop will show sharp spikes just
before blockages occur. Figure 9.4.2-2 shows the BP field experiment (Corrigan et
al., 1996) with methanol stoppage in a North Sea gas pipeline with little condensate or
free water; in that figure step changes and spikes in P are more prevalent than a
gradual increase.
In contrast, recent DeepStar Wyoming trials (Hatton et al., 1997) show both gradual
and spiked pressure drops, in a gas-condensate field. In Case Studies C.25, 26, and 27
the pressure built gradually upstream of a plug, while pressure spikes downstream
indicated hydrate sloughing from the wall, with agglomeration and bridging
downstream.
However, the DeepStar tests had five pressure sensors spaced at intervals of a few
thousand feet. As indicated in the calculation two paragraphs earlier, with only two
pressure sensors at either end of a line, severe hydrate wall buildup must occur in
order to sense a significant pressure drop, due to the dampening effect of the gas.
Most pipelines are likely to experience hydrates as sudden, extreme pressure drops.
H-0806.35
9-132
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
FIGURE 9.4.2-1: WATER PRODUCTION FOR WET GAS LINE (FROM CORRIGAN ET AL, 1996)
H-0806.35
9-133
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
FIGURE 9.4.2-2: DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE DUE TO HYDRATE BLOCKAGE (FROM CORRIGAN ET AL, 1996)
H-0806.35
9-134
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The only hydrate crystal detection instrumentation suitable for subsea use
identified by this survey is sand monitoring instrumentation. In a limited
number of laboratory tests, the Fluenta acoustic sand monitor has detected
hydrates. However, a detailed study using the Fluenta monitor has not been
conducted.
A typical acoustic sensor from Fluenta is shown in Figure 9.4.2-3. Over 280 units
have been installed to detect sand impingement on pipe by clamping the unit onto the
flow line downstream of a 90o elbow or 45o bend. At flow rates as low as 3 ft/sec the
unit can detect 50 micron sand particles. Such units are rated for water depths of 4000
ft. and may be diver-assisted or ROV installed with an underwater cable.
Acoustic sensors quantify the hail on a tin roof sound typical of hydrate particles
impinging on a wall at a pipeline bend. However, this unit has yet to be field tested in
a subsea application. The initial background note of the Paragon Engineering and
SwRI (April 1996) study presets a caution which still exists:
This survey did not identify any proven hydrate or paraffin deposition measurement
instrumentation for subsea multiphase flow lines or any other type of fluid
transmission lines. For gas transmission lines, ultrasonic instrumentation has worked
in specific applications and for single-phase liquid or gas lines, an acoustical/pigging
system has been proposed.
H-0806.35
9-135
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-136
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-137
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-138
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
b.
c.
H-0806.35
9-139
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-140
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-141
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
9-142
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
flowline obstruction one-third the way between the platform and the well. If the
pressure is suddenly decreased downstream, the rate of downstream pressure recovery
should be one- half the rate of upstream pressure decrease. With low porosity plugs
patience may be required, as illustrated in the following case study.
_____________________________________________________________________
Case Study 12. Depressurizing the Blockage for Location
In January 1996 Statoil experienced a hydrate blockage in a black oil system in a 6inch I.D., 1 mile- long line in the Gullfaks field. The normal oil rate was 18,000 ft 3 /d,
the water rate was 16,242 ft3 /d, and the GOR was 100-360 scf3 /scf3 .
The normal line operating pressure was 2420 psia and the hydrate equilibrium
pressure (at the low temperature) was 261 psia. With the well shut in, the downstream
pressure at the platform was rapidly reduced to 1670 psia. Figure 9.4.2-8 shows
blockage upstream and downstream pressure response (note expanded scale). Over a
25 hour period, the upstream pressure decreased about 73 psi while the downstream
pressure increased the same amount. It was concluded that the plug was located midway in the pipe. See Case Study 15 (Section 9.4.3.1 D.) for the removal of this Statoil
plug.
Two points should be emphasized about this case study: (1) safety and (2) rate. First,
the small diagnostic pressure reduction was made from one side of the plug, well
above the hydrate dissociation pressure, to prevent safety problems associated with a
plug projectile (Section 9.2) propelled by a high differential pressure.
Second, pressure recovery was very slow, averaging about 3psig/hr. This slow rate
may not be noticed if pressure is not carefully monitored by platform personnel, who
may be inclined to discount a slow changes. The slow rate of pressure change was
thought to be due to the fact that most of the line contained liquid, causing the
apparent plug porosity to be about 1000 times smaller than that for gas flow.
_____________________________________________________________________
H-0806.35
9-143
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-144
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Distance L
Plug
Upstream
Downstream
2/3 L
H-0806.35
1/3 L
9-145
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-146
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Statoil, the company with the most methodical, documented experience in hydrate
remediation, prefers the above method of plug location. The method locates the
blockage center and the relative volumes upstream and downstream of the
blockage(s). The disadvantage of the method is that it does not give any idea of the
length of the blockage, how close the blockage is to the platform (due to the unknown
plug porosity), or how multiple plugs may affect this location determination. Statoil
locates the plug-platform proximity by inhibitor back-injection (see Rule-of- Thumb
18) or by back-pressurization, as shown in the following method.
Pressure Increase. To locate a complete pipeline blockage one method is to measure
the pressure increase as metered amounts of gas are injected at the platform. The rate
of pressure increase is correlated to the rate of gas input to determine the length for a
given diameter line between the platform injection point and the blockage.
_____________________________________________________________________
Example 13. Back-Pressurization to Determine Plug Location.
An offshore 16 inch ID gas pipeline is in full production when a hydrate plug occurs,
blocking flow for a 0.6 gravity gas. The line is shut- in and the pipeline cools to the
ambient temperature of 39.2o F. Before hydrate dissociation can begin to take place,
the approximate location of the plug end should be obtained to determine the best
remediation method and evaluate safety concerns.
One standard location procedure is back-pressurization. This method consists of
pumping a known amount of gas into the pipeline and measuring the change in
pressure over time. From these pressure values, an estimate of volume can be
obtained through PV=ZnRT.
The following assumptions are made for the problem:
1. no porosity of the plug,
2. no liquid in the pipeline,
3. none of the injected gas condenses,
4. constant temperature throughout the pipeline,
5. the heat of gas compression is dissipated rapidly, and
6. the pipeline is initially at atmospheric pressure.
H-0806.35
9-147
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
A reciprocating pump on the platform is used to inject gas at a rate of 4.89 lbmole/min
into the pipeline, so that the pipeline pressure slowly increases. The heat of
compression is assumed to be dissipated in the ocean and the entire temperature
remains at 39.2 o F.
The time required for the pipeline to attain even increments of pressure (e.g. 400, 600,
850 psia, etc.) are measured and these data can be used to estimate the pipeline volume
downstream of the plug via the equation:
PV = ZnRT V =
ZnRT
P
where
Z = gas compressibility as a function of P,T, and gas composition. Values
obtained through an equation-of-state or from gas gravity compressibility charts
(Figures 23-7,8,9 of the GPSA Engineering Handbook (1994))
n = value obtained from data (data table below)
P = corresponding pressure for n (data table below)
R = 10.73 (Universal Gas Constant in units of psia, oR, lbmol, ft3)
T = 498.87oR (seafloor temperature)
Five data points are averaged to estimate the volume of the pipeline between the
hydrate plug and the platform. The first data point calculation is as follows:
A line pressure of 400 psia is attained after 60.76 minutes when 297 lbmoles of gas
have been pumped into the line. The gas compressibility is estimated at 0.915 from
Figures 23-7,8,9 of the GPSA Engineering Handbook (1994). The pipeline volume is
estimated as:
V=
ZnRT
(.915)(297 )(10 .73)(498.9) =3637 ft 3
P
(400)
The first estimate of the pipe volume down stream of the plug is 3637ft3.
H-0806.35
9-148
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Time (Minutes)
Pressure
(psia)
Est Volume
(ft3 )
60.76
400
3637
96.58
600
3664
144.39
850
3667
198.61
1100
3662
300.01
1500
3663
3658
This same calculation is summarized for four other data points, in the above table.
The average approximation for the volume after the hydrate plug was 3658ft3 . The
cross-sectional area of the pipeline is calculated, in order to estimate the pipeline
length between the plug and the platform. The pipeline cross-sectional area is
2
D 2 16 2
2 1 ft
=1.396 ft 2
A=
=
=201 .06in
2
4
4
144in
H-0806.35
1.
Because hydrate plugs are frequently porous (>50%) and permeable, they transmit
flow and act as a leak in a system considered to be a closed (i.e. no permeability)
2.
3.
The liquid hold- up in the line must be known. This is particularly a disadvantage
when significant elevation changes result in unknown liquid holdup profiles, or
when the hydrate plug has accumulated liquid in front of it.
9-149
1-Dec-00
4.
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The location of multiple plugs cannot be addressed by this method; only the plug
located nearest the point of injection can be determined.
acoustic response is a function of the relative amounts of gas and liquid, which are
usually unknown and may occupy portions of a pipeline.
6.
reflected pulses are dampened by walls, valves, bends, and by a flexible plug.
H-0806.35
9-150
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-151
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The platform end of the flowline is pressurized inducing a hoop strain, sensed by the
pipeline caliper. The internal pressure causes a hoop strain that results in an outward
movement of the caliper which varies with the wall deposits of the pipe. Lack of hoop
strain across a section of pipe would indicate a blockage. The signal is transmitted to
a work boat at the surface.
This method was successfully used in the North Sea on an 8- inch, 15 km long flow
line. Results of the strain gage are shown in Figure 9.4.2-9b for 20 points at various
lengths along a line blocked with paraffin. Points 13, 14, and 15 are shown to be
blocked with hard plugs, between visco-elastic plugs (points 15-18 and 3-13) at either
end. The map in Figure 9.4.2-9b was in agreement with the contents of the flow line
when it was replaced. Recovery and deployment of each measurement required 1-2
hours. Due t necessity for ROV deployment, this method yet to be used to locate a
hydrate.
Recommended Procedure to Locate Hydrate Plug
There is no one precise method to locate the hydrate plug, so a combination of the
above methods are indicated below for best results.
H-0806.35
1.
Estimate the hydrate formation temperature and pressure of the blockage relative
to the conditions of the pipeline. Use a simulation to determine at what length the
contents of the pipeline enter the hydrate formation envelope during normal
operations. Confirm the simulation with a linear interpolation between the
wellhead and platform temperature and pressure. This will provide an
approximation of the plug initiation point, but with flow blockage the entire
pipeline will cool into the hydrate stability region. This calculation should be done
during initial line design.
2.
Depressurize the platform end of the plug to about 2/3 of the pressure between the
normal operating pressure and the hydrate formation pressure. Do not decrease the
pressure on one side of the plug below the hydrate formation pressure. Monitor
the rate of pressure increase at the platform and the pressure decrease at the
wellhead for the lesser of (a) either 24 hours or (b) until a significant pressure
change (e.g. 75 psig) is obtained at each point. Use the rate of pressure change at
wellhead and platform to determine the center point of plug(s), or relative volumes
at each end of the plug(s).
3.
Fill the riser with inhibitor to attempt to determine the distance between the
platform and the plug. This may be inaccurate due to pipeline elevation changes,
etc.
4.
Back-pressure the pipeline and monitor the pressure increase for a measured
volume of gas input. Estimate the distance from platform to plug by the rate of
9-152
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
pressure change, relative to gas input, for a given compressibility and simulated
liquid retention volume. Use this technique with method 2 to determine volume
before the plug.
5.
9.4.3
2.
3.
4.
Applications of the above methods can be further divided into three cases: (a) partial
blockage, (b) total blockage without substantial liquid head, and (c) total blockage
with a liquid head. The following discussions concern only the final two cases. It is
assumed that any indication of a partial blockage will be promptly treated with
massive doses of methanol, the most effective inhibitor. Combinations of the above
methods are simultaneously tried.
Rule of Thumb 19. Regardless of the method(s) used to dissociate the hydrates, the
time required for hydrate dissociation is usually days, weeks, or months. After a
deliberate dissociation action is taken, both confidence and patience are required to
observe the result over a long period of time.
Often it is suggested that corrective actions be changed almost hourly when immediate
results are not observed. Rapidly changing corrective actions, results in thrashing
without significant effects on plug removal. The waiting aspect of plug removal is
frequently the most difficult for platform operating and engineering personnel, who
are accustomed to producing results on a continuous basis. Typical times of days or
weeks are required for plug removal as indicated by Appendix C case studies.
Measurements such as pressure drop across the plug are continuously monitored and
changed deliberately, only after some time has passed to gain assurance of initial
method failure.
Rule of Thumb 20. When dissociating a hydrate plug, it should always be assumed
that multiple plugs exist both from a safety and a technical standpoint. While one
plug may cause the initial flow blockage, a shut-in will cause the entire line to
H-0806.35
9-153
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
rapidly cool into the hydrate region, and low lying points of water accumulation will
rapidly convert to hydrate at the water-gas interfaces.
9.4.3.1
H-0806.35
9-154
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
laboratory and field studies these plugs were found to be very porous (>50%) and
permeable. Porous, permeable hydrates easily transmit gas pressure while still acting
to prevent free flow in the pipeline. When the pressure was decreased at both ends of
a highly porous hydrate plug, the pressure decreased throughout the entire plug to an
almost constant value. The dissociation temperature at the hydrate front is determined
by the pipeline pressure. The depressurization results in a uniform hydrate
dissociation temperature which is in equilibrium with the LW -H-V line pressure in
Figure 9.4..3-1, predicted by the methods of Section 9.4.3 and 9.4.4.
H-0806.35
9-155
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-156
1-Dec-00
DEEPS TAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-157
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-158
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-159
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-160
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In the above conceptual picture, it is assumed that the pipeline is exposed to turbulent,
deep ocean water so that the pipe wall temperature is constant at 39 o F. If a line is
insulated, hydrate dissociation becomes much more difficult because the insulation
which prevented heat loss from the pipe in normal operation will prevent heat influx to
the pipe for hydrate dissociation. Alternatively, if the pipe is buried in the ocean floor,
the pipe wall temperature will be greater than 39F, but only by an average of about 1
o
F per 100 ft. of buried depth.
The cross section in Figure 9.4.3-4a shows a hydrate plug dissociation when the
pressure is too low. An inner hydrate core is surrounded by an ice layer, that is
enclosed in a water layer adjacent to the pipe wall. Figure 9.4.3-4b shows the
temperature profile from 39 o F at the pipe wall, to 32 o F at the water-ice interface, to a
lower hydrate dissociation temperature (set by the line pressure) at the ice-hydrate
interface, where it remains uniform throughout the hydrate layer. As a result, there are
two two-phase boundaries: a slowly dissociating water- ice boundary (X1 ), and a
second, rapidly dissociating ice- hydrate boundary (X2 ). We are particularly interested
in the rate of progress of X1 , which determines the disappearance of the final solid
(ice), since any solid phase constitutes a flow obstruction in a pipeline.
Hydrate dissociation to a low pressure almost always results in an ice problem which
may be more difficult to remove than the initial hydrate. Hydrate removal is
accomplished by both depressurization and heat influx from the surroundings, while
an ice plug removal must rely on heat influx alone. As a result an ice plug may
dissociate more slowly than a hydrate plug.
For example, if a 16 inch line containing only methane is depressured to atmospheric
pressure, 85 days are required for radial dissociation of an ice plug, while only 17 days
would be required for dissociation of a hydrate plug to water if the pressure was
maintained at 450 psig. These calculated results are based upon the radial dissociation
model of Kelkar, et al. (1997) in which radial dissociation prevails.
Austvik (1997) noted some exceptions to radial dissociatio n, particularly for plugs of
low porosity/permeability or for very long plugs. Plug permeability may decrease
considerably during the first hours after plug formation; this suggests that plugs should
be dissociated as soon as possible to take advantage of higher porosity.
H-0806.35
9-161
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
For the above reasons, a hydrate plug should be dissociated through a second
production line, if available. If this is impossible, depressurization through a service
line for injecting inhibitors at the well head; in this case provision should be made for
removing or bypassing the check valve in the service line at the well head. In some
cases, as in Case Study 14, it may be worthwhile to connect a floating production
vessel to the manifold or wellhead for depressurizing the upstream side of the plug.
_____________________________________________________________________
Case Study 13. Gulf of Mexico Plug Removal in Gas Export Line
A hydrate blockage in the export line from Shells Bullwinkle platform in the Green
Canyon Block 65 to the Boxe platform was reported in DeepStar Report A208-1
(Mentor Subsea, 1995, page 52). The 12 inch, 39,000 ft. line was un- insulated line.
Seawater temperature was 50 o F at the base of the platform in 1400 ft. of water. Gas
gravity was 0.7, without condensate. Flow rate was 140 MMscf/d at an inlet pressure
of 800 psi.
Gas hydrates formed during a re-start after the platform was shut down due to a
hurricane. During the shut- in period the gas dehydrator was partially filled with water.
After production was restarted, since the dehydrator was not cleaned out properly, it
was not dehydrating gas as designed, and wet gas entered the export riser, causing
water condensation and hydrate formation. A complete hydrate blockage formed in
less than one hour, just past the base of the export riser at a low spot.
To remove the blockage, the line was depressured on both sides of the plug. Then
methanol was circulated into the line to accelerate the hydrate dissociation rate. After
complete removal of the hydrates, the dehydrator was cleaned, inspected and re-started
properly. The entire remedial operation required 36 hours to complete. The major
cost was the lost production time.
H-0806.35
9-162
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
When depressurization cannot be easily achieved from both sides of a plug, then more
costly steps may be required to balance the depressurization to ensure platform safety,
as indicated in the following case study.
_____________________________________________________________________
Case Study 14: Removal of North Sea Hydrate Plug by Depressuring Both Sides.
This case study is a remediation summary of hydrate blockage in an ARCO 16 inch,
22 mile long pipeline between a North Sea gas field well and platform.
Plug Formation
Setting. The gas field is located in the southern North Sea and consists of three subsea
wells, flowing into a subsea manifold with a capacity of four well inputs. A graphical
representation of the field is shown in Figure 9.4.3-5. The wells gas compositions,
temperature, and pressure promote hydrate formation, consequently mono-ethylene
glycol (MEG) is injected into the manifold and wellheads to thermodynamically
inhibit hydrates. The inhibited water, gas, and condensate is then pumped through a
22 mile, trenched, insulated export pipeline to a processing platform where water is
removed from the condensate. The MEG in the pipeline is recycled and piped back to
the manifold via a 3 inch pipeline piggybacked to the export line.
Blockage. On April 14th, 1996 an unusually large liquid slug over-ran the platform
primary separator causing a temporary shut down. The liquid slug was remediated,
but complete blockage of the pipeline had occurred during shut-down. It was
hypothesized that the blockage was a result of a hydrate plug. The reasons were:
H-0806.35
9-163
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
HOST PLATFORM
WE
LL
WE
LL
36 KM
- 16 EXPORT
MANIF
WE
LL
FOURTH
INTAKE
H-0806.35
9-164
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The pipeline free water, recovered during depressurization at the platform, did not
contain MEG inhibitor. The 3 inch MEG inhibitor line had ruptured.
Through back-pressurization, the blockage was found to be 150 meters away from the
platform. At this location, the pipeline was exited the mudline allowing contents to be
rapidly cooled by ocean currents, causing hydrate formation.
Slight decreases in pressure determined that the blockage had some porosity. This had
also been observed for several Statoil hydrate plugs (see Tommeliten Field Case
Studies C.15, C.16, and C.17 in Appendix C. In contrast however, two DeepStar field
trials C.26, and C.27 formed low-porosity, low-permeability plugs which would
transmit pressure very slowly and withstand high pressure drops.)
The liquid slug which shut down the compressors probably was caused by a partial
hydrate plug pushing a fluid front down the pipeline as it moved.
The blockages proximity to the platform posed serious safety concerns. Pipeline
depressurization was necessary to dissociate the hydrate; however it had to be done on
both sides of the hydrate plug. If only the blockages platform side was depressured,
the pressure differential would cause a projectile to form which could destroy the riser
piping and damage the platform. The projectile would be life-threatening to workers
on the platform and result in costly damages to the platform itself. Consequently,
depressurization had to be done through both the platform and the subsea manifold to
ensure safety. Projectiles could form due to dissociation, if gas became trapped within
multiple plugs. Slow depressurization was required to remove pressure build- ups in
the hydrate plug(s). Several methods were considered.
Depressurization Method
Initial Ideas
Three questions were raised to determine a proper depressurization method.
1. Will the remediation process effectively depressurize the pipeline?
2. What is the cost of equipment and modifications?
3. How much time is needed to complete the remediation?
Based on these questions, process engineers, consultants, safety management, and
diving specialists proposed three potential depressurization methods. They were:
Jack-up Rig
Method: Tow a jack-up rig to the site. From the rig, attach a high pressure riser to the
manifolds subsea tree and flare exiting gas via the rigs flare stack.
H-0806.35
9-165
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
9-166
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
manifold would be connected with a spool piece. Figure 9.4.3-6 is a schematic of the
design.
Time Frame: A FPSO was available for immediate use, consequently the required
time was expected to be 6-8 weeks.
Estimated Cost: $1,906,000.
Feasibility: This method proved to be the most feasible. The immediate availability
of a FPSO and diving rig allowed modifications to begin. It was estimated that the
FPSO could be at the site and begin within two weeks.
Establishing Procedures/Permits. It took approximately two weeks to develop
potential remediation processes. Procedures were then written to firmly establish the
processes required for the pipeline depressurization. Procedures considered the safety,
process, and coordination requirements between the diving rig and the FPSO. All
parties were educated about the tasks involved.
Government permits were applied for at the Health and Safety Executive Pipeline
Inspectorate (HSE) and the Department of Trade and Industry Oil and Gas Office
(DTI) for additional gas flaring and well modification. The permits were expedited by
local agencies to prevent delay in hydrate removal. Two weeks were required to
prepare procedures and permits for depressurization. In the meantime, the FPSO and
diving rig were being equipped for the operation and moving to the field
H-0806.35
9-167
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Collar
FP S O
FPSO process and flares
exiting
gas
from
the
manifold
280 meter
High Pressure
Riser
Valve Sled
5 Ton
Clump
Weight
16
Export
Pipe
Ma nifold
H-0806.35
9-168
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-169
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-170
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-171
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
was also steam traced with 1000 ft. of 1 inch piping to maintain the minimum process
temperature required by the FPSO. Figure 9.4.3-1 is a complete picture of the FPSO
attachment to the subsea manifold. All valves and risers were tested and shown to be
in working order. Overall the modification and installment procedures required one
week before pipeline depressurization could begin.
Determining the Pipeline Minimum Pressure. Reducing pipeline pressure too much
could result in ice formation. This causes significant problems because ice melting
might have required significantly more time, than hydrate dissociation. Ice formation
was prevented through use of the hydrate equilibrium curve (Figure 9.4.3-10) for the
field.
At constant low pressure, hydrates will continually dissociate, maintaining the
equilibrium temperature at that given pressure. As the graph illustrates, the
equilibrium pressure at 32 0 F was 200 psig. To prevent ice formation, the pipeline
pressure could not drop below 175 psig. Consequently, the FPSO reduced the pipeline
pressure to 185 psig to maximize hydrate dissociation without ice formation.
Depressurization. Twenty three days were required to completely dissociate the
pipeline hydrate. Heat transfer between the ocean and the pipeline was slow because
the line was trenched and insulated in the sea floor. Dissociation was slightly
facilitated by occasional back-pressuring which drew methanol into the plug. Backpressuring also proved beneficial in determining the location of the plug. Figure
9.4.3-11 shows the pressures in the pipeline throughout the depressurization process.
Note the slight pressure increases that occurred during depressurization. These
formed as a result of gas pockets suddenly releasing as the plug was dissociated.
The pressure was monitored for 12 hours after the hydrate was thought to be
dissociated. No pressure variation was noticed so the flexible riser was recovered and
the depressurization apparatus dismantled. Throughout the whole operation, no
equipment failure occurred and the operation progressed smoothly.
Recommissioning the Pipeline. After the hydrate was dissociated, there remained
significant amounts of free water in the pipeline. The pipeline had to be recommissioned carefully to prevent reformation of hydrates. Above normal amounts of
MEG were added to the system before pipeline start-up. One gas well was opened and
the platform flow high to ma intain low pressure, preventing hydrate formation. The
high intake caused a high gas velocity which facilitated rapid water removal. The first
12 hour night shift reported 7000 ft3 of water received from the separator, the water
H-0806.35
9-172
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-173
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-174
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-175
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
which would result from a 1.25 mile long (non-porous) hydrate plug. The high flow
rate of gas was maintained until the water contained 40% MEG, ensuring that the line
was fully inhibited. The pressures and intakes were then returned to normal operating
levels.
Conclusions
The remediation team removed the hydrate plug efficiently. They achieved a
monumental task in a very short period of time, preventing more severe economic
losses Figure 9.4.3-12 provides a timetable of the remediation process. The procedure
and methodology followed could be applied to many different situations.
Communication, clear objectives, and excellent resources helped in removing the
hydrate plug.
Despite the efficient remediation effort, the economic impact of the hydrate plug was
substantial. The cost of depressurizing the pipeline was almost 3 million dollars,
without counting lost production. On top of this, relations between the buyers and
producers were tested, due to lack of production. Fortunately, good initial relations
between the two reduced the impact of the disruption. This case study shows the
potential financial loss that can result from hydrate plugs. Hydrate prevention is key
in preventing significant economic and production losses.
_____________________________________________________________________
Hydrate Depressurization from Both Sides of Plugs with Significant Liquid Head
Results similar to those of Case Studies 13 and 14 may not be applicable to very deep
ocean plugs. When depressuring a multi-phase deepwater pipeline the hydrostatic
pressure (or head) of the liquid against the face(s) of the plug may be higher than the
hydrate dissociation pressure. However, the removal of fluids from each side of a
hydrate plug may be difficult.
To date there is little documented experience for depressuring plugs with liquid heads
in deepwater lines. However the situation has been evaluated in light of most of the
case studies in Appendix C, and recommendations are provided in Example 14.
_____________________________________________________________________
H-0806.35
9-176
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-177
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-178
1-Dec-00
DESIGN
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-179
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Of the seven options summarized in Table 9.4-2, those with gas lift were eliminated
due to low liquid removal rates. None of the depressurization options were
recommended; however, multiple access ports at 4- mile intervals were recommended
with use of coiled tubing as described in Section 9.4.3.4 on mechanical removal.
Issues/Limitations
H-0806.35
9-180
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-181
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-182
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-183
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
An alternative to pumping the fluids to the surface is to discharge the fluids into a
parallel, unblocked flowline. This method would require access points along the
pipeline to locate the plug and remove the liquids to the parallel pipeline.
_____________________________________________________________________
Depressurizing One Side of Plug(s)
Rule of Thumb 20 indicates that multiple hydrate plugs should be assumed to exist in
a shut- in line. With multiple plugs, substantial gas may be trapped between the plugs,
and depressurization techniques should be similar to depressurization through one side
of a plug. The over-riding safety concern is that a plug might dislodge from the pipe
wall to become a projectile which can rupture a line or vessel.
Table 9.4-3: Procedure for Depressurization of One Side of a Hydrate Plug, or
Multiple Plugs without an Intermediate Access Port gives a procedure for
depressurizing one side of a hydrate plug. A similar procedure can be used with
multiple hydrate plugs when liquid heads exist on each side of the plug. DeepStar
A208-1 presents Figure 9.4.3-16 to illustrate the situation to remove two hydrate plugs
without an intermediate access point. In this case, it is assumed that there are multiple
access points to the pipeline, so that the general position of the plug(s) can be located
by pressure differential.
The procedure in Figure 9.4.3-16 was slightly modified from that proposed by the
Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers , in Guideline for Prevention and Safe
Handling of Hydrates (1994), and that proposed in DeepStar Report A208-1.
H-0806.35
9-184
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-185
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
While the above method represents an ideal depressurization from only one side, frequently a
non- ideal depressurization must be achieved, as in the following case study for a plug which had
low liquid permeability, with a very low gas to oil ratio. It should be noted that liquid
permeability through a hydrate plug is about a factor of 1000 lower than that of gas.
_____________________________________________________________________
Case Study 15. Line Depressured from One Side for Hydrate Plug Removal
In January 1996 Statoil (Gjertsen et al., 1997) depressured a hydrate plug in a North
Sea line which was alternatively used as a black oil producer and a gas injector to
maintain reservoir pressure. The oil and water production rates were 18,000 ft 3 /day
and 16,242 ft3 /day respectively, and the gas to oil ratio was usually 100-360 scf/ft3 , a
fairly low value. The line and plug location method is in Case Study 12 in Section
9.4.3.1B.
Since the plug was about mid-way along the 1.6 mile pipeline, there was not an option
of using an inhibitor because pipeline topology prevented inhibitor contact with the
plug. Since there were no connections at the well the plug had to be depressurized
from the platform side only. By considering the hydrate formation curve it was
determined that the plug equilibrium pressure was 261 psia but that ice would form
when the pressure was below 115 psia.
Figure 9.4.3-17 shows the depressurization of the line, with the upstream pressure, the
platform pressure, and the pressure drop. During dissociation the pressure was
decreased in steps, and a slow bleed through was observed from 0-73 hours, from 7390, 95-105 hours, and from 105 through 120 hours.
During the time prior to 120 hours, the pressure was above the hydrate equilibrium
pressure, and while the upstream pressure decreased steadily, it never decreased to the
downstream pressure, indicating that the plug was not very permeable to black oil. A
second mechanism was that the light oil ends may have been flashing to maintain a
constant pressure upstream. However the increase in downstream pressure occurred
much more rapidly as the downstream pressure was lowered, indicating that the plug
was porous, even to the black oil.
After about 120 hours the line pressure was maintained between 145 -261 psia
downstream of the plug. The plug dissociated about 50-60 hours after the downstream
pressure had been reduced sufficiently for melting by heat influx from the ocean. This
was indicated by a sudden upstream pressure decrease from 1890 psig to 1160 psig,
H-0806.35
9-186
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
while the downstream pressure increased from 218 psig to 1015 psig during the same
period. The pressure was decreased to 145 psig and kept there for over 30 hours to
melt the remainder of the hydrates.
Restart of the well (see Case Study 18 Section 9.4.9) was accomplished two weeks
after the original plug developed. This case is another indication of the long times
required to remediate a hydrate plug.
_____________________________________________________________________
Case Studies C.25, C.26, and C.27 in Appendix C are an overview of DeepStar
Wyoming field studies of hydrate formation and dissociation from one side of the
plug. These studies have the best instrumentation of any hydrate studies to date, and
provide several exceptions to the concepts in this portion of the handbook. For
example, in two of three cases, relatively impermeable plugs were formed, one of
which withstood a P of 475 psi and was propelled down the pipeline at a velocity of
270 ft/s.
In each DeepStar field trial, depressurization was done gradually in stages from one
side of a hydrate plug with prior testing to ensure that an absorbing gas cushion
existed downstream. Where the hydrate plug existed upstream of an above- ground
bend, angle, or valve, the test was aborted and the plug was depressured from both
sides due to safety reasons. In depressuring one side of a hydrate plug, it is instructive
to simulate the worst-case as a dislodged, frictionless, piston projectile in a pipeline, as
in Example 15.
H-0806.35
9-194
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-188
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Example 15. Simulation of Hydrate Projectile Upon Depressuring One Side of Plug.
Xiao and Shoup of Amoco (1996 a,b,c, 1997) performed a series of simulations of a
hydrate projectile in preparation for depressurization from one side of a hydrate plug
in a Kerr-McGee, Wyoming 4 inch line. The plug was conservatively modeled as a
frictionless piston.
Using OLGA the steady state flow in the line was modeled prior to blockage
formation. The model included pipeline topography to obtain steady state liquid
volumes trapped at low points in the pipeline. The total mass flow was 92 BOPD and
4.166 MMscf/d. Figure 9.4.3-18 shows pipeline topography and the liquid holdup. At
a ground temperature of 34 o F, the pipeline was simulated as shut- in for 8 hours,
resulting in a simulated plug formation.
Hydrate plugs were initially situated at 7,550 ft. from the inlet of a 17,000 ft. pipeline,
with upstream pressures of 1150 psig and 575 psig and a constant initial downstream
pressure of 50 psig. Transient velocities of two plugs were simulated after formation:
(a) a 20 lb m plug which was 5 ft. long, and (b) a 137 lbm plug which was 30 ft. long.
Velocity profiles were obtained for each plug, propelled by the initial pressure
differentials of 1100 psi and 525 psi., against an initial pressure of 50 psig with a
closed valve at the line end..
For an upstream pressures of 1150 psig, the plugs reached a peak velocity 740 ft/s
(smaller plug) and 450 ft/s (larger plug). For an upstream pressure of 575 psig, the
plugs reached a peak velocity of 550 ft/s (smaller plug) and 340 ft/s (larger plug). The
inertial effects of the gas caused rapid acceleration and the final position of the larger
plug (700 ft. and 1,700 ft. from the pipe discharge at initial upstream pressures of 1150
psig and 575 psig respectively) was governed by a pressure balance, caused by
expansion of the upstream gas and compression of the downstream gas.
The simulation indicated that liquid condensate present in the line had very little effect
on the plug maximum velocity when condensate was injected far away from the plug
initial position. Figure 9.4.3-19 shows the plug velocity as a function of pipe position
for the case of 1150 psig upstream pressure with a 137 lb m plug. Plug simulation
results were used to plan and execute field plug dissociation tests. The calculated plug
H-0806.35
9-189
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-190
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-191
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
velocity was an acceptable match with measured plug velocities in the field with a
gamma-ray detector.
It should be noted that modeling the plug as a frictionless piston provides conservative
results. The modeled plug will be slowed by any friction between plug and the pipe,
as well as by blow-by of gas at the wall and through the porous plug.
_____________________________________________________________________
9.4.3.2
9.4.3.3
H-0806.35
9-192
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
However, heating is a viable option for topside hydrate plugs on a platform where a
thermocamera can be used to determine the plug limits (and where the possibility of
multiple plugs has been eliminated). Similarly in a plugged well where the upper plug
end is available, heating may be one of the primary options, as indicated in the below
case studies. Heating a plug in a well can be accomplished using a heated wireline
broach, similar to tool the shown in Figure 9.4.2-6.
_____________________________________________________________________
Case Study 16. Plug Dissociation by Heating in a Well
A hydrate plug was experienced in a well feeding a jackup platform in the Norwegian
sector in mid-May 1997. A hydrate plug, initially caused by pressurization of the well
with water, formed below the downhole safety valve in the well. This is a particularly
precarious condition which can result in a well blow out, if it is not handled properly.
Field personnel first attempted to decrease the pressure in steps to just above the
hydrate equilibrium pressure and unsuccessful attempts were made to push MEG
through the hydrate plug. The next action was to inject MEG into the well leaving
only a small gas volume at the top of the well. With a higher pressure atop the plug,
the only way to get gas into the well was by hydrate dissociation via MEG.
When the pressure dropped to 4280 psia, MEG was re- injected into the well until the
pressure rose to 4930 psia. A total of 0.14 gallons of MEG were re- injected,
indicating that a very small amount of hydrates had dissociated. It was concluded the
plug had very low permeability and dissociated very slowly. This concluded the
period of getting to know the plug.
At that point the pressure was reduced atop the well to 15 psia and shut- in so that only
the additional static head (394 ft. above the plug) maintained pressure above the plug.
The pressure recovered to 100 psia as an indication that hydrates were dissociating
upon pressure reduction. There were at least six similar pressure reduction and
recovery confirmations that hydrates were dissociating in the well; each time pressure
increases exponentially approached an asymptote of 100 psia.
It was determined the keep the pressure at 15 psia on top of the well to provide
constant hydrate melting. The plug temperature was approximately 48 o F. Five hours
after maintaining the pressure at 15 psia, the hydrate dissociation was complete and
the pressure atop the well rose to 160 psia. The entire hydrate plug melted 12 days
H-0806.35
9-193
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
after the initial formation. Questions remained concerning why the plug did not
respond to MEG injection, so that depressurization had to be used.
_____________________________________________________________________
9.4.3.4
4 or 6
4 or 6
3,000 - 5,000
6,000 - 8,000
See Case Study 11 (Section 9.4.3.1A) for a successful exa mple of hydrate plug
removal with coiled tubing and glycol jetting. In other case histories coiled tubing has
been used successfully. For example coiled tubing was recently used to dissociate a
plug at Statoils Statfjord field (Urdahl, 1997). Coiled tubing is expensive, requiring
special rigs. The daily cost of coiled tubing in 1997 is $1 million/d to rent the rig.
H-0806.35
9-194
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Coiled tubing technology is being developed. For hydrate applications, three new
types of coiled tubing are listed from the DeepStar A208-1 report by Mentor Subsea
(Davalath, 1995):
1.
Coiled tubing can get hydraulic drilling equipment to the plug Figure 9.4.3-20
2.
A tractor can be used to pull the coiled tubing through the flowline from the
platform side Figure 9.4.3-21 in lines larger than 4 inch ID at a speed of 5400 ft/hr
with penetration distances to 15,000 ft. Testing is underway in Deepstar Project
3202.
3.
With the use of coiled tubing it is important to remember that as much as 170 scf of
gas evolves from each ft3 of dissociated hydrate. Coiled tubing must have gas flowby
capability in the drive mechanism at the tubing front. This will prevent either pushing
the tubing from the plug face or line over-pressure. For example with the pig-driven
coiled tubing shown in Figure 9.4.3-20, gas must be produced from the tubing.
9.4.4
H-0806.35
9-195
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-196
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-197
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-198
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
pipeline was depressured from one side of the plug, and when the plug had melted the
line was maintained at atmospheric pressure for over one day to eliminate the light
components which might form hydrates.
Before start-up, methanol was injected in the amount of 530 gallons in the 6 inch ID,
1.6 mile line from the platform. The pipeline was then pressurized with diesel from
the platform to the sub-sea valve, in an amount which indicated that the pipeline was
nearly empty of liquid after the previous depressurization to atmospheric conditions.
A further injection of diesel corresponding to two pipeline volumes was pumped into
the pipeline and well. Subsequently the well and the pipeline were put into production
without any hydrate problems.
9.4.5
9.4.5.1
H-0806.35
1.
Hydrate plugs are always dissociated, but the time scale is usually days to weeks.
Deliberate changes and patience are required. Hourly changes are ineffectual.
2.
Multiple hydrate plugs should always be assumed and treated as a safety hazard.
3.
Many hydrate plugs are porous and transmit pressure easily while acting to
obstruct flow. Some plugs are permeable to gas, but less so to condensate or
black oil. This concept controls many aspects of hydrate dissociation, including
radial depressurization, Joule-Thomson cooling through the plug, and the fact that
depressurization may cause the plug downstream temperature to decrease below
the hydrate equilibrium temperature.
4.
Methods are not well-defined for locating hydrate plugs and determining their
length. However, knowledge of the precise location and length of a plug would
be a vital help in dissociation.
5.
Attempts to blow the plug out of the line via a high upstream pressure always
results in a larger, more compacted hydrate.
6.
9-199
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
7.
If the pressure is decreased too much, the hydrate plug will rapidly form an ice
plug, which may be more difficult to dissociate.
8.
9.
In some cases, depressurization from one side of a plug has been safely done.
10. Heating is not recommended for hydrate plugs without a means for relieving the
excess gas pressure when hydrates dissociate.
11. Coiled tubing represents the primary mechanical means for dissociating hydrates.
12. Usually methanol or glycol is injected into plugged flowlines, but this is seldom
effective due to the necessity to get the inhibitor at the face of the plug.
13. Inhibitor injection and de-pressuring techniques are available for system shut- in
and start-up - two times of jeopardy in formation of hydrate plugs.
9.4.5.2
H-0806.35
1.
Investigate the use of various access points along a flowline to allow (1) locating
the plug, (2) removal of liquid head at each side of a plug, and (3) depressuring
from each side of the plug. Such options include (a) multiple access points along a
pipeline, (b) dual production lines, (c) wellhead access through service lines with
check valves removed or bypassed, and (d) blind flanges and valves at manifold.
2.
Investigate the use of various coiled tubing techniques to enter a long distance
subsea line, such s (a) locomotive-type device for pulling coiled tubing, (b) pigs
mounted outside of coiled tubing to assist penetration, (c) composite coiled tubing
to reduce drag.
3.
Consider using a long radius riser (from 20-80 ft.), eliminating bends and S
configurations where water might accumulate, and reducing line low spots.
4.
Eliminate un-necessary restrictions and valves in the system and provide for
heating or methanol injection where Joule-Thomson cooling is a problem.
Consider installing a heater on the platform to prevent hydrate formation in the
choke and/or separator.
9-200
1-Dec-00
9.5
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
5.
Consider providing pressure and temperature monitors a various points along the
pipeline. Provide for hydrate prevent ion at these instrument points.
6.
Economics
Economics provide the motivation for all engineering action. When we ask, Why
should hydrates be of concern? the ultimate answer relates to economics. Even
concerns of higher value (e.g. safety or the environment) relate directly to economics
because such concerns can prevent process operations.
The present section is aimed at providing economics in terms of hydrate safety,
prevention, and remediation - the previous three major sections of the handbook. In
every example provided, a time stamp enables the reader to update the economics,
using such tools as the Consumer Price Index.
9.5.1
9.5.2
H-0806.35
9-201
1-Dec-00
9.5.2.1
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-202
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
seasonal; typical dockside North Sea methanol costs were $0.11/lbm ($0.72/gallon)
and ethylene glycol cost were $0.27/lb m during the 1997 summer.
Since methanol recovery is not economical, methanol injection is normally considered
as an operating cost. The Deepstar Study CTR 221-1 (Paragon Engineering, 1994)
shows methanol recovery to be very expensive in Table 9.3.9-1 of Case Study 7 in
Section 9.3.9.1A. For methanol recovery late in the life of a field, the total installed
cost on an existing platform was estimated at $16.7 million ($20 million total installed
cost with a new platform) while the annual operating cost is $6 million. For ethylene
glycol (MEG) a low vapor pressure results in a smaller recovery column, making the
economics much more favorable.
Subcool wt%
No.
Wel
l
life
yr
WHP
psia
Oil
Gas
H2 O
bbl/D
Mscf/d
bbl/D
T( F)
MeOH Cost
MeOH gpm
k$/yr
Jolliet
1
5
8
3,317
1,970
911
2,500
600
43
1,670
3,268
850
2
17
4
46.3
38.8
27.8
35.3
33.1
27.3
0.026
0.206
0.040
7.65
60.6
11.8
Jolliet
20
1
5
10
2,821
1,449
1,123
4,400
16,400
5,100
2,948
33,948
36,210
4
124
172
43.9
34.4
30.8
34.8
31.1
29.2
0.051
1.412
1.832
15.0
415.6
539.2
Hercules
1
5
8
2,325
1,737
1,824
1,367
465
23
869
376
30
0
666
22
41.2
37.0
37.7
33.9
32.3
32.6
0
7.889
0.263
0
2,322
77.4
Hercules
20
1
5
10
2,325
1,064
1,064
2,700
22,700
19,100
3,000
12,500
11,700
0
4,540
5,157
41.2
30.0
30.0
33.9
28.7
28.7
0
47.75
54.24
0
14,054
15,964
H-0806.35
9-203
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
TABLE 9.5-2: TRANSMISSION LINES (60 MILES) SIZING, COSTS AND PUMPING
SKID COSTS (FROM DEEPSTAR I. CTR 240)
Reservoir
No.
Wells
Min. Line
ID (in)
Line Cost
MM$
Skid Cost
k$
Jolliet
Jolliet
1
20
0.306
0.780
1.03
1.11
5.20
30.00
Hercules
1
1.629
1.79
34.00
Hercules
20
2.815
1.79
89.50
Additional cost of valve, actuator, manifolding,
and packaging = $6,700/well.
Rule-of-Thumb 22. Methanol loss costs can be substantial when the total fraction
of either the vapor or the oil/condensate phase is very large relative to the water
phase.
Sections 9.3.3. and 9.3.4. provide a quantitative means of validation of the above
Rule-of-Thumb. Example 7 provides a conservative sample calculation in which 15%
of the methanol is lost to the vapor and liquid hydrocarbon. Statoil provided the
below table showing a reduction in condensate price for different me thanol
concentrations (>30 ppm by wt) in a condensate.
H-0806.35
0
0-$2/metric ton (MT = 2205 lb m)
$2-4/MT (or $0.25 - $0.50/ Bbl)
$4-6/MT (excludes some crackers)
$6-9/MT (excludes most crackers)
$9-40/MT (reduced confidence in product)
9-204
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
phase
16
12
H-0806.35
Life
yrs
of
Use
H2 O
avg,
bbl/d
Time in
hydrate
zone, hr
Max
T,
o
F
wt%
MeOH
in H2 O
MeOH
1000
lbm
KI
1000
lbm
active
multi
0
7
15
304
287
150
0
2.3
40.9
no hyd
11.7
31.4
0
16
33
0
20.9
19.3
0
0.409
NA*
liquid
0
7
15
346
295
118
0
7.9
43.2
no hyd
17.5
19.4
0
20
21
0
21.5
8.8
0.
0.441
0.170
gas
0
17
8.4
25.5
28
9.7
7
10
24.6
30.8
33
5.9
15
4
72.9
32.0
33
2.4
NA* = conditions too severe for kinetic inhibitor (KI)
0.128
NA*
NA*
9-205
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Line
(in)
16
8
12
phase
multi
liquid
gas
MM
lbm
$MM
7-9
6-15
1-4
72.9
52.5
33.0
22.1
15.9
10.0
0.36
1.05
0.03
25.9
52.5
15.6
7.8
15.9
4.7
0.36
1.05
0.03
3.2
9.3
0.26
50.0
0
17.4
18.4
9.3
5.5
This includes the cost of methanol solvent for the kinetic inhibitor
This is the methanol cost in those years when a KI cannot be used because T > 27o F
MEG
MeOH
THI
Conc/bbl H2 O,wt%
Quantity, lb m
Cost/bbl H2 O
15
61.7
$16-$17
15
61.7
$6.5 - $7.5
0.25
0.882
$8-$10
From the above table, operating cost benefits appear marginal (better than MEG,
worse than MeOH). Bloys et al. (1995) suggested that economics were favorable for
new developments (due for example, to capital savings of avoiding regeneration
systems) but marginal for retrofits of systems with traditional inhibitors such as
monoethylene glycol.
The incentive for newer kinetic control methods is a substantial capital cost reduction
by the elimination of the need for offshore platform equipment, and a small operating
cost reduction. In one high water production North Sea field, BP reckoned the capital
H-0806.35
9-206
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
costs savings at $50 million for platform costs including methanol injection costs,
glycol drying, and regeneration (Argo and Osborne, 1997).
For example, BP currently operates some Southern North Sea pipeline wet, thereby
saving the capital cost of drying the gas on the pla tform. In addition to capital cost, a
savings may be realized on the platform itself.
Rule-of-Thumb 23. The cost of a fixed leg North Sea platform is $77,000/ton.
The above Rule-of-Thumb was given by Edwards (1997). BP would like to use
unmanned platforms, but the inhibitor recovery units on some platforms prevents
doing so. As additional costs, Edwards also estimated the operation of an inhibitor
recovery unit at 2 hrs/day operator time and maintenance requires 600-700 hr/year at
$85/hr.
The economics of anti-agglomerants are much less certain than those stated above for
kinetic inhibitors. No documented costs of anti-agglomerants were found. However,
anti-agglomerant economics should include such factors as emulsion breaking,
recovery, and disposal.
9.5.2.2
H-0806.35
9-207
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
pressure of 4000 psia, bundled flow lines are more cost effective. Technical details
and associated economics are provided in Section 9.3.7.4.
9.5.3
Usually deferred production is counted at the end of reservoir life, so that the time
value of money is considered. A dollar today is worth more than a dollar
tomorrow due to inflation.
2.
Fields are frequently sold over their lifetime, and deferred cost means lost revenue
during the ownership of a field.
3.
Production losses due to hydrates are site-specific, but are enormous when considered
collectively. From the hydrate group with the largest world-wide remediation
experience, Austvik of Statoil(1997) indicated the magnitude of the problem by
saying, At any instant in the North Sea, there is probably a hydrate blockage which
requires remediation. As one onshore example, despite large quantities of methanol
injection for hydrate prevention, Todd et al. (1996) report 66 hydrate blockages
occurred in one well and productio n line during winter of 1995-1996, resulting in
production losses of more than $240,000.
Offshore hydrate remediation techniques are very costly if they are not explicitly
included into the initial design. For example, the ARCO Case Study 14 represented a
fortunate instance (in April 1996) of having an extra flange available at the manifold
for depressurization. In this case two solutions were technically available:
H-0806.35
1.
Jack-up Rig. Tow a jack- up rig to the site and attach a high pressure riser to the
manifolds subsea tree. Flare exiting gas via the rigs flare stack. The estimated
cost: was $2 million and a delay of approximately eight weeks was needed to
locate a suitable rig. The time required for hydrate removal could be twelve
weeks.
2.
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
estimated cost was $1.9 million and a FPSO was available for immediate use,
reducing the required time to 6-8 weeks.
Other techniques such as the use of coiled tubing were not available at the time. (The
daily cost of coiled tubing was $1 million/d to rent the rig in July, 1997.) The final
cost of depressurizing the ARCO pipeline was almost 3 million dollars, without
production losses. Even with such high costs, the loss of production usually causes
time to be the deciding resource during remediation.
During remediation periods, gas supply is usually met via substitution. However, the
borrowing capacity is typically limited to 5 times the daily capacity, so that gas
supplies are purchased from the spot market. Typical non-delivery penalty costs are
$50,000/day after tax on a gas production unit of 125MM scf/d. Non-delivery contract
pressures may be eased by considering hydrates as a Force Majeure as done in
ARCO Case Study 14, implying that no penalties should be incurred because there
was no human error.
9.6
References
1.
Aarseth, F., Use of Electrical Power in Control of Wax and Hydrates, Proc 1997
Offshore Technology Conference, paper OTC 8541, Houston, TX, May 5-8, 1997.
2. Argo, C.B., Blain, R.A., Osborne, C.G., Priestley, I.D., Commercial Deployment
of Low Dosage Hydrate Inhibitors in a Southern North Sea 69 Kilometer WetGas Subsea Pipeline, SPE 37255, Proc. SPE Int. Symp. on Oilfield Chemistry,
Houston, Texas (18-21 February 1997)
3. Argo, C.B., Osborne, C.G., Personal Communication Estimation of Capital and
Operating Cost Associated with Threshold Hydrate Inhibitors, BP Sunbury
Research Centre, U.K. July 18, 1997.
4. Austvik, T., Personal Communication Regarding Safety, Prevention, Remediation
and Economics at Statoil Reseach Center, Trondheim, Norway, July 13 - 15,
1997.
5. Austvik, T., Hustvedt, E., Meland, B., Berge, L., Lysne, D., Tommeliten Gamma
Field Hydrate Experiments, Proc. 7th Inter. Conf. on Multiphase Production,
BHRA Group Conf. Ser. Publication 14, Cannes, June 7-9, (1995)
6. Austvik, T., Hustvedt, E., Gjertsen, L.H.,Urdahl, O., Formation and Removal of
Hydrate Plugs, Field Trial at Tommeliten, Proc. Gas Processors Asosication
Conference, San Antonio, Texas, (March 1997)
H-0806.35
9-209
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
7. Baillie, C., Wichert, E., Chart Gives Hydrate Formation Temperature for Natural
Gas, Oil & Gas Journal, 37 (April 1987)
8. Barker, J.W., Gomez, R.K., Formation of Hydrates During Deepwater Drilling
Operations, J. Petrol. Tech., 41, 297 (March 1989)
9. Behar, E., Delion, A.-S., Sugier, A., Thomas, M., Plugging Control of Production
Facilities by Hydrates, 1st Internat Conf. on Natural Gas Hydrates, Sloan,
E.D., Happel, J., Hnatow, M. eds New York Academy of Sciences, Vol.715, p
94, (1994)
10. Berge, L., Gjertsen, L., Lysne, D., The Importance of Porosity and Permeability
of Hydrate Plugs in Pipes, in Proc. 2nd Intnl. Conf. on Natural Gas Hydrates,
p. 533, (Monfort, J.P., ed.), Toulouse, 2-6 June (1996)
11. Bloys, B., Lacey, C., Lynch, P., Laboratory Testing and Field Trial of a New
Kinetic Hydrate Inhibitor, OTC 7772, Proc. 27th Ann OTC, Houston, Texas
May 1-4, (1995)
12. Brown, G.G., A Series of Enthalpy-Entropy Charts for Natural Gases, Trans
AIME, 160, 65 (1945)
13. Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (R. King, T. Sharples, J. Stewart, S.
Sortland, authors) CAPP Guideline for the Prevention and Safe Handling of
Hydrates, 10 pages (January 1994)
14. Chevron Canada Resources, Hydrate Handling Guidelines: Safety and Loss
Control Manual, Chevron Internal Report, 27 pages (July 23, 1992)
15. Corrigan, A., Duncum, S.N., Edwards, A.R., Osborne, C.G., Trials of Threshold
Hydrate Inhibitors in the Ravenspurn to Cleeton Line, SPE Prod. & Facil., p
250 (Nov. 1996)
16. Davalath, J., Barker, J.W., Hydrate Inhibitor Design for Deepwater
Completions, Proc. 68th Annual Tech. Conf. of Society Petroleum
Engineering, SPE 26532, Houston, Texas, 3-6 October 1993.
17. Deaton, W.M., Frost, E.M., Jr., Gas Hydrates and Their Relation to the Operation
of Natural-Gas Pipe Lines , 101 pp. U.S. Bureau of Mines Monograph 8, 1946.
18. DeepStar I CTR 230-1 Control Systems, Intec Engineering, 4 Sections and 3
Appendices, (December 1992)
19. DeepStar I CTR 240-1 Chemical Injection System Study, Intec Engineering, 4
Sections and 1 Appendix, (December 1992)
H-0806.35
9-210
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-211
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
33. Englezos, P., Kinetics of Gas Hydrate Formation and Kinetic Inhibiton in
Offshore Oil and Gas Operations, Proc. 5th Int. Offshore & Polar Eng. Conf.,
, pg 289, the Hague, Netherlands (June 11, 1995)
34. GPSA Engineering Data Book, Revised 10th Edition, Gas Processors Suppliers
Association, 6526 East 60th Street, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74145
35. Gjertsen, L.H., Austvik, T., Urdahl, O., Duus, R., Removal of a Gas Hydrate
Plug From a Subsea Multiphase Pipeline in the North Sea, Proc. BHR Group
1997 Multiphase 97 Conference, Cannes, France, (June 18-20, 1997)
36. Grainger, M., TR Oil Services Perspectives on the Use of Alternate Hydrate
Inhibitors, written personal communication to E.D. Sloan, (September 3,
1997)
37. Hatton , G.J., Barajas, A.M., Kuhl, C.A., Hydrate Plug Decomposition Test
Program, Final Report, SwRI Project 04-8217, October 1997, Prepared for
DeepStar 3204 Subcommittee.
38. Houston,C., Personal Communication: Survey of USA Methanol Usage, July 31,
1997
39. Katz, D.:L., Prediction of Conditions for Hydrate Formation in Natural Gases,
Trans. AIME, 160: 140 (1945)
40. Katz, D.L., Cornell, D., Kobayashi, R., Poettmann, F.H., Vary, J.A., Elenbaas,
J.R., Weinaug, C.F., Handbook of Natural Gas Engineering, McGraw-Hill
Book Co., Inc., New York, 802 pp. (1959).
41. Kelkar, S.K., Selim, M.S., Sloan E.D.,Hydrate Dissociation Rates in Pipelines,
Proc. 13th Symposium on Thermophysical Properties, June 22-27, 1997,
Boulder, Colorado
42. Kent, R.P., Coolen, M.E., Hydrates in Natural Gas Lines, Mobil Internal Report,
7 pages (1992)
43. Lingelem, M.N., Majeed, A.I.,m Stange, E., Industrial Experience in Evaluation
of Hydrate Formation, Inhibition, and Dissociation in Pipeline Design and
Operation, 1st Internat. Conf. on Natural Gas Hydrates, Sloan, E.D., Happel,
J., Hnatow, M. eds., New York Academy of Sciences, Vol.715, p 75, (1994)
44. Loh, J., Maddox, R.N., Erbar, J.H., New Hydrate Formation Data Reveal
Differences, Oil & Gas Journal, 81(20), p. 96 (1983)
45. Lynch, P., Orwell Field Pipeline Blockage Report, April - June 1996, ARCO
British Ltd. Report, 23 pages, November 1996
H-0806.35
9-212
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
9-213
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
58. Polderman, L.D., "The Glycols as Hydrate Point Depressants in Natural Gas
Systems," Proc. Gas Conditioning Conference, Norman, OK (1958)
59. Robinson, D.B., Ng, H.-J., Hydrate Formation and Inhibition in Gas or Gas
Condensate Streams, J. Can. Petrol. Technol., 25(4), 26 (1986)
60. Sas-Jaworsky, A., II., Blount, C.G., Tailby, R.J., Coiled Tubing...Operations and
Services, World Oil, pg 55, (June 1993)
61. Shuler, P.J., Chevron Production Technology Co., Personal Communicatio n of
HYDCALC program (June 10, 1997)
62. Sloan, E.D., The Colorado School of Mines Hydrate Program, Proc. 64th Ann.
GPA Convention, Gas Processors Association, Houston (March 1985)
63. Sloan, E.D., Jr., Clathrate Hydrates of Natural Gases, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New
York, (Second Edition) 704pp (1998)
64. Sloan,E.D., Happel, J., Hnatow, M.A., eds, (First) International Conference on
Natural Gas Hydrates, Annals of New York Academy of Sciences, 715, 1994
65. Stange, E., Majeed, A., Overa, S., Experimentations and Modeling of the
Multiphase Equilibrium and Inhibition of Hydrates, Proc. 68th Annual GPA
Convention, San Antonio, Texas (March 1989)
66. Texaco (J. Todd, K. Barbin, E,. Busby, S. Hourcade, D. Hall, B. Peterson)
Reliability Engineering - Gas Freezing and Hydrates, (a handbook for
operating personnel), 16 Sections (1996)
67. Todd, J.L., Personal Communication, June 18, 1997
68. Townsend, F.M., Reid, L.S., Hydrate Control in Natural Gas Systems, L.S. Reid
and Assoc, P.O. Biox 1188, Norman, OK 73070, (September 23, 1978)
69. Urdahl, O., Personal Communication on Safety, Prevention, Remediation, and
Economics at Statoil Reseach Center, Trondheim, Norway, July 14, 1997.
70. Xiao, J.J., Shoup, G., Amoco Letter to G. Hatton, Southwest Research Institute,
OLGA Simulation - Steady-State Results, September 16, 1996a.
71. Xiao, J.J., Shoup, G., Amoco Letter to G. Hatton, Southwest Research Institute,
OLGA Simulation - Plug Movement Results, September 23, 1996b.
72. Xiao, J.J., Shoup, G., Amoco Letter to G. Hatton, Southwest Research Institute,
OLGA Simulation - Plug Movement Results: Efect of Injecting Condensate
on Plug Movement,November 6, 1996c.
H-0806.35
9-214
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
73. Xiao, J.J., Shoup, G., Amoco Letter to G. Hatton, Southwest Research Institute,
Flow Pattern Maps for the Kerr McGee 4 Inch Pipeline, February 5, 1997.
74. Yousif, M., Austvik, T., Berge, L., Lysne, D., The Effects of Low Concentration
Methanol Solutions on Hydrate Formation, in Proc. 2nd Intnl. Conf. on
Natural Gas Hydrates, p. 291, (Monfort, J.P., ed.), Toulouse, 2-6 June (1996)
75. Yousif, M.H., Li,P.M., Selim, M.S., Sloan, E.D., Depressurization of Natural Gas
Hyrates in Berea Sandstone Cores, J. Inclus. Phenom. and Molec. Recog., 8,
71, (1990)
H-0806.35
9-215
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
APPENDIX A
GAS HYDRATE STRUCTURES, PROPERTIES, AND HOW THEY FORM
H-0806.35
Appendix A.
Gas Hydrate Structures, Properties, and How They Form
The following discussion is excerpted from the monograph by Sloan (1998,
Chapters 2 and 3), to which the reader may wish to turn for a more complete explanation.
Two recent hydrate conference summaries (Sloan et al., 1994; Monfort 1996) also provide
research and applied perspectives of the hydrate community.
Gas clathrates are crystalline compounds which occur when water forms a cage-like
structure around smaller guest molecules. While they are more commonly called hydrates, a
careful distinction should be made between these non-stoichiometric clathrate hydrates of
gas and other stoichiometric hydrate compounds which occur for example, when water
combines with various salts.
Gas hydrates of current interest are composed of water and the following eight
molecules: methane, ethane, propane, isobutane, normal butane, nitrogen, carbon dioxide,
and hydrogen sulfide. Yet other apolar components between the sizes of argon (3.5 ) and
ethylcyclohexane (9) can form hydrates. Hydrate formation is a possibility where water
exists in the vicinity of such molecules at temperatures above and below 32oF. Hydrate
discovery is credited in 1810 to Sir Humphrey Davy. Due to their crystalline, non-flowing
nature, hydrates first became of interest to the hydrocarbon industry in 1934, the time they
first were observed blocking pipelines. Hydrates concentrate hydrocarbons: 1 ft 3 of
hydrates may contain 180 scf of gas.
Hydrates normally form in one of three repeating crystal structures shown in Figure
A.1. Structure I (sI), a body-centered cubic structure forms with small natural gas
molecules found in situ in deep oceans. Structure II (sII), a diamond lattice within a cubic
framework, forms when natural gases or oils contain molecules larger than ethane but
smaller than pentane. sII represents hydrates which commonly occur in hydrocarbon
production and processing conditions, as well as in many cases of gas seeps from faults in
ocean environments.
The newest hydrate structure H (sH) named for its hexagonal framework, has
cavities large enough to contain molecules the size of common components of naphtha and
gasoline. Some initial physical properties, phase equilibrium data, and models have been
determined for sH and one instance of in situ sH in the Gulf of Mexico has been found.
Since information on structure H is in the fledgling stages, and since it may not occur
commonly in natural systems, most of this appendix concerns sI and sII.
obtains sI; linking the faces of 512 cavities results in sII; in sH a layer of linked 512 cavities
provide connections.
Spaces between the 512 cavities are larger cavities which contain twelve pentagonal
faces and either two, four, or eight hexagonal faces: (denoted as 51262 in sI, 51264 in sII, or
51268 in sH). In addition sH has a cavity with square, pentagonal, and hexagonal faces
(435663). Figure A.1 depicts the five cavities of sI, sII, and sH. In Figure A.1 a oxygen
atom is located at the vertex of each angle in the cavities; the lines represent hydrogen
bonds with which one chemically-bonded hydrogen connects to an oxygen on a neighbor
water molecule.
Table A.1 Geometry of Cages in Three Hydrate Crystal Structures in Figure A.1
Hydrate Crystal Structure
Cavity
Description
Number of Cavities/Unit Cell
Average Cavity Radius,
Variation in Radius1, %
Coordination Number2
Number of Waters/Unit Cell
I
Small Large
512
51262
2
6
3.95 4.33
3.4 14.4
20
24
46
II
Small Large
512
51264
16
8
3.91 4.73
5.5
1.73
20
28
136
H
Small Medium Large
512
435663 51268
3
2
1
3
3
3.91
4.06
5.713
Not Available
20
20
36
34
Inside each cavity resides a maximum of one of the small guest molecules, typified
by the eight guests associated with 46 water molecules in sI (2[512]6[51262]46H2O),
indicating two guests in the 512 and 6 guests in the 51262 cavities of sI. Similar formulas for
sII and sH are (16[512]8[51264]136H2O) and (3[512]2[435663]1[51268]34H2O)
respectively.
Structure I, a body-centered cubic structure, forms with natural gases containing
molecules smaller than propane; consequently sI hydrates are found in situ in deep oceans
with biogenic gases containing mostly methane, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen sulfide.
Structure II, a diamond lattice within a cubic framework, forms when natural gases or oils
contain molecules larger than ethane; sII represents hydrates from most natural gas systems
gases. Finally structure H hydrates must have a small occupant (like methane, nitrogen, or
carbon dioxide) for the 512 and 435663 cages but the molecules in the 51268 cage can be as
large as 0.9 (e.g. ethylcyclohexane). Structure H has not been commonly determined in
natural gas systems to date.
Many sH
Ice
Structure I
Structure II
P63/mmc
4
a =4.52 c =7.36
94
Peak at 229 cm-1.
220
58.1
Pm3n
Fd3m
46
136
12.0
17.3
~58
58
Peak at 229 cm-1 with others
240
25
50
50
9.5
8.4est
8.2est
0.33
8.8
3.9
1.88
~0.33
5.6
2.4
1.95
~0.33
NA
NA
NA
56x10-6
12
3.8
77x10-6
14est
3.3
52x10-6
14est
3.6
2.23
0.49.02
0.51.02
A.2.b. Guest: Cavity Size Ratio: a Basis for Property Understanding. The hydrate
cavity occupied is a function of the size ratio of the guest molecule within the cavity. To a
first approximation, the concept of "a ball fitting within a ball" is a key to understanding many
hydrate properties. Figure A.2 may be used to illustrate five points regarding the
guest:cavity size ratio for hydrates formed of a single guest component in sI or sII.
1. The sizes of stabilizing guest molecules range between 3.5 and 7.5 . Below 3.5
molecules will not stabilize sI and above 7.5 molecules will not stabilize sII.
2. Some molecules are too large to fit the smaller cavities of each structure (e.g. C2H6 fits
in the 51262 of sI; or i-C4H10 fits the 51264 of sII).
3. Other molecules such as CH4 and N2 are small enough to enter both cavities (512+51262
in sI or 512+51264 in sII) when hydrate is formed of single components.
4. The largest molecules of a gas mixture usually determines the structure formed. For
example, because propane and i- butane are present in many natural gases, they will
cause sII to form. In such cases, methane will distribute in both cavities of sII and
ethane will enter only the 51264 cavity of sII.
5. Molecule sizes which are close to the hatched lines separating cavity sizes exhibit the
most non-stoichiometry, due to their inability to fit securely within the cavity.
Table A.3 shows the size ratio of several common gas molecules within each of the
four cavities of sI and sII. Note that a size ratio (guest molecule: cavity) of approximately
0.9 is necessary for stability of a simple hydrate, given by the superscript . When the size
ratio exceeds unity, the molecule will not fit within the cavity and the structure will not form.
When the ratio is significantly less than 0.9 the molecule cannot lend significant stability to
the cavity.
Table A.3 Ratios of Guest: Cavity Diameters for Natural Gas Hydrate Formers
Molecule
Cavity Type=>
Guest Dmtr ()
N2
CH4
H2S
CO2
C2H6
C3H8
i-C4H10
n-C4H10
4.1
4.36
4.58
5.12
5.5
6.28
6.5
7.1
0.700
0.744
0.782
0.834
0.939
1.07
1.11
1.21
0.817
0.868
0.912
1.02
1.10
1.25
1.29
1.41
0.616
0.655
0.687
0.769
0.826
0.943
0.976
1.07
As seen in Table A.3, ethane as a single gas forms in the 51262 cavity in sI, because
ethane is too large for the small 512 cavities in either structure and too small to give much
stability to the large 51264 cavity in sII. Similarly propane is too large to fit any cavity
except the 51264 cavity in sII, so that gases of pure propane form sII hydrates from free
water. On the other hand, methane's size is sufficient to lend stability to the 512 cavity in
either sI or sII, with a preference for sI, because CH4 lends slightly higher stability to the
51262 cavity in sI than the 51264 cavity in sII.
A.2.c. Phase Equilibrium Properties. In Figure A.3 pressure is plotted against
temperature with gas composition as a parameter, for methane+propane mixtures.
Consider a gas of any given composition (marked 0 through 100% propane) on a line in
Figure A.3. At conditions to the right of the line, a gas of that composition will exist in
equilibrium with liquid water. As the temperature is reduced (or as the pressure is
increased) hydrates form from gas and liquid water at the line, so three phases (liquid water
+ hydrates + gas) will be in equilibrium. With further reduction of temperature (or increase
in pressure) the fluid phase which is not in excess (water in pipeline environments) will be
exhausted, so that to the left of the line the hydrate will exist with the excess phase (gas).
All of the conditions given in Figure A.3 are for temperatures above 32oF and
pressures along the lines vary exponentially with temperature. Put explicitly, hydrate stability
at the three-phase (LW -H-V) condition is always much more sensitive to temperature than
to pressure. Figure A.3 also illustrates the dramatic effect of gas composition on hydrate
stability; as any amount of propane is added to methane the structure changes (sI sII) to
8
a hydrate with much wider stability conditions. Note that a 50% decrease in pressure is
needed to form sII hydrates, when as little as 1% propane is in the gas phase.
10
11
12
13
2.
3.
4.
5.
Figure A.1. These fluid clusters are envisioned to join other clusters as the beginning of
the hydrate crystallization process.
Figure A.5 indicates an autocatalytic reaction mechanism hypothesized for hydrate
formation based upon limited experimental evidence. The figure depicts the progress of
molecular species from water [A], through metastable species [B] and [C], to stable
nuclei [D] which can grow to large species.
At the beginning of the process (point A), hydrogen-bonded liquid water and gas are
present in the system. Water clusters around gas molecules to form both large and
small clusters [B] similar to the hydrate cages of sI and sII. At point [B], the cages are
termed labile - they are relatively long-lived but unstable.
The cages may either dissipate or grow to hydrate unit cells or agglomerations of unit
cells [C], thus forming metastable nuclei. Since these metastable unit cells at [C] are of
subcritical size, they may either grow or shrink in a stochastic process. The metastable
nuclei are in quasi-equilibrium with the liquid-like cages until the nuclei reach a critical
radius. After attaining the critical radius [D], the crystals grow rapidly in a period
sometimes called catastrophic growth.
In our conceptual picture, when the system is heated, it is driven to the left in Figure
A.5, and stable hydrate crystals are dissociated. Once the hydrate dissociation point is
reached and passed, there are still labile microscopic species in the water that range in
size from multiple hydrate unit cells [C] to metastable nuclei [B]. These residual
structures are present up to a certain level of thermal energy above dissociation. At
temperatures below that upper boundary, these species causes a decrease in induction
or metastability time of a successive run, because the building blocks of crystals
remain in the liquid. However, once about 100F is passed, no residual structure
remains to promote hydrate formation.
The above cluster model conceptual picture is most likely to occur at the interface,
either in the liquid or the vapor side. The reader should note that the above is a largely
unproven hypothesis, whose only justification is to serve as a mental picture for qualitative
predictions and future corrections.
In contrast to well-determined thermodynamic properties, kinetic characterization of
hydrates is very ill-determined. One has only to turn to the recent review of hydrate kinetics
by Englezos (1995) or to the authors monograph (1998) to determine the following
unsettling facts which act as a state-of-the-art summary:
No satisfactory kinetic model currently exists for formation or dissociation. Due to the
unsatisfactory state of hydrate kinetics knowledge, this area is the subject of intensive
research at the present.
15
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
APPENDIX B
USERS GUIDE FOR HYDOFF AND XPAND PROGRAMS
H-0806.35
Appendix B.
Users Guide for HYDOFF and XPAND Programs
A Word of Caution
While it is hoped that the programs accompanying this book will be of use in
estimating the limiting conditions of hydrate formation, the author should not and cannot be
held totally accountable for the use of the predictions which the program provide. If there is
a safety consideration or an important process decision to be made based upon the
programs predictions, the user is cautioned to obtain a second opinion from someone
knowledgeable in hydrate phase equilibria, before proceeding.
Executive Summary
Program Specifications
This program has been developed to run in IBM-PC compatible computers having
DOS as operating system. The program is executable without any additional hardware or
software requirements.
Contents of the Disk
The 3.5 in. disk provided with this handbook contains four files:
1. HYDOFF.EXE, an executable file to prediction hydrate formation conditions,
2. FEED.DAT, a file to be used as external input of the feed components and composition
for HYDOFF. FEED.DAT is an optional file; it should be noted that HYDOFF will run
regardless whether the file FEED.DAT is present.
3. XPAND.EXE an executable file to determine the isenthalpic (H=0) and isentropic
(S=0) gas expansion conditions, and
4. HYDCALC.XLS, a shortcut estimation spreadsheet to calculate methanol or
monoethylene glycol amounts. Use of this program is specified in Section II.B.
Appendix B provides common examples using HYDOFF and XPAND which may
then be modified by the engineer for his/her own purposes. Section B.1 considers the use
of HYDOFF (and FEED.DAT), while Section B.2 details the use of XPAND.EXE.
B.1. HYDOFF
B.1.a. Running the Program
The program can be executed directly from the 3.5 in disk or copied to the harddrive and then executed. It is recommended to make a backup copy of the program in case
problems occur (e.g. virus). At the DOS prompt, simply type HYDOFF and follow the
instructions given by the program.
It should be noted that at no point in the program is the user asked to enter an initial
guess for the calculations (for pressure predictions). The program has its own internal initial
guess. Also, the user does not have to specify the equilibrium phases for any calculation.
The equilibrium phases are given as output of the predictions.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The standard output for hydrate phase equilibria calculations will display:
Equilibrium phases (I-H-V, LW -H-V or LW -H-V-LHC ).
Equilibrium pressure.
Hydrate equilibrium crystal structure (sI or sII).
Phase components and compositions (i.e. feed, fluid hydrocarbon, and hydrate).
Fractional occupancy of cages by hydrate formers in each type of hydrate cavity.
Different outputs will be shown for each calculation type. Examples to follow will
better illustrate how the program is structured and the format of the output.
Component
Mole %
Methane
Ethane
Propane
i-Butane
n-Butane
Nitrogen
n-Pentane
73.29
6.70
3.90
0.36
0.55
15.00
0.20
n-Hexane
0.00
HYDOFF
FAX:(303) 273-3730
(1)
(2)
TEMPERATURE
Fahrenheit
Kelvin
PRESSURE
psia
kPa
Is the FEED COMPONENTS and COMPOSITION saved under FEED.DAT (No=1 Yes=2)?
1
2. Ethane
5. n-Butane
8. Carbon Dioxide
3. Propane
6. Hydrogen Sulfide
NON-HYDRATE FORMERS
9. n-Pentane
13. Octane
10. i-Pentane
14. Nonane
11. Hexane
15. Decane
12. Heptane
16. Toluene
Methane
: 0.7329
Mole Fraction of
Ethane
: 0.0670
Mole Fraction of
Propane
: 0.0390
Mole Fraction of
i-Butane
: 0.0036
Mole Fraction of
n-Butane
: 0.0055
Mole Fraction of
Nitrogen
: 0.1500
Mole Fraction of
Pentane
: 0.0020
Mole Fraction of
Hexane
: 0.0000
PRESSURE
Pressure
Pressure
Pressure
PREDICTION
prediction
prediction
prediction
at
at
at
at
a given
given T
given T
given T
TEMPERATURE
with Methanol
with Salt (NaCl)
with Salt+MeOH
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
F)
399.92
psia
Experimental pressure
365.1 psia
Methane
Ethane
Propane
i-Butane
n-Butane
Nitrogen
n-Pentane
n-Hexane
FEED
.7329
.0670
.0390
.0036
.0055
.1500
.0020
.0000
VAPOR
.7329
.0670
.0390
.0036
.0055
.1500
.0020
.0000
HYDRATE
.5777
.0299
.3076
.0408
.0063
.0377
.0000
.0000
Methane
Ethane
Propane
i-Butane
n-Butane
Nitrogen
n-Pentane
n-Hexane
SMALL
.6916
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0461
.0000
.0000
LARGE
.0444
.0739
.7602
.1008
.0155
.0011
.0000
.0000
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
PRESSURE
Pressure
Pressure
Pressure
PREDICTION
prediction
prediction
prediction
at
at
at
at
a given
given T
given T
given T
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
TEMPERATURE
with Methanol
with Salt (NaCl)
with Salt+MeOH
6
End of run : HYDOFF
Stop - Program terminated.
Example 2 - Pressure prediction with methanol (experimental data by Ng, H.-J., and
Robinson, D.B. (1983))
HYDRATE PREDICTION PROGRAM: HYDOFF
(ACCOMPANYING THE OFFSHORE HYDRATE HANDBOOK)
Release Date : July 3rd, 1997
COPYRIGHT :
Professor E. Dendy Sloan
Center for Hydrate Research
Department of Chemical and Petroleum-Refining Engineering
Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO 80401
PHONE:(303) 273-3723
FAX:(303) 273-3730
(1)
(2)
TEMPERATURE
Fahrenheit
Kelvin
PRESSURE
psia
kPa
Is the FEED COMPONENTS and COMPOSITION saved under FEED.DAT (No=1 Yes=2)?
1
2. Ethane
5. n-Butane
8. Carbon Dioxide
3. Propane
6. Hydrogen Sulfide
NON-HYDRATE FORMERS
9. n-Pentane
13. Octane
10. i-Pentane
14. Nonane
11. Hexane
15. Decane
12. Heptane
16. Toluene
Methane
: 0.7160
Mole Fraction of
Ethane
: 0.0473
Mole Fraction of
Propane
: 0.0194
Mole Fraction of
n-Butane
: 0.0079
Mole Fraction of
Nitrogen
: 0.0596
Mole Fraction of
Carbon Dioxide
: 0.1419
Mole Fraction of
Pentane
: 0.0079
PRESSURE
Pressure
Pressure
Pressure
PREDICTION
prediction
prediction
prediction
at
at
at
at
a given
given T
given T
given T
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
TEMPERATURE
with Methanol
with Salt (NaCl)
with Salt+MeOH
F)
773.01
psia
Experimental pressure
800.6 psia
Methane
Ethane
Propane
n-Butane
Nitrogen
Carbon Dioxide
n-Pentane
VAPOR
.7160
.0473
.0194
.0079
.0596
.1419
.0079
LIQUID
.7159
.0473
.0194
.0079
.0596
.1419
.0079
HYDRATE
.6033
.0405
.2615
.0132
.0167
.0647
.0000
Methane
Ethane
Propane
n-Butane
Nitrogen
Carbon Dioxide
n-Pentane
LARGE
.1036
.1094
.7064
.0358
.0011
.0390
.0000
PRESSURE
Pressure
Pressure
Pressure
PREDICTION
prediction
prediction
prediction
at
at
at
at
a given
given T
given T
given T
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
TEMPERATURE
with Methanol
with Salt (NaCl)
with Salt+MeOH
2
Enter the required Temperature (in
33.71
F)
10
566.2
Experimental pressure
691.8 psia
psia
Methane
Ethane
Propane
n-Butane
Nitrogen
Carbon Dioxide
n-Pentane
VAPOR
.7159
.0473
.0194
.0079
.0596
.1419
.0079
LIQUID
.7159
.0473
.0194
.0079
.0596
.1419
.0079
HYDRATE
.5931
.0367
.2772
.0139
.0150
.0642
.0000
Methane
Ethane
Propane
n-Butane
Nitrogen
Carbon Dioxide
n-Pentane
LARGE
.0786
.0991
.7487
.0375
.0007
.0317
.0000
PRESSURE
Pressure
Pressure
Pressure
PREDICTION
prediction
prediction
prediction
at
at
at
at
a given
given T
given T
given T
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
TEMPERATURE
with Methanol
with Salt (NaCl)
with Salt+MeOH
11
6
End of run : HYDOFF
Stop - Program terminated.
HYDOFF
FAX:(303) 273-3730
(1)
(2)
TEMPERATURE
Fahrenheit
Kelvin
PRESSURE
psia
kPa
12
Is the FEED COMPONENTS and COMPOSITION saved under FEED.DAT (No=1 Yes=2)?
1
2. Ethane
5. n-Butane
8. Carbon Dioxide
3. Propane
6. Hydrogen Sulfide
NON-HYDRATE FORMERS
9. n-Pentane
13. Octane
10. i-Pentane
14. Nonane
11. Hexane
15. Decane
12. Heptane
16. Toluene
Methane
: 0.8470
Mole Fraction of
Carbon Dioxide
: 0.1530
13
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
F)
496.75
Experimental pressure
494.6 psia
psia
Methane
Carbon Dioxide
VAPOR
.8470
.1530
HYDRATE
.7222
.2778
Methane
Carbon Dioxide
LARGE
.6610
.3191
PRESSURE
Pressure
Pressure
Pressure
PREDICTION
prediction
prediction
prediction
at
at
at
at
a given
given T
given T
given T
TEMPERATURE
with Methanol
with Salt (NaCl)
with Salt+MeOH
14
Methane
: 0.823
Mole Fraction of
Carbon Dioxide
: 0.177
PRESSURE
Pressure
Pressure
Pressure
PREDICTION
prediction
prediction
prediction
at
at
at
at
a given
given T
given T
given T
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
TEMPERATURE
with Methanol
with Salt (NaCl)
with Salt+MeOH
F)
980.03
Experimental pressure
1012.4 psia
psia
VAPOR
15
HYDRATE
Methane
Carbon Dioxide
.8230
.1770
.8230
.1770
.7150
.2850
Methane
Carbon Dioxide
LARGE
.6566
.3305
PRESSURE
Pressure
Pressure
Pressure
PREDICTION
prediction
prediction
prediction
at
at
at
at
a given
given T
given T
given T
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
TEMPERATURE
with Methanol
with Salt (NaCl)
with Salt+MeOH
6
End of run : HYDOFF
Stop - Program terminated.
B.2. XPAND
16
17
Example 1 - Step-by-step calculation of the gas expansion found in Example 12, Section
II.F.3. These steps were used to calculate the final temperature of a gas expanded from
1500 psia, 100 oF to 300 psia.
Gas Composition:
Component
Mole %
Methane
Ethane
Propane
i-Butane
n-Butane
i-Pentane
92.70
5.30
1.40
1.40
0.34
0.14
18
Component
1
Component
2
Component
3
Component
4
Component
5
Component
6
1:
2:
3:
4:
5:
6:
1st
T1 = 559.700 R
T2 = 520.000 R
1st delta H =
891.234 BTU/lbmol
Ideal gas delta H =
-376.414 BTU/lbmol
2nd delta H =
201.219 BTU/lbmol
Total delta H =
313.602 BTU/lbmol
1st delta S =
Ideal gas delta S =
2nd delta S =
Total delta S =
.179 BTU/lbmol-R
2.501 BTU/lbmol-R
.059 BTU/lbmol-R
2.620 BTU/lbmol-R
19
Guess
2nd Guess
T1 = 559.700 R
T2 = 500.000 R
1st delta H =
891.234 BTU/lbmol
Ideal gas delta H =
-562.102 BTU/lbmol
2nd delta H =
216.348 BTU/lbmol
Total delta H =
112.784 BTU/lbmol
1st delta S =
Ideal gas delta S =
2nd delta S =
Total delta S =
.179 BTU/lbmol-R
2.136 BTU/lbmol-R
.070 BTU/lbmol-R
2.245 BTU/lbmol-R
3rd
T1 = 559.700 R
T2 = 488.700 R
1st delta H =
891.234 BTU/lbmol
Ideal gas delta H =
-665.909 BTU/lbmol
2nd delta H =
225.689 BTU/lbmol
Total delta H =
-.364 BTU/lbmol
1st delta S =
Ideal gas delta S =
2nd delta S =
Total delta S =
.179 BTU/lbmol-R
1.926 BTU/lbmol-R
.078 BTU/lbmol-R
2.027 BTU/lbmol-R
20
Guess
21
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
APPENDIX C
HYDRATE BLOCKAGE AND REMEDIATION
H-0806.35
Studies from DeepStar II.A. CTR 208A-1 by Mentor Subsea (1996) denoted by *
shut-in period over a 300-ft section underneath a road crossing. Previously, hot taps
had located a blockage in the same location. While hot tapping was an option, in this
case, it was considered too risky. Furthermore, hydrates do not typically form in
these 6 inch lines if depressurized within the first 24 hours.
To remove the blockage, two methods were used simultaneously. First, the
line was depressurized on both sides of the plug. Then, a welding rig applied
electrical current directly to the 300- ft section of the steel pipe. The line was heated
to 20 to 25 C (68 to 77F) using the welding rig. This approach was effective in
melting the hydrate plug. The remedial operation took two days to complete.
the gas dehydrator was turned on to remove water vapor from the gas stream and (2)
methanol was injected into the gas export line.
Analysis of the liquid samples showed that the methanol content was 11-wt%,
which was well below the 26-wt% required to avoid hydrate formation. However, Elf
reported that the flowline did not plug with hydrates although it experienced
subcooling up to 6C. Hydrates were found just downstream of the choke on the
platform. Due to Joule-Thomson cooling (see Section II.E) the gas/water mixture
experienced the lowest temperature downstream of the choke.
Before re-starting production, the separator was depressurized and circulated
with steam to remove the hydrates. About 9000 gal of methanol were injected into
the pipeline inlet, the outlet and upstream of the pipeline outlet choke. An additional
21,000 gal of methanol was injected during the first two days of restart, when the gas
flow rate was gradually re-established.
The liquid outlet valve of the inlet separator was severely eroded during the
hydrate formation period. This might have been due to a combination of metallic
particles, scale, or hydrate crystals flowing at high velocities through the valve. The
valve had to be replaced. Another reason for forming hydrates downstream of the
choke was the lack of an upstream heater. In many subsea completions, a heater is
installed upstream of the separator and choke to prevent hydrates or wax formation
and to improve the separation efficiency.
10
Case Study C.17. The uninhibited line was shut- in at full well pressure and
cooled to ambient sea temperature. The line was then started and began producing at
a rate of 12MM scf/d without any methanol present. The production line was
maintained for 40 hours without any hydrate blockage of the line. Several blocking
events occurred topside before a blockage occurred somewhere between the template
and riser. After observing pressure changes on both sides of the plug, it was
determined that the plug was approximately 2.5 miles away from the platform. The
hydrate plug was removed through one-sided depressurization. The hydrate plug
dissociated slowly, taking nine days before it was removed.
Figure C.1 shows the measured pressure difference across the two plugs in
Case Studies C.16 and C.17 as a function of time. These curves have been generated
removing large pressure fluctuations that occurred while reducing the pressure. The
figure highlights the change of permeability of the plug as a function of time.
Figure C.2 shows the pressure in the riser during the hydrate removal process.
The equilibrium pressure for the hydrate plugs was approximately 200 psi at the
ambient temperature. Plug 1 was kept under the equilibrium temperature until it was
dissociated. Plug 2 was temporarily kept above the equilibrium point to limit the
cooling effects caused by Joule-Thomson cooling. It was thought that this practice
had little effect on increasing the rate of dissociation.
11
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
Plug 2 (Case Study 17)
400
200
0
0
50
100
150
Time (hours)
12
200
250
300
400
350
Pressure (psi)
300
250
Plug 1 (Case Study 16)
200
150
100
50
0
0
50
100
150
Time (hours)
13
200
250
300
14
carried out over a two week period, and was done in slow steps to prevent any high
pressure buildups due to multiple plugs. After eight weeks, the plug was completely
dissociated and full production could resume. The line was restarted by slowly
sweeping the pipeline with dry gas, building up to high gas rates. The line was
consistently pigged, first with undersized pigs and then full-sized. No problems were
witnessed during start- up.
The hydrate remediation process lasted eight weeks and cost $500,000 to
carry out. Overall, the plug shut-down production for three months and cost $5.5
million due to remediation expenses and loss of sales.
15
A through drillstring perforating gun was then run to shoot the 7 in. casing
just above the gas snad. The gas influx was killed by pumping a 14.2 lbm/gal mud
down the drillstring and into the formation at surface pressures up to 3,100 psi. At
the conclusions of the kill operation, both the chokeline and the kill ine were found
plugged. Subsequent operations were hampered by the inability to use either line.
After cementing operations which secured the well bore, the BOPs were recovered.
Hydrates and trapped gas were found in the chokeline and the kill line of the bottom
eight riser joints.
Case Study 23
Davalath and Barker (1993) described a hydrate problem in 595 ft. of water
located offshore South America. The well was completed with a 7 inch casing and
3.5 inch tubing. Production was gas and condensate at several hundred barrels per
day with a water cut of about six percent. A 15 hour production test was followed by
a 25 hour shut- in period to collect reservoir pressure buildup data.
The well was shut-in at the surface, which exposed the tubing to high pressure
gas and cold 45oF water, which led to the formation of hydrates. Under these
conditions the tubing fluid was about 29oF below the hydrate formation temperature.
Wireline tools were blocked by a bridge inside the tubing string and further pulling
caused separation. Subsequently the lubricator was found to be full of hydrates.
16
Attempts were made to melt hydrates by (1) pouring glycol into the top of the
tubing, (2) using heated mud and seawater, (3) increasing the pressure up to 7,000 psi
at the surface to break the hydrate plug. The above attempts were unsuccessful and
the authors noted that the pressure increase caused a more stable hydrate, rather than
blowing it from the tubing.
A coiled tubing string was stripped inside the tubing and 175oF glycol was
circulated to the hydrate plug at 311 ft. Direct contact with the hot glycol removed
the hydrate plug but more than 13 days were lost because of this incident.
Case Study 24
Davalath and Barker (1993) also reported hydrate formation during well
abandonment in the Gulf of Mexico. During normal production methanol was
injected at the subsea tree. After stopping production the flow lines and tree piping
were filled with seawater and corrosion inhibitor from the surface to the seafloor.
During plug and abandonment operations, the operator found ice- like solids inside the
tubing bore of the tree at the seafloor and in the annulus bore. The solid hydrate
plugs were dissolved by circulating heated CaBr2 brine through a coiled tubing string
run inside the tubing.
17
line was a Separator- Receiver Unit (SRU-10) which contained a pig receiver and
blowdown.
Temperatures were not analyzed because the RTD was an external measurement.
However, the pressures at the four sites, the orifice measurement, and the gamma ray
measurements proved invaluable in analyzing hydrate formation and dissociation.
The following steps were used to conduct a test:
18
Test
Dates
Block Time, hrs
Plug Length, ft
Max P, psi
Max Gas Sprfcl
Velocity cm/s
Max Load, n
Leakage, Mass/
Load (g/s/n)
Max plug
Velocity, ft/s
Shr Strss N/cm2
1
1/27-31/97
85
NA
174
12.07
2
2/1-5/97
62
NA
Aborted
NA
3
2/6-8/97
37
25
390
NA
4
2/19-20/97
143
90, 300, 30, 70
475
1.15
9857
0.00150.0067
NA
NA
NA
2960
0.00029
26908
0.00038
NA
270
65
0.13
NA
2.14
2.29
19
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
APPENDIX D
RULES OF THUMB SUMMARY
H-0806.35
Rule of Thumb 1: (Section II.A) At 39oF, hydrates will form in a natural gas system
if free water is available and the pressure is greater than 166 psig.
Rule-of-Thumb 3: (Section II.B.3.b) At 39oF and pressures greater than 1000 psia,
the maximum amount of methanol lost to the vapor phase is 1 lbm MeOH/MMscf
for every we ight % MeOH in the free water phase.
Rule-of-Thumb 4: (Section II.B.3.b) At 39oF and pressures greater than 1000 psia,
the maximum amount of MEG lost to the gas is 0.002 lbm/MMscf.
145
Rule-of-Thumb 12. (Section II.F.2.b) PVP may be used to inhibit pipelines with
subcooling less than 10oF for flow lines with short gas residence times (less than 20
minutes).
146
Rule of Thumb 19. Regardless of the method(s) used to dissociate the hydrates,
the time required for hydrate dissociation is usually days, weeks, or months. After
a deliberate dissociation action is taken, both confidence and patience are required
to observe the result over a long period of time.
Rule of Thumb 20. (Section III.C) When dissociating a hydrate plug, it should
always be assumed that multiple plugs exist both from a safety and a technical
standpoint. While one plug may cause the initial flow blockage, a shut-in will cause
the entire line to rapidly cool into the hydrate region, and low lying points of water
accumulation will rapidly convert to hydrate at water-gas interfaces.
Rule of Thumb 21. (Section III.C.3) Because the limits of a hydrate plug cannot be
easily located in a subsea environment, heating is not recommended for subsea
dissociation.
147
Rule-of-Thumb 22. (Section IV.B.1.a) Methanol loss costs can be substantial when
the total fraction of either the vapor or the oil/condensate phase is very large
relative to the water phase.
Rule-of-Thumb 23. (Section IV.B.1.b) The cost of a fixed leg North Sea platforms
is $77,000/ton.
148
10.0
PARAFFIN WAXES
10.1
Introduction
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
As hydrocarbon fluids are produced from the reservoir they will inevitably cool and
undergo changes in pressure. As a consequence of these changes, high molecular weight
components of the oil have the potential to precipitate as solids. Among these are the
saturates or paraffins which can crystallize as waxes and have the potential to cause a
host of operational problems anywhere throughout the production and export system.
Waxes can solidify in the bulk oil as discrete particles or crystals and they can condense
onto cooled surfaces such as pipe walls and tubulars. The vast majority of the waxes will
crystallize in the bulk oil impacting the low temperature flow behavior, potentially
resulting in pumping and restart difficulties. Another major issue, especially for subsea
flowlines, is the build-up of solid waxy layers on the pipe walls. These layers, if allowed
to form, will require periodical removal to avoid blockages or reduced throughputs.
Although these two issues are the main focus of this section and of most design concerns,
there are other ways in which wax can equally impact production and export systems.
While the majority of waxes are transported straight through the system, a small
percentage can have detrimental effects on downstream process equipment. Another
major problem is that of gravity settling in which waxy layers or sludges are formed in
the bottom of storage tanks, shipping and process. A common problem for shipping
crude is the loss of cargo to sludge formation. A VLCC tanker may leave 10,000 BBL of
waxy sludge in its tanks on discharge, which may have to be dug out manually.
The key to preventing or mitigating operational problems caused by waxes is to identify
the potential problems early in the design phase of a project. All the problems associated
with paraffin wax formation are not insurmountable and most can be readily designed out
with proper consideration to fluid properties.
This section is structured to aid the facilities designer ident ify and effectively manage the
risks to production and the environment from paraffin wax formation. The section begins
by briefly outlining what waxes are, how to predict their behavior, and then explains how
they can impact production systems giving examples where appropriate. It then
continues by addressing design issues associated with wax and the development of wax
management strategies to avoid or minimize their impact in a controlled, safe and
economical manner.
H-0806.35
10-1
1-Dec-00
10.2
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Will paraffin wax deposit or build- up layers with- in the production system?
If so, it is crucial to determine where and when it may occur and whether it will
adversely impact production or monitoring/control. If left unchecked a wax can
effectively choke back production. In severe cases wells have been killed and
flowlines have been totally blocked.
H-0806.35
10-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
A decision tree outlining basic requirements to address paraffin wax related issues is
shown (HOLD).
10.3
Phase Behavior
To assess any impact paraffin wax may have on production or export systems; knowledge
of the basic wax formation behavior is required.
In its simplest form all wax related problems could be avoided if the fluid and surfaces in
contact with the fluids can be maintained above the wax formation onset temperature or
cloud point or wax appearance temperature. Therefore, at the very least the onset
conditions must be determined. However, the onset temperature can range from below
20F for condensates to over 140F for waxy oils. In most cases, especially subsea, it is
generally impractical to achieve the goal of maintaining the system temperature
sufficiently high to avoid wax formation. Eventually the fluids have to cool and waxes
will form, but being able to dictate where and the rate at which the waxes form is the goal
of good design.
This section deals with what waxes are and how they behave in relation to condensate
and black oil production. Understanding this phase behavior is critical when assessing if
and where wax will form. The impact of and how to dealt with this wax formation on
fluid rheological properties and system pumpability is the subject of section 10.4. While
the build- up of solid wax layers is addressed in section 10.5.
H-0806.35
10-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
temperature. It is generally regarded that waxes consist of branched (iso), cyclic and
straight chain (normal) alkanes having chain lengths in excess of 17 carbon atoms (C 17 )
and potentially up to and over C100 . The distribution of these compounds depends on the
individual crude oil, but generally above C20, the amount of any single carbon number
paraffin decreases exponentially. Typically the amount of C60 plus material will be less
than one weight percent of the total oil.
The normal paraffins are generally the more abundant species forming macro-crystalline
structures. Iso and cyclic paraffins may also be present in significant quantities, which
can form microcrystalline waxes. These paraffins have structures which are extremely
varied from near straight chain n-paraffins with several methyl branches to very complex
cyclic structure as illustrated in Figure 10.3-1. Each isomer has slightly different
physical and chemical properties, and the number of possible isomeric variations for
waxes is very large. However, it is a characteristic of crude oils that the isomers are
predominately those with single methyl branches. The cyclic paraffins may consist of a
single cyclo-pentane or cyclo-hexane ring structure on a long chain normal or branched
paraffin, or any number of ring structures with many straight or branched chains.
(n o r m a l ) n - p a r a f f i n
iso-paraffin
Cyclo-paraffin
H-0806.35
10-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
the oil is reduced, more and more of the wax forming paraffins of decreasing chain length
will subsequently crystallize.
The wax content of a crude is only a measure of the total amount of wax forming
compounds in the oil. It does not represent the amount of material that could crystallize
at a given set of conditions, nor how this will impact fluid properties.
The structure of the paraffin molecules will also impact the morphology and growth rate
of the wax crystals. Pure normal paraffins produce large regular macro-crystalline
structures, while isomers and cyclic paraffins produce a microcrystalline wax. In crude
oils both types of waxes regularly occur. The large crystals associated with pure nparaffins are rarely encountered in reality due to poisoning from the incorporation of
isomers and other materials in the oil.
Melting points of normal paraffins are affected by whether the chain contains an even or
odd number of carbon atoms. N-paraffins with an even number of carbon atoms pack
more closely in the crystalline state and result in higher melting temperatures. The iso
and cyclic paraffins produce microcrystalline waxes with higher melting temperatures
than their n-paraffin counterparts.
The cloud point and solid wax fraction wax at a given temperature are not constants for a
given fluid. They are affected by pressure and the amount of light ends in solution. The
cloud point represents a phase boundary that is dependent on the solubility of the waxes
in the oil. The higher the proportion of wax solvents, such as benzene, the lower the
cloud point. Pressure also has an effect through the differential compressibilities of the
light and heavy components.
The Figure 10.3-2 illustrates a typical wax phase envelope. The cloud point will be
lowest at the fluids bubble point. Above the bubble point, increasing pressure reduces
the relative volume of the light ends raising the formation temperature, even for stock
tank oil. Below the bubble point, these light ends are lost to the gas phase again raising
the cloud point.
H-0806.35
10-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Wax Formation
Pressure
Re
ser
vo
ir F
lui
d
No Wax
Sto
ck
Ta
nk
Oi
l
Bubble Point
Temperature
10-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
addressed. However, others such as analyzing fluids from one zone when the well will
be producing from multiple zones are harder to correct.
If no samples are available:
An estimate of the phase boundaries including the cloud point may be possible from the
PVT and geo-chemical compositional analysis. Such an estimate should be checked
against a database of previously analyzed fluids.
If no sample or compositional data are available:
Some limited comparisons could be drawn from adjacent wells or fields producing from
similar fluids to those expected with the he lp of the geo-chemists. However, there are
many examples were fluids from adjacent wells producing from the same field exhibit
significantly different behavior to each other and from that expected.
Even though these comparisons can be made where no samples or data exists it is
advisable to consider that wax will form somewhere in the production system and
measures should be taken to ensure it can be dealt with. Wax formation has been
experienced at temperatures in excess of 140F.
Cloud Point (Wax appeara nce temperature)
The wax appearance temperature (WAT) or cloud point is the singularly most important
parameter relating to wax formation. It is the temperature at which waxes first crystallize
from solution. If the fluid or any surface in contact with the fluid are below the cloud
point wax has the potential to form. Waxes can exist above the cloud point, due to
hysteresis, if previously precipitated.
There are a number of measurement techniques available (see section 10.6). The choice
of which to use will depend on the type of oil and amount of sample available as well as
the companys individual preference. These preferences are usually linked to experience
and comparisons to a database.
Due to crystallization kinetics, the measurement techniques themselves can influence the
derived value. It is highly recommended that cloud point be determined using two
different techniques or are at least consistent with the operators experience. With care
the cloud point can be determined to an accuracy of 5F between two different
techniques performed by the same laboratory.
H-0806.35
10-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
H-0806.35
10-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
18
16
WaxyCrude(17%wt)
Solid Wax Fraction %wt
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
-25
-5
15
35
55
75
95
115
135
Temperature F
It is now more usual to predict the wax content as a function of temperature using
thermodynamic models. This information is then used in subsequent deposition
modeling.
Compositional Analysis
To predict the wax phase behavior a compositional analysis of the wax forming
compounds in the crude oil are required. As these are the longer chain paraffins, a
standard C7+ analysis from a PVT report is generally insufficient. A quantitative
compositional analysis out to C30 should be performed as a minimum requirement. This
type of analysis can be obtained from a PVT or geochemistry laboratory.
Since waxes are predominately the longer chain paraffins (C 30+), a detail analysis of these
is required to accurately predict phase behavior. This can be obtained via high
temperature gas chromatography (HTGC) compositional analysis, sometimes referred to
as an extended paraffin analysis. The technique has been only been recently developed
for high molecular weight paraffins and is not as readily obtainable. A geochemistry
laboratory is the most likely source for this analysis. Most laboratories offer a semi
quantitative HTGC analysis which must be normalized using the standard C30 PVT
analysis.
H-0806.35
10-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Figure 10.3-4 is a plot of HTGC data for two crude oils which shows normal waxes
extending out to a carbon number of 80. Recent research has indicated that the cloud
point of a crude oil can possibly be correlated to the C50+ fraction.
10
Crude A
N-Paraffin (wt%)
1
0.1
Crude B
0.01
0.001
0.0001
0.00001
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Carbon Number
10-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
build-up. However, on its own the phase behavior will not determine how much wax will
stick to a surface or how the precipitated waxes will influence flow behavior. Thus most
wax thermodynamic simulators are coupled with pipeline wax build- up simulators to
generate the property tables required for deposition simulation.
All the models calculate the vapor- liquid equilibria of the system including the phase
envelope, saturation and critical points, cricondentherms and cricondenbars. Cloud
points and solid paraffin fractions are calculated as a function of temperature and
pressure; however, they can differ significantly in their handling of the wax phase.
The thermodynamic prediction usually takes the form of a solid- liquid-vapor equilibrium,
in which the fluid phases are described by an Equation of State (EOS) such as SoaveRedlich-Kwong (SRK) or Peng-Robinson (PR), and the solid phase is usually modeled as
a solid solution such as those proposed by Won. Here the solid wax fraction is assumed
to be a single solid composed of a mixture of the individual wax components. An
alternative approach proposed by Firoozabadi uses a multi-solid model in which the wax
components individually freeze out to form a mixture of solids.
Models generally differ in their treatment of the C7+ fraction or solid phase and require
different levels of sophistication in their input parameters.
Some models treat the C7+ fraction as a single or series of pseudo-components and
assume a homogenous solid mixture is precipitated. Others assume a heterogeneous solid
mixture where waxes crystallizing at a given point remain isolated and do not mix with
waxes precipitating later these may also take account of the changing liquid composition.
The majority of models assume the solid phase is formed predominately from the nparaffins and ignores the iso and cyclic components.
The former models require a limited C7+ characterization as input and the model assumes
or calculates a distribution of the wax components. The latter allow the user to input a
detailed composition or distribution of these wax- forming compounds. The chemical and
physical properties of these components needed to calculate the phase behavior are preprogrammed into the code but can be tuned in some instances.
In performing phase behavior predictions for waxes it is recommended to seek expert
advise. The choice of model and validation of input and output data is still a new and
developing science.
H-0806.35
10-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Modeling Considerations
In performing phase behavior predictions for waxes it is recommended to seek expert
advise. The choice of model and validation of input and output data is still a new and
developing science. Wax is not a single component but a complex mixture of many
individual species. Hence the phase behavior can be difficult to predict and variations in
the predicted cloud point of over 20C are not uncommon.
The simplest models utilizing a single or very limited number of pseudo components for
the C7+ characterization have the advantage of being easier but may over simplify the
complex nature of waxes. However, the cloud point and phase behavior of the depositing
waxes are dictated by the behavior and amount of the longer chain paraffins. It is
therefore important to account for these components when describing wax formation.
This is usually done but utilizing a series of pseudo components each describing a
different wax fraction. Here averaged physical and chemical properties are used based on
an assumed (exponential) distribution of the individual wax components within a given
Molecular weight range. However, detailed characterizations of these fractions indicate
that the n-paraffin distributions do not always exhibit an exponential decay with
increasing carbon numbers. In theory a more robust prediction should be obtained from
models utilizing a measured distribution of all the individual components. However, the
limiting factor is the level of sophistication and accuracy of such an extended paraffin
characterization required as input. Often the analysis does not extend reliably beyond
C50 . Therefore, an extended exponential distribution is often assumed. (Also Iso, cyclo
paraffins are not included in extended analyses).
HTGC techniques used to characterize these high n-paraffin distributions are still
evolving. The analysis is limited by the detection limit of the instrument currently
around 0.0001 percent. For many crude oils the amount of any single component beyond
C50 is close to this limit.
As previously mentioned variations in how the fluid is characterized can lead to
significant changes in the predicted cloud points and phase behavior. The definition of
cloud point within the models can also lead to wide variations in the results. Here the
cloud point is usually defined at a certain fraction of solid wax present. This may vary
between 0.00001 and 0.001 percent by weight, which can lead to a variation of over 20C
in some cases.
H-0806.35
10-12
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Therefore, wherever possible the predictions should be tuned to reliable experiment data.
This is usually in the form of the stock tank oil cloud point. There are several methods of
tuning this data. Firstly the amount of solid phase required in the model could be
adjusted to meet the value determined in the measurement. An alternative is to vary the
amount of and/or physical and chemical properties in any lumped or pseudo components
or the distribution of any assumed extended paraffin distribution.
Thermodynamic modeling can also be used to validate the compositional analysis and
sample integrity. If the modeling results and cloud point approximate to the temperatures
of sampling then waxes could have deposited waxes during sampling. A sudden tail off
in the higher n-paraffins can also indicate waxes may have been lost. It is possible to
correct the paraffin distribution to account of any lost components and determine an
improved cloud point.
10.3.5 Design Considerations
To properly assess the potential for wax to impact production operations or system design
it is essential to characterize the fluids. Wax analysis should be incorporated into the
sweet of fluid characterizations and not be left as an afterthought.
To perform a meaningful analysis a representative valid sample is essential. Serious
errors have occurred through sample contamination (with drilling fluid) or where waxes
have been lost during sampling. These issues can usually be identified and addressed.
However, others such as analyzing fluids from one zone when the well will be producing
from multiple zo nes are harder to correct. Where no samples are available some limited
comparisons can be drawn from PVT and geo-chemical data or from adjacent wells.
Details of fluid analysis are given in sections 10.3.3 and 10.3.4
The first questions that need to be asked are: Is wax going to form and if so where and
when?
To totally avoid wax in the system, the fluid and the surfaces in contact with the fluid
must be maintained above the cloud point. However, this is often impractical especially
during shut- ins and periods of reduced production.
Avoiding Wax Formation:
If maintaining a high system temperature is a feasible option then an accurate
determination of the cloud point may be sufficient without further analysis. This may be
H-0806.35
10-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
the case for the entire productio n system or to assess whether wax can be avoided in a
specific area such as the wellbore.
To avoid wax formation and not consider remediation or control strategies in the design
there must be confidence that the system temperature profiles will be sufficiently above
the cloud point in all the areas of interest (i.e. the entire wellbore or flowline) for the
entire production lifetime.
It is therefore important to understand the behavior, risks and uncertainty in both the
cloud point and the thermal performance of the system.
With care the cloud point can be determined to an accuracy of 5F. However, predicted
thermal profiles such as flowing wellhead temperatures, may not be so accurate,
especially over the life of the field. Large areas of uncertainty exist in the reservoir
performance in terms of projected production profiles and with external environmental
conditions. The performance of the insulating materials or systems and thermal profile
modeling must also be considered and not taken for granted.
Generally, it is recommended that to totally avoid wax formation, the lowest predicted
temperature profiles should be no less than 10F above the maximum cloud point value.
Confidence in Cloud Point
Cloud points are a phase boundary in that the onset of wax formation will vary with
temperature, pressure and liquid phase composition. In a production system the fluids
will exhibit a minimum cloud point as they pass through the bubble point. This usually
occurs within the wellbore. As the fluids are produced the pressure will fall and the
cloud point will increase. The maximum cloud point is usually equivalent to the stock
tank value and experienced downstream of separation.
H-0806.35
10-14
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Bubble
point
Temperature
Choke
Distance
Flo
wli
ne
We
llbo
re
Res
erv
oir
Figure 10.3-5 illustrates the care that must be exercised when assessing where wax will
form. The dark shared area represents the uncertainty in temperature profile of the fluids
flowing in the system. The lighter shade indicates the potential differences in cloud
points.
The dead oil cloud point gives an absolute maximum value for a multiphase system.
However, in some systems the dead oil value may be overly conservative (up to 30F for
some condensate systems), or margin of safety between measured cloud point and
predicted system temperature is unacceptably slim. Then it will be appropriate to
determine the actual in-situ live oil cloud points.
The difference between live and dead oil cloud points can be anywhere from a few
degrees to over 40F. However, the live values often quoted are determined at the
reservoir fluid bubble point which is likely occur in the wellbore where fluids are
H-0806.35
10-15
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
relatively hot. At the cool end of a flowline the pressure may have reduced significantly
and the in-situ cloud point could be much closer to the stock tank oil value.
The dead oil cloud point represents a realistic maximum value for design purposes and
does agree well with field data for the onset of wax deposition build-up.
Multiphase Flow & Turbulence
The flow regimes have no effect on the thermodynamic properties of the waxes, however
they can affect wax crystal growth, effecting rheological properties. These are described
in detail in sections 10.4 and 10.5.
Water
The production or introductio n of wax has no discernable effect on the phase behavior of
the waxes themselves. However, partitioning of gas and chemicals into or out of the
water phase could have some effect.
Water will raise the heat capacity of the production stream thus effecting where the in the
system the fluids cool below the cloud point.
Shut-Ins
It is inevitable that production will be shut- in occasionally. Depending on the length of
the shut- in it may not be possible to prevent the system from cooling below the cloudpoint. If this occurs wax will form and the impact of wax structures on fluid rheological
properties and solid wax build-up must be addressed (Sections 10.4 and 10.5).
Commingling Fluids
If two or more fluids are mixed the resulting phase behavior will be dependent on both
the paraffin wax composition and the solvency of the blend. Providing the fluid streams
are all mixed above the cloud point of each individual fluid, then the resulting blend can
be treated as a single fluid and the phase behavior easily predicted using a
thermodynamic simulator.
However, if the fluids are mixed below any one of the individual cloud points the
resulting wax formation behavior is complicated by potential dissolution of precipitated
waxes in fresh solvent and co-crystallization onto existing wax crystals. These
phenomenon are fairly insignificant in predicting wax phase behavior but can have a
H-0806.35
10-16
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
major impact on the rheological behavior of waxy oils downstream of the mixing point
(See section 10.4).
Gas Lift
For the purposes of predicting wax phase behavior gas lift can be treated as commingling
of two fluids. However lift gas can have a detrimental effect on the wax formation
properties of the oil. If lean gas is used it can strip out light-end solvents into the gas
phase thus raising the cloud point. Again these effects should be simulated using a
thermodynamic model. The cooling effect the lift gas may have on the tubing must also
be considered.
Chokes/Flashing
High pressure gradients when flashing cause Joule Thomson cooling effects which may
result in large sub-cooling of the waxes. Coupled with the highly turbulent flow and
presence of gas bubbles crystallization is likely to be instantaneous in the bulk fluid when
the fluids drop below the cloud point. Crystal structure could be very different, forming
many tiny individual crystals as opposed to larger amorphous growth associated with
slow cooling. These effects may impact wax deposition and rheological behavior but are
ignored in modeling wax phase behavior.
Inhibition
In addition to avoiding wax formation through controlling temperature the phase
behavior and onset temperatures can also be modified. The guaranteed method,
sometimes used, is to dilute the fluid with a wax solvent. This is akin to methanol or
glycol for hydrate control. The solvent could be a proprietary product or another light
hydrocarbon production stream. Either way a significant volumetric quantity (5 to 50
percent) is needed to have any significant effect at lowering cloud points.
Alternative lower dosage kinetic inhibitors are now under development. These like the
kinetic Threshold Hydrate Inhibitors work by suppressing nucleation and/or preventing
crystal growth. Being kinetic inhibitors they can suppress wax formation by a certain
level of subcooling for a given time period. The greater the subcooling (suppression of
cloud point) the greater the driving force for crystallization and therefore the shorter the
time period before the inhibitor fails and the wax precipitates. This is unlikely to be of
major concern in a producing stream where the fluids are constantly cooling and the
target is to inhibit to a given temperature. However, they will be of concern when
H-0806.35
10-17
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
protecting a system during a shut- in, where the system will continue to cool and remain at
or below the design target temperature for a significant time period.
These cloud point suppressants (CPS) although new to the upstream industry have been
used in diesel fuels for a number of years. However, at present the degree of suppressio n
is still small (<10F), performance is case specific and expensive requiring up to 0.5
percent volume of inhibitor. They are not to be confused with pour point depressants
(PPD), which act on wax crystal morphology at lower temperatures.
A more realistic approach is to accept wax will form and utilize a number of control
methods to prevent or minimize its impact on viscosity and solid wax build- up. These
include chemical wax inhibitors, which can modify wax crystal growth, dispersant, and
surfactants. Most are relatively effective at dosage rates (<0.1 percent by volume) but
again are case specific. Details of all these inhibitors are given in the relevant sections on
pumpability and wax deposition (sections 10.4 and 10.5).
Further Reading:
Won K W Thermodynamics for Solid Solution-Liquid-Vapor Equilibria: Wax Phase
formation from Heavy Hydrocarbon Mixture. Fluid Phase Equilibria, 30, 1986
Brown T S, V G Niesen and D D Erickson The Effects of Light Ends and High
Pressures on Paraffin Formation. SPE 28505 1994
Pedersen Karen Schou, Prediction of Cloud Point Temperatures and Amount of Wax
Precipitated. SPE Prod & Facilities, Feb. 1995
Lira Galeana C, Firoozabadi A and Prausnitz J M. Thermodynamics of Wax
Precipitation in Petroleum Mixtures. AIChE Journal 42 1995
Hanson, Asger B, Elfinn Larsen, Walther B Pedersen, Anne B Nielsen and Hans Petter
Ronningsen.
Wax Precipitation from North Sea Crude Oils 3. Precipitation and
Dissolution of Wax Studied by Differential Scanning Calorimetry. Energy & Fuels 5
1991
Hansen et al Wax Precipitation from North Sea Crude Oils 2. Solid Phase as Function of
Temperature Determined by Pulsed NMR. Energy & Fuels 5 1991
H-0806.35
10-18
1-Dec-00
10.4
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Impact on Pumpability/Restart
Wax crystallization can have a significant impact on the low temperature flow behavior
of crude oils and waxy condensates. When an oil cools below its cloud point waxes will
start to crystallize from solution. Here the amount and morphology of the crystallized
wax fraction will influence the flow behavior of the oil.
At low enough temperatures sufficient wax may have crystallized to from structures and
the oil will start to solidify (gel). Under conditions of no- flow the temperature at which
this occurs is approximated by the pour point. However, the pour point does not
necessarily represent the temperature at which the fluid in the pipeline will suddenly
solidify and become immovable. There are many examples of production systems
operating at temperatures below the pour point where the oil is still pumpable providing
sufficient energy is applied.
Fortunately, most oils behave in a predictable fashion being relatively fluid and easy to
pump. However, as the solid wax fraction increases the behavior will become
increasingly difficult to predict. At low temperatures fluid properties can be orders of
magnitude different from that anticipated. Such behavior normally manifests itself
during shutdowns or later in field life when production rates drop off. Here at low
production rates the apparent viscosities may be high, in some cases so high that the
available pumping pressure is insufficient to maintain flow. This is a potential problem
in subsea lines where the fluid temperatures fall to that of the seabed.
This section outlines the potential behaviors of crude oils when wax is present. It will
deal with the impact or this behavior on pipeline design and methods available to mitigate
any problems. Whether the fluid is a highly waxy high pour point crude or a light oil the
basic methodologies are the same.
To account for the influence of wax on fluid pumpability and restart behavior the
following questions must be addressed.
H-0806.35
10-19
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
H-0806.35
10-20
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Shear Thinning
Shear thinning is generally the first non-Newtonian behavior experienced in most oils on
cooling below the cloud point. At zero shear or flow the fluid exhibits a finite but not
infinite viscosity. As the shear rate is increased the viscosity decreases. This fall in
viscosity does not continue indefinitely but tends to an asymptotic value beyond a certain
shear where the fluid exhibits apparent Newtonian behavior (see figure). The variation in
viscosity with increasing shear rate is reversible, thus as shear rates (flowrates) reduce the
viscosity will increase. Figure 10.4-1 illustrates the relationship between viscosity and
shear rate for a shear thinning fluid.
The relationship between the shear rate and shear stress can be expressed as a power law
function:
= n
Note: for Newtonian fluids: n = 1
and
K = Viscosity
Viscosity cP
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
H-0806.35
10-21
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
This behavior is relatively easy to characterize. There are several methodologies and
wide range of instruments available suited to waxy crude oils. However, simple
kinematic or PVT viscosity data are not appropriate below the cloud point, as they do not
measure viscosity as a function of shear rate.
Shear Thickening (Dilatancy)
Dilatant behavior is essentially the opposite of shear thinning. Here the viscosity
increases with increasing shear rate. This behavior is usually associated with high solids
fractions at high shear rates. It is rarely experienced in crude oil transportation.
Fluid characterization and methodologies for design are basically the same as for shear
thinning behavior. Dilatant behavior can generally be described by the same power law
equations.
Thixotropic Behavior
In addition to temperature and shear dependency, the viscosities of many waxy oils also
exhibit a time dependent effect. At a given temperature the viscosity of an oil can
decrease with time when subjected to shear. When the shear is removed or reduced the
fluid can fully or partially regain its original viscosity.
This behavior is caused by interactions between the individual wax particles and the
development of macro structures. As the temperature falls and the solid wax fraction
increases this behavior can become dominant. This is especially true near to and below
the pour point
At a given flow or shear rate structures and ordering of the wax fraction will develop with
time affecting the viscosity. If the shear is then increased these structures can be broken
down resulting in a reduction in viscosity (shear thinning) and new ordering established.
If the shear is then reduced new additional structures can develop and the viscosity may
recover. Figure 10.4-2 illustrates this behavior.
H-0806.35
10-22
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Apparent Viscosity
Flowrate
Time
Most waxy oils are not strictly thixotropic but are shear degradable as the structures are
not fully recove rable.
Gelation and Yield Stress
When sufficient solid wax has precipitated the particles can start to form interlocking
structure networks. These structures can dramatically increase viscosity and eventually
solidify or gel the oil. The flow behavior of this gelled oil is very complex and requires
careful analysis at conditions relative to production conditions. In addition to shear
thinning or thixotropic behavior the oil may exhibit a yield stress where the apparent
viscosity at zero shear is infinite. Yield stress is the force required to initialize flow.
Under flowing conditions the oil will become very viscous and highly non-Newtonian
once cooled close to and below the pour point. Under these conditions the oil exhibits a
dynamic yield stress which must be overcome to maintain flow. If the applied stresses
fall below this value then flow will cease.
Under static conditions there is no shear to disrupt the developing structures and the oil
can form a gel easily. The temperature at which this occurs approximated by the pour
point. The force required to overcome this gel structure is known as the static yield stress
or more often just yield stress. On applying a small force the gel may deform and start to
creep eventually flowing. But for practical reasons the yield stress is the force required to
initiate flow in a reasonable time frame (minutes for a pipeline).
H-0806.35
10-23
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
At lower temperatures the wax structures can form into a porous media in which the wax
forms a solid matrix entrapping the liquid oil. Such a structure will behave as a solid,
requiring very high stress before flowing.
Once the yield stress has been overcome and flow has initiated the gel structure will
break down under the action of shear. The rate of breakdown and development of flow is
very important to ensuring that full equilibrium flowing condition can be re-established.
Here characterizing the time dependence thixotropic behavior of the fluid is crucial.
Note that for most oils the pour point corresponds to a solid wax fraction of between only
2 to 5 weight percent. This is generally irrespective of the oils quoted or nominal wax
content. However, generally the higher the nominal wax content, the greater the solid
wax fraction at a given temperature, and thus the higher the pour point.
Sample History (The Importance Sample Handling)
Thermal and mechanical shear history an oil is subjected to can significantly effect the
low temperature flow properties. Viscosities and yield stresses at a given temperature
can be very different depending on the flowrates and temperature profiles throughout the
entire production system or its handling in the laboratory.
Here the formation of wax structures is dictated by the rate of wax crystallization,
morphology and crystal growth. These will be influenced by the amount of energy in the
system and the presence of existing wax particles and structures, which provide suitable
sites for further crystal growth. These particles and structures will in turn have been
influenced by the shear and thermal conditions in which they developed.
Temperature cycling: On heating waxes will start to dissolve. However, unless all the
crystalline and microcrystalline waxes are returned to solution they can act as nucleation
sites for subsequent crystal growth. The oil may retain a memory of past handling
resulting in a high viscosity state. The microcrystalline cyclo and iso paraffins can have
significantly higher melting temperatures than the n-paraffins. Thus the temperature
required to destroy the oils me mory of past history may be significantly higher than the
cloud point.
H-0806.35
10-24
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
This effect can be illustrated by the pour point of a waxy oil in which the sample was
subsequently reheated to increasing temperatures. It can be seen in Figure 10.4-3 that a
temperature of at least 50C to 60C was required to dissolve all the waxes and start to
destroy sample memory.
30
25
20
Pour Point C
15
10
5
0
-5
-10
-15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Re-heat Temperature C
Cooling rates: Rapid cooling can lead to supercooling and tends to produce many small
wax crystals while slow cooling can produce large crystal agglomerates. These effects on
crystal morphology and the effects of the morphology on flow properties can be
significant but are not very well understood and are very unpredictable.
Shear: Structures developing under low shear conditions may result in higher viscosities
but can be degraded by high shear.
These issues are important in a pipeline as the fluids flow properties may change with
changing production profiles or during transients such as start-up.
It is therefore important when analyzing waxy fluids to simulate conditions the fluids are
likely to encounter in the field. This includes restoring the sample to a condition it would
have in the production system, i.e. as if it where produced from the reservoir. Here it is
probable that initially all the waxes will be in solution. When examining export systems,
thermal profiles during processing (separation) may impact downstream flow properties.
H-0806.35
10-25
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
700
600
High Shear 1000s-1
Temp Cycled
Viscosity cP
500
400
300
200
Low Shear 1s-1
100
High Shear 1000s-1
0
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
Temperature F
The viscosity of a waxy oil (25 weight percent wax, ASTM pour point 70F) was
measured as a function of temperature at two shear rates. In the first instance the oil was
temperature cycled to 50C prior to cooling resulting in the very high viscosities.
Cooling under high shear produced lower viscosities and a lower pour point (40F
compared to 70F for the low shear case). A second sample was subjected to an identical
procedure except the oil was heated to reservoir temperature 85C prior to cooling. This
resulted in the much low viscosities for both the high and low shear cases and lower pour
points (<20F and 25F for the high and low shear respectively).
Emulsions
Flow properties of emulsions can be very complex and virtually impossible to predict.
They will depend on the oil viscosity, water cut, the presence of waxes and other
suspended solids both in the oil and water and the droplet sizes.
There are two categories of emulsion associated with hydrocarbon production: oil
external and water external. In most black oil systems emulsions formed from produced
water start out as oil external. Here the water droplets are carried in a continuous oil
phase. At low water cuts (<5 percent) there is little impact on flow properties. As the
water cut increases the emulsion becomes increasing viscous until they invert into a water
H-0806.35
10-26
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
continuous phase and the apparent viscosity is radically reduced. The Figure 10.4-5
illustrates the effect water cuts, in the form of emulsion, can have on viscosity.
The effect on viscosity will depend not only on the water cut but also on the size and size
distribution of the droplets. Very small tightly pack droplets can increase the viscosity
my several orders of magnitude. Droplet size will also impact emulsion stability and the
inversion point. The inversion point can be anywhere between 25 and 70 percent water.
It is rarely a clear inversion; at high water cuts viscous oil continuous emulsions are often
carried along with free water.
Apparent Viscosity
Inversion Point
Water Cut %
100
10-27
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Where water is present at low temperatures the risk of hydrate formation must be
considered. While the water is emulsified there may be less tendency to agglomerate
hydrates. However, very strong gels have been experienced where conditions for
hydrates and gelation from waxy oils existed together.
10.4.2 Fluid Analysis
Flow properties for crude oils are not easily predicted even for non-waxy low pour point
fluids. Wherever possible viscosity data should be obtained on relevant samples. PVT
derived data and correlations are generally only suitable where fluids are Newtonian, i.e.
above the cloud point. Once the waxes have started to precipitate flow behavior should be
thoroughly investigated.
Given the complex behavior of waxy crude oils and their dependence not only on
temperature but also on applied shear and past history, it is important that fluid analysis
programs are designed and conducted at conditions appropriate to the production system
under investigation.
Fluid flow properties are predominately determined on stock tank dead oil at
atmospheric conditions. This tends to lead to an over-estimate of the pipeline viscosities
and yield stresses. In specific cases where fluid properties at production or ambient
temperatures cause significant pumping difficulties, live oil rheological measurements
should be considered.
Details of analysis techniques are given in section 10.6.
Non Newtonian Indicators
Cloud point can be an indication of where an oil is likely to transition from Newtonian to
non-Newtonian behavior. Most oils will exhibit Newtonian behavior above the cloud
point simplifying the analysis and enabling correlations or extrapolations to be used with
confidence. This may not necessarily be the case for emulsions or oils carrying other
suspended solids.
Wax contents and pour points are first guides as to whether an oil may exhibit significant
non-Newtonian behaviors or present pumping difficulties. High wax contents >20
percent (many Chinese and Indonesian crudes) are usually viscous and exhib it high pour
points. Pumping difficulties are commonly experienced close to and below an oils pour
point.
H-0806.35
10-28
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
H-0806.35
10-29
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Above the cloud point a few kinematic or PVT viscosity determinations are normally
sufficient to establish this relationship. However, the data must be converted to dynamic
viscosity, by multiplying by fluid density at the measured temperatures, before it is useful
for system design.
Preferably dynamic viscosity determinations as a function of shear should be performed
at a number of temperatures. These will confirm the limits of Newtonian behavior and
can be used directly for hydraulic analysis.
Below the cloud point and where non-Newtonian behavior is suspected, dynamic
viscosities should always be determined as a function of shear as well as temperature.
The temperature and shear rate ranges examined should cover the anticipated production
conditions including transients such as start-up.
A typical analysis will consist of performing flow curves (see section 10.6) at a number
of individual temperatures, as illustrated in Figure 10.4-6. Depending on the flow
behavior, models can be fitted to these curves. In most cases the fluid can then
characterized as a series of power law functions. Viscosities at intermediate shear rates
and temperatures can be interpolated from correlations (section 10.4.3).
50
45
40
40F
Viscosity cP
35
30
25
20
60F
15
10
80F
100F
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
H-0806.35
10-30
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
If it has been established that the oil is sensitive to thermal and/or mechanical
pretreatments and handling then the viscosity, shear and temperature relationships for
each potential fluid state or pre-treatment will need to be established.
Some waxy oils may exhibit thixotropic behavior which can be very complex and
difficult to characterize. This behavior becomes significant at temperatures close to and
below the pour point. In these cases it is essential to seek expert assistance.
The figures below illustrate how thixotropic behavior can effect viscosity determinations.
Here it is apparent as a hysteresis in the flow curves. Depending on the starting point and
whether initially ascending or descending in shear rate the apparent viscosities can be
substantially different.
100
X
Initially Increasing Shear
90
80
Viscosity cP
70
60
50
40
30
*
*
Starting Point
Starting Point
C
Z1
20
10
1
Y1
A
10
100
10
100
1000
10-31
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
time. The resultant viscosity values can be further dictated by the highest or lowest
applied shear rates, e.g. inc reasing the highest applied shear from 100 s-1 (Y) to 1000 s-1
(Y1) eroded the wax structures resulting in the final viscosities being lower at the initial
shear rate.
If thixotropic behavior or sensitivity to past sample handling is apparent then an
alternative methodology may be adopted. Here the apparent viscosity is determined as a
function temperature at a series of fixed shear rates, illustrated in Figure 10.4-8. This is
akin to actual thermal and shear history a sample may undergo in a pipeline where oil is
produced at a fixed rate and subsequently cools.
Viscosity cP
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
High Shear 1000s-1
0
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
Temperature F
In this case temperature viscosity relationships can be established at each individual shear
rate.
Live Oil Measurements
In most cases these are not required as available correlations are adequate or the oils are
sufficiently fluid so as not to cause pumpability concerns.
However, under live conditions the viscosity of very waxy crudes can be significantly
lower and exhibit less seve re non-Newtonian behavior than the stock tank oil.
H-0806.35
10-32
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Insulated pipelines cool slowly therefore there is a finite time before the fluids cool to a
temperature at which the yield stresses become unacceptable. Where a line is likely to be
restarted before it has fully cooled, the relationship between yield stress and temperature
should be explored.
H-0806.35
10-33
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
10.4.3 Correlations
There are a number of correlations used in predicting fluid flow in pipelines
wellbores. The majority of are based on Newtonian fluid behavior developed
reservoir fluids at high temperatures or adapted from petroleum products. These
therefore generally suitable only above the cloud point, unless Newtonian behavior
been confirmed at lower temperatures.
and
for
are
has
Some equations exist for non-Newtonian behaviors such as shear thinning where the
Reynolds number and friction factors can be calculated from power law models fitted to
the fluid properties.
However, when dealing with waxy oils at low temperatures and below the cloud point
most correlations are unsuitable and actual data should always be used.
Dead Oil Viscosity
Newtonian Fluids (Above Cloud Point)
Interpolation of measured data.
Newtonian hydrocarbon fluids generally exhibit a linear relationship between the log of
viscosity and temperature. The viscosity at a desired temperature is extrapolated between
two experimentally determined values. These relationships are strictly only true for
Newtonian fluids and generally not suitable for extrapolation to low temperatures below
the cloud point.
A widely applicable equation is: ln() = A+TB.
(T is in absolute temperature K or R).
A and B are determined from experimental data.
Another widely used method is ASTM D341.
log( +0.7) = A - B log(T)
Where A and B are constants calculated from the measured viscosities, kinematic
viscosity () in centiStokes, and temperature in absolute units of Kelvin or degrees
Rankine.
H-0806.35
10-34
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
This correlation is often misused with dynamic viscosity data and extrapolation outside
the measured data set and below the cloud point. Kinematic viscosity must be converted
to dynamic viscosity () for calculating friction factors and pressure drops.
API Correlations
Correlations exist for estimating the viscosity of stock tank oil from API Gravity. These
should only be used with caution where no measured data (including PVT) is available.
They should never be used below the Cloud Point. The two acceptable correlations are:
Beal, C: The viscosity of Air, Water, Natural Gas, Crude Oil and Its Associated
Gases at Oil Field Temperature and Pressures. Trans AIME 1946.
Beggs H D and Robinson JR Estimating the Viscosity of Crude Oil Systems.
J PF Pet Tech. Sept 1975
Viscosity Index ASTM D2270
This is an extension of the ASTM D341. In this method the variation of kinematic
viscosity with temperature is described by a single parameter. The higher the Viscosity
Index the smaller the effect of temperature on viscosity.
This correlation is widely used in product formation and in calculating the viscosity of
blended fluids. It can be applied to crude oils and condensates but is not suitable below
the cloud point.
Non-Newtonian Fluids (Below Cloud Point)
Newtonian interpolations may be extrapolated below the cloud point providing the oil has
been determined to remain Newtonian over the temperature range of interest. Few
correlations if any are suitable for fully describing the viscosity temperature relationship
for non-Newtonian fluids. In this case the viscosity is also dependent on the applied
shear and potentially sample history.
Providing the oil is well characterized over the temperature and shear rates of interest
power law and other fluid property models may be used to describe the behavior at a
given temperature. It may also be possible to fit a log viscosity temperature relationship
across this data at an individual shear rate or fluid state.
H-0806.35
10-35
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Where the oil has be characterized as a function of temperature for a given shear rate a
viscosity temperature relationship can be established, then power law or other fluid
descriptions applied at a given temperature.
Where possible the measured data should always reflect conditions appropriate to
production.
Live Oil Viscosity
The standard methodology for estimating live oil viscosity is to determine the dead oil
viscosity at the temperature of interest then apply the following correlations to account
firstly for the dissolved gases then compensate for pressure.
These correlations can strictly only be applied above the cloud point where no wax is out
of solution. The GOR and pressure will also influence the solubility of waxes and their
impact on flow properties. Whist the impact on wax phase behavior can be predicted the
impact on viscosity is very difficult to assess.
For low wax content oils or where behavior is Newtonian the additional effects are likely
to be insignificant and these correlations can be applicable. However, for waxy oils or
fluids near the pour point the effects can be dramatic and laboratory measurements may
need to be considered.
Live Oil Viscosity at Saturation Pressure.
live oil = A( dead oil)
H-0806.35
10-36
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
1.187
[-0.000039Pressure 5]
x10
10-37
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
solidify requiring a finite pressure before flow even begins. This behavior may also
impact crude oil processing, storage and shipping.
Steady State Flow
Pour point is a poor indicator of flow behavior with many oils successfully flowed at
temperatures significantly below the pour point. The key parameter is dynamic viscosity.
Viscosity is sensitive to changes in temperature and pressure but can also be sensitive to
flow rate. The in-situ dynamic viscosities can be estimated from stock tank oil viscosity
data then adjust for the effect of solution gas and pressure, using empirical correlations
given in section 10.4.3.
These procedures and correlations are reliable providing the fluids remain Newtonian.
So is the fluid Newtonian at the conditions of interest? Fortunately most oils behave in a
predictable Newtonian fashion above the cloud point, although this may not be the case
for emulsions or slurries (see section 10.4.1).
Validation of Newtonian behavior can be determined from laboratory generated flow
curves (see section 10.6). PVT or kinematic viscosity data are not suitable. For
Newtonian fluids the standard Reynolds Number (N RE) and friction factor equations can
be used adjusted for liquid hold- up and flow regime in multiphase flow.
If the fluids cool below the cloud point, wax will crystallize and non-Newtonian behavior
may be encountered. The point at which the behavior starts to deviate from Newtonian
will depend on the amount and rate of wax crystallization or other solids content. This
transition temperature can be established from the convergence of slopes of log() versus
temperature.
The relationship between viscosity, temperature, solution gas and pressure can start to
deviate from expected values and the correlations break down. Vis cosity will not only be
dependent on temperature but also upon the shear rates or flow regimes applied to it and
even past handling. The viscosity will become increasingly difficult to predict as the
temperature decreases and solid wax phase increases.
Experimental data should always be used where the fluids exhibit non-Newtonian
behavior. Fortunately most oils are relatively fluid even at temperatures significantly
below the cloud point. These can then be described by a series of temperature dependent
shear thinning power law equations. Apparent viscosity at any given temperature and
H-0806.35
10-38
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
shear rate can be interpolated from these models. These analyses can then be handled in
a conventional manner. However, very waxy oils can exhibit very complex flow
properties (see section 10.4.1.) requiring a thorough characterization and complex design
calculations.
Handling Moderately Waxy Non-Newtonian Behaviors
Frictional pressure drop calculations with non-Newtonian fluids can be handled in several
ways.
Assumed Newtonian Fluid.
Here fluid is considered Newtonian for calculating NRE, friction factors and pressure
drops. Viscosity is assumed not to vary with flow or shear rate. Therefore a different
viscosity temperature relationship must be used for each flowrate being examined.
As viscosity does vary with shear, the viscosity data used must be correctly matched to
the shear rate in the field.
8v Under laminar flow conditions Newtonian shear rates are given by:
d
Where v = fluid velocity or two-phase mixture velocity.
=
However, for a shear thinning fluid the shear rate is also a function of the fluid properties.
In these cases the shear rate must be adjusted by the shear thinning index n.
8v 3n - 1
x
d 4n
10-39
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
The appropriate viscosity data can then be selected for a given shear rate and a viscosity
temperature relationship established. Reynolds numbers and friction factors can be
calculated assuming the fluids are Newtonian and a separate viscosity temperature
description used for each distinct flowrate.
Power Law Model
The assumed Newtonian model is generally adequate for low pour point oils. However, a
more actuate method is to use shear thinning parameters in calculating NRE and friction
factors.
The shear thinning index (n) can have a significant effect on Reynolds number, viscosity
and friction factors. Shear rates are not directly used in the calc ulations but used in the
data analysis to determine apparent viscosity and n.
Reynolds number can be redefined based on the apparent viscosity :
4n 8v
= K
3n - 1 d
n-1
N Re
d 4n d
=
x
K 3n 1 8v
n 1
or
Re P L
(2- n )d n
=
8( n-1) K
f =
16
N
Re P L
1
4.07
2.65
d
=
log + 6.0 f
n
n
2
In turbulent rough flow the Torrance equation is used:
Power law models are normally obtained from laboratory viscosity data at several
discrete temperatures. Careful interpolation of this is essential to ensure an accurate
description of the oil at intermediate temperatures required in the pipeline simulation.
H-0806.35
10-40
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
A
D
Pressure
Flowrate
Figure 10.4-9: Effects of Shear Thinning on Frictional Pressure
Figure 10.4-9 illustrates the potential effects a waxy fluid may have on a single-phase
export pipeline. The line is insulated and cools from a high inlet temperature to an
ambient of 40F. Three fluids are illustrated; a non waxy oil Newtonian over the entire
pipeline temperature profile, a black oil exhibiting some shear thinning behavior at low
temperatures, and a very waxy crude.
H-0806.35
10-41
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
At high throughputs (A) a significant proportion of the line is relatively warm and the
flow is fully turbulent. The resultant pressure drops are similar for each fluid. As
flowrates are reduced more of the line will have cooled to ambient temperature resulting
in higher viscosities and pressures. At a given point the combination of reduced flow
velocity and increased viscosity will result in a transition to laminar flow (point B)
towards the exit end of the line. This transition is most likely to occur at much higher
throughputs for the waxy oil which exhibits the high viscosities.
Once in laminar flow, pressure drop is directly proportional to viscosity and flowrate. As
flowrates reduce the viscosity increases thus the pressure drop may be higher than
anticipated (Point C). This behavior is compounded by the increase length of line at
ambient temperature at low throughputs. In the case of the waxy oil this behavior can
lead to a surprising effect where the pressure drop becomes exceeding high (Point D) due
to very high viscosities over a significant length of the line.
This behavior will impact line sizing. Smaller diameters yield higher shear for a given
flowrate and a warm temperature profile both resulting in lower viscosities. There are
examples of lines sized for waxy fluids according to the viscosity under high shear
turbulent conditions. Unfortunately the frictional pressures at low throughputs exceeded
the design pressure of the systems and design throughputs could not be achieved without
retrofit or remediation.
The effects of sample history can also be significant. Upstream process conditions can
have a big impact on the downstream low temperature flow behavior. In addition
laboratory data can be easily misinterpreted or conducted under inappropriate conditions.
It is therefore critical when dealing with very waxy fluids to ensure the data is
appropriate to field conditions and the effects of time dependency are accounted for.
There are several successful methods for reducing the effects of viscosity and the degree
of non-Newtonian behavior. These include modifying the system design to keep the
fluids warmer and at higher shear and modifying the fluid viscosity with chemicals or
processing. These methods are discussed in section 10.4.5.
Transients/Restart
The shutdown of a pipeline or flowline is usually determined by events other than the
flow conditions in the line. However, in the case of very waxy crudes there may be a
condition where the increasing viscosity or dynamic yield stresses at low throughputs
may result in a premature shutdown as available pumping or design pressures are
H-0806.35
10-42
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
exceeded. In effect the behavior described in section 10.4.1 may dictate a minimum
throughput for a waxy oil pipeline. If this condition occurs restart may not be easily
achieved without some form or remediation or treatment (see section 10.4.5)
The major concern for most pipelines is whether the oil will gel following shutdown, and
if so, can the line be restarted. Following a shutdown it is important to determine if the
oil could potentially solidify at the minimum environmental conditions. Pour points are
useful indicates of potential solidification. If the pour points are near or above minimum
ambient temperature then the yield stresses must be determined.
Yield stress can be translated into pipeline restart pressure by the following equation.
Yield Stress wall =
Pressure x diameter
4 x length
As with other waxy fluid flow properties, yield stress is dependent on wax structure
development and can therefore be effected by the conditions prior to and during the
shutdown. Reduced throughputs prior to shutdown will result in different temperature
and shear profiles and potentially different fluid behavior than if the operating at full
production rates. The external environment can also exert an influence other than final
temperature. Higher cooling rates during specific periods such as storms or winter ice
melts and wind chill may all influence gelation and restart. Note that wind chill does not
lower the final ambient temperature, rather it accelerates the heat losses to the
environment as if exposed to a lower temperature.
If sufficient pressure is available to easily overcome the yield stresses of a line fully
packed with gelled oil then further analysis is not required. However, if the yield stress
give rise to cause for concern then following should be considered:
The yield stress at one end of the line may be different to that at the other.
On shut down the fluids at one end of a pipeline are likely to undergo a different
thermal and shear history than the fluids at the other. At the inlet the fluids are likely
to be warm. On shutdown these fluid will have undergone a short history of cooling
under shear followed by static cooling to ambient if the shut- in is long enough.
Fluids at the exit end will experience a very different history. They will have
undergone a different temperature profile all under shear/flow conditions. At any
point along the line the fluids will have been subjected to intermediate thermal and
shear profiles.
Laboratory analysis may show that a single yield stress value for the entire line is
inappropriate.
H-0806.35
10-43
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Flow Development
Following the shutdown of a pipeline the available pressures may be sufficient to
overcome the yield stress and initiate flow, but the pressure required to re-establish full
production rates may be substantially higher.
In a waxy crude oil line the thixotropic characteristics of the fluid will dictate the rate at
which the flow will develop. If the rate of decay of viscosity and increase in flowrate are
insufficient to displace these cold viscous fluids with fresh warm oil prior to this fresh oil
also cooling and becoming sufficiently viscous, it may not be possible to re-established
full production rates. Such cases have occurred during winter months whereby full
production could not be achieved until the environment had warmed sufficiently during
the following spring.
Methods to alleviate restart problems are presented in section 10.4.5
H-0806.35
10-44
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Storage / Shipping
Flow properties are also important to storage and shipping. Here the available forces to
move viscous or gelled oil are much lower than in a pipeline. In a static storage or
shipping vessel it is crucial that the oil does not solidify. In these cases it is appropriate
to maintain fluids above the pour point.
Viscosity is also crucial dictating rates of discharge (export pumps have limited suction)
and stirring. Shear thinning behavior can compound high viscosity problems, as the
shear rates within the tanks are very low.
High pour point waxy fluids should always where possible be stored in heated stirred
tanks. Where this is not possible the fluids should be kept circulated between vessels, or
discharged before cooling below the pour point
Another significant problem associated with waxy oil storage is sludge formation. Here
over time wax particles will settle out under gravity forming a viscous waxy layer at the
bottom of the tank. The sludge can be purely waxy oil but is more usual to be a
combination of waxy oil sediment and water in an emulsified form. This layer is very
difficult to discharge often requiring ma nual efforts.
The formation of sludges has a significant cost element associated with them, not just
attributed to clean up and operational expense. A large tanker may be unable to
discharge this sludge which could account of 0.1 percent of the loaded cargo. For a
VLCC this could amount to a days production from a medium sized field.
In many large shipping vessels it is common to prevent the formation of waxy layers
through maintaining the oil temperature above the cloud point. Thus no wax particles are
formed. This too has its own set of problems resulting in significant vapor pressures,
flash point concerns and loss of lighter ends.
The rate of sludge formation is difficult to predict but the rate of wax settling is governed
by Stokes Law. Here the lower the viscosity and greater the density different between
the solid wax particles and the liquid oil the faster the settling. Fortunately the density
difference is small and a stirred tank or circulation within and between tanks is usually
sufficient to prevent any sediments from forming.
H-0806.35
10-45
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Storage temperature is therefore important; maintaining the oil at a high temperature will
reduce the viscosity thus increasing the rate of any settling. While storing at low
temperature, increases the risk of gelation if the heating or circulation systems fail.
Crude Oil Processing and Monitoring
Viscous waxy oils can be difficult to process partly due to the high viscosities and partly
to the suspended solids content.
Separation of water is often a major problem requiring high temperatures or long
residence times coupled with chemical demulsifiers. Dehydration studies and chemical
demulsifier screening are strongly recommended for waxy oils at the design stage, as
retrofit is very costly. Waxy sludges can also form and begin to fill separators if
residence times are too long.
In addition to crude dehydration, water clean up to meet oil in water discharge
specifications can also prove difficult. Again this should be addressed through separate
studies at the design stage.
Chemicals used to mitigate flow problems such as pour point depressants (PPDs) can be
detrimental to separation. Chemical selection studies should always check compatibility
not just with other production chemicals but also with processing.
Waxy oils can also cause problems in heat exchangers. As well as fouling with
deposition (see section 10.5.4) suspended wax particles and viscous or semi- gel slugs can
block the inlets to both heaters and coolers. Plate heat exchangers are particularly
vulnerable to this type of plugging.
Filters and injectors for crude oil driven engines are also susceptible to plugging with
suspended wax particles or gelled oil. These issues become prevalent when pigging a
waxy oil line. Here in addition to the solid deposited wax removed from the wall, slugs
of gelled oil and suspended wax particles carried ahead of the pig cause significant
process upsets. These normally only manifest them once the system is on production.
Solutions will be specific to each case, but generally filters are removed and problem
areas bypassed when a pig is due to arrive.
H-0806.35
10-46
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
10-47
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
H-0806.35
10-48
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
been successfully applied but requires carefully monitoring of process and poses some
risks during prolonged shutdowns where the core may settle to the bottom of the pipe.
Alternative schemes: Alternative production strategies, i.e. offloading to heated shuttle
tankers through short productions lines, have been used as more cost effective than
insulation or heating a long export line.
Prevention Fluid Modification
Waxy crude oils are generally sensitive to past history and handling in which the fluid
flow properties can vary widely (see sections 10.4.1). In these cases it is probable the
fluid properties can be modified to yield lower viscosities, pour points and yield stresses.
If the oil is non-waxy or not sensitive to handling then modification of the fluid flow
properties, other than dilution, will be more difficult.
Dilution: Waxy oils can be diluted with solvents or production fluids from adjacent nonwaxy wells or fields. The amount of dilution to achieve pumpable viscosities or
reduction in yield stress can vary from a few percent to over 50 percent diluent. Studies
to determine optimal amounts will be required; the blending correlations (section 10.4.2)
can be used as an initial guide. The success and economics will depend on the local
availability of the diluent. In some cases solvent recycling has been used, with the
solvent transported back along a dedicated line.
It is absolutely critical that the solvents or diluent are compatible with the waxy oil.
Dilution with paraffinic solvents can lead to instability and precipitation of asphaltenes
especially in low asphaltene content oils. Lowering of viscosity can also accelerate the
build-up of solid wax layers on pipe walls (see section 10.5).
Emulsification: The apparent viscosity of very viscous oils can be substantially reduced
by forming a water external emulsion as in the case of Orimulsion. However, significant
process problems in both forming and breaking stable emulsions and in general
processing may be encountered. Substantial amounts of surfactants may also be required.
Thermal Treatment: A waxy oils low temperature viscosity and pour point can often be
reduced by heating the oil above a predetermined temperature. This can be used to
advantage during processing prior to transportation or export. Dedicated crude oil
heaters or even the temperature of separation can be adjusted to potentially achieve a
lower viscosity state.
H-0806.35
10-49
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
This method has been successfully used for export lines where increases in separation
temperature reduced the need for chemical treatments. In some cases the fluids have
required complex temperature cycling and the addition of mechanical shear (Nahorkatiya
field is an example). Laboratory studies will be needed to identify suitable process
conditions to achieve a low viscosity state and the sensitivity to changes or upsets in the
process.
Microbes: Long chain paraffin molecules can be digested by bacteria resulting in a
lightening of the viscosity. More commonly used as an enhanced oil recovery
mechanism the microbes are squeezed into the near wellbore region of the reservoir and
allow to establish a sizable population prior to bringing production back on-line. Due to
this method of application and the rate of generation of microbe population this
technology is more suited to low production and stripper wells and may have to be
repeated frequently.
Chemical: Low dosage chemicals are widely available to treat waxy oils and reduce
viscosity pour point and yield stress values. These chemicals are generally wax crystal
modifiers or wax dispersants. They will only be effective on waxy fluids below the cloud
point and cannot effect the viscosity above the cloud point or of non-waxy oils. These
chemicals have a number of potential benefits but when used to modify the low
temperature flow properties they are generally referred to as Pour Point Depressants
(PPDs).
Effectiveness and selection of PPDs are crude oil specific. Therefore, a screening and
performance study will be required. Selection of the chemicals' ability to reduce pour
point alone is no guarantee as to its performance at reducing viscosities and yield stress.
These parameters must be incorporated into a screening program and performance
specifications should be matched to the system parameters. The same data is required of
the treated oil as for any other fluid. The procedures and behaviors outlined in section
10.4.2 should still be followed.
PPDs are most effective at reducing the low temperature viscosities and yield stresses.
They will reduce the degree of non-Newtonian behavior thus having a greater impact on
the low shear low flowrate behavior. If the high temperature and/or the high shear
viscosities appropriate to full production are of concern then PPDs are unlikely to be as
effective as modifying the system design.
H-0806.35
10-50
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
PPDs are generally successful at reducing viscosities and yield stresses at dosage
concentrations of between 50 and 2000 PPM although the majority of usage has been
optimized to between 200 to 500 PPM depending on the concentration of and category of
active ingredient.
Deployment of these chemicals can cause problems. They can be waxy fluids and can
solidify at low temperatures. To be effective they need to be injected into the oil stream
above the cloud point ideally at the wellhead or downhole. Thus they may require
significant dilution if deployed via a long umbilical. Careful umbilical selection will be
required to ensure that sufficient quantities of the active chemical can be delivered and
that the chemical is compatible with all materials.
PPDs are also used to meet tanker, storage and trunk line entry specifications. Often
these are little more than a pour point requirement and have little relevance to the
viscosity or restart ability. If a chemical is needed to meet such a requirement placed on
the export oil then consideration should be given to achieving maximum benefit from the
product in the upstream production system.
Remediation
Occasionally pumping problems due to waxy oils are unexpectedly encountered either in
the form of excessive pressure drop and restricted throughput or through inability to
restart following a shut- in. Equally a new waxy discovery may be routed through an
existing system which may not be able to handle the viscous or high pour point nature of
the fluid. Methods to alleviate pumpability problems will depend on the nature of the
problem being encountered.
Not all increases in frictional pressure are caused by the viscous non-Newtonian behavior
of waxy oils. The line may be plugging due to deposition of waxes (section 10.5) or
other solids. Plugging due to deposition is usually associated with a gradual but
consistent increase in pressure in areas subjected to heat loss. Whereas viscosity related
problems are associated with an equilibrium increase in pressure. If a line plugged
following a shut- in were it cooled below the pour point it is highly probable the oil
gelled. If however, it plugged while it is likely to be caused by deposition of solid wax
(section 10.5)
If the line is flowing but the throughput is restricted or falling due to viscous waxy oil
there are a number of options available.
H-0806.35
10-51
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Never stop or reduce the flowrate even if the waxy oil is commingled. This could
result in gelation or a significant increase in viscosity as shear rates and temperature
profiles fall.
Chemical treatment in the form of PPDs or solvent dilution will reduce viscosities
and friction pressure drops. They can be rapidly deployed to solve an immediate
problem, then optimized for regular use.
Heating the input crude may be sufficient to raise the temperature profile and avoid
the non-Newtonian behavior. This option is unlikely to be of benefit in long or
uninsulated lines.
If the line is shut-in and cannot be restarted with the available pressure:
Maintain maximum pressure across the line and wait. Gelled oil will often creep and
can be slowly displaced. Ensure the displacement fluid is of a low viscosity,
preferably treated water. Restart may have to wait until environmental temperatures
warm.
Heating may be used. If the gelled oil can be warmed by applying external heat to the
pipeline the yield stresses will be reduced. The oil does not have to be warmed to
above the pour point but sufficient to reduce the yield stress to that available for
restart.
Intervention into the line via taps or coil tubing has been successful in restarting
gelled oil lines. The line can be sectioned effectively shorting the line and increasing
the applied yield stress. Displacement with solvents or lighter oils is recommended.
Intervention can also be used to locally introduce heat, mechanical shear or chemicals
to break-up the gel structure.
Blowdown for multiphase lines reducing the pressure will expand and evolve gas
from the liquid phase. This gas expansion is likely to break any gel structures and
mobilize the oil.
Retrofit
If the system cannot achieve design throughputs or cannot be restarted due to waxy oil
behavior then retrofit or treatment of the fluids will be required.
Replace or upgrade the system. The export pumps and sections of the production
system could be upgraded or resized to adequately handle the fluid properties. This
could include insulation or burial, which will improve the steady state frictional
pressures as the line, will operate warmer. However, they do not afford ultimate
protection in the event of a shut down.
Modification of the fluid properties is commonly adopted, see section 10.4.5. This
can be achieved by dilution, thermal treatment or more usually via the use of flow
improver additives such as PPDs. These offer advantages in that they can be
H-0806.35
10-52
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
At initial commissioning and start-up the line could be pre- heated by pumping hot water.
The waxy oil could also be heated during this initial stage until equilibrium temperature
conditions are established. Dilution or the use of PPDs can also be very effective here.
During periods of planned shutdowns or low production the fluids can again be
chemically treated or diluted or even displaced with a non-waxy oil or treated water.
Unplanned shutdowns require special consideration, as fluids already in the line cannot
be treated. If the line is insulated or buried there is a probability that a significant length
is warm and above the pour point. Here there will be a finite time before a significant
length of the line will have cooled to form a gel of sufficient strength that it cannot be
restarted. Fortunately most unplanned shutdowns are relatively short <24hours and the
line can be restarted as the gel has not yet fully developed. The level of insulation and
production rates prior to shutdown will dictate the time window available. Ideally this
should be in the order of several days to a week or longer.
During a prolonged shut down it may still be possible to apply pressure and/or partly
displace the oil. This may have to be achieved with separate pumps. The introduction of
shear even for short periods will partly degrade the gel structure reducing the yield stress
and prolonging the time window.
10.4.6 HSE
The safe operation of a production system is dependent on understanding the fluid
behavior and design capabilities of the system. If the implications of transporting waxy
fluids are not fully considered pipeline blockage and even rupture may occur. The
handling of waxy crude oils gives rise to additional HSE implications above and beyond
the handling of crude oils and multiphase hydrocarbon production streams. Chemicals
H-0806.35
10-53
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
may be required to treat the oil. With good design practice the risks posed by these issues
can be fully assessed and minimized.
The following issues are specific to waxy oils.
Gelled oil within a pipeline that cannot be restarted poses risks to the environment.
There is a potential for fluid escape if the line has to be entered. Equally there is a
potential for leakage if the line is abandoned full of gelled oil.
Any blockage within a system has the potential for generating high local pressures
with pose a risk to pipeline integrity. Very strong gels can support high differential
pressures for short periods.
Waxy sludges formed in the bottom of storage and ships tanks may have to be
eventually dug out by hand.
Heating hydrocarbons to prevent or alleviate wax problems will lead to higher vapor
pressures and flash point concerns.
The use of chemicals and solvents to treat waxy oils also leads to a number of HSE
concerns. While most wax inhibitors themselves are generally of low toxicity many
contain substantial proportions of aromatic solvents required to facilitate deployment.
Here unless the products are sufficiently dilute they can block delivery systems and
umbilicals. At typical treatment rates significant quantities of these products must be
shipped and stored onsite on a regular basis. In some cases the cold flow
characteristics required these products to the stored in heated tanks. Most solvent
systems have a high flash point and are carcinogenic.
Any chemical treatments or oil heat must be compatible with all materials they come
in contact with both in the physical pipes and seals and other production chemicals.
Wax inhibitors tend to be incompatible with methanol.
Waxy oils and the use of inhibitors can have detrimental effects on dehydration and
on the quality of the oil in water discharge specs. Here it is essential that chemical
treatments are compatible with the whole process.
10-54
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
T.C Davenport & R.S Somper, The Yield Value and Breakdown of Crude Oil Gels,
Journal of Institute of Petroleum, Vol. 57, No. 554, March 1971
Chang C & Boger D, Influence of Thermal History on the Waxy Structure of Statically
Cooled Waxy Crude Oils, SPE 57959
Sifferman T R, Flow Properties of Difficult to Handle Waxy Crude Oils, JPT, Aug. 1979
Barnes H A., Thixotropy A Review, Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech., Vol. 70,
No. 1, 1997
Pipeline Design
Wardaugh and Boger, Flow Characteristics of waxy crude oils: application to pipeline
design, AIChE Journal, Vol 37, June 1991
Ells J W & Brown V R R, The Design of Pipelines to Handle Waxy Crude Oils, Journal
of Inst of Pet., Vol. 57, No 555, 1971
Perkins T K & Tur ner J B, Starting Behaviour of Gathering Lines and Pipelines Filled
with Gelled Prodhoe Bay Oil, JPT, 301, March 1971
Mitigation
Russel R.J. & Chapman E.D., The Pumping of 85F Pour Point Assam (Nahorkatiya)
Crude Oil at 65F, J. of Inst. of Pet. Vol. 57, No. 117, 1971
Mike H F and Norway F, Thermally Insulated Pipelines Successfully Move High-WaxContent Crude Offshore Gabon, Oil & Gas Journal, Vol. 25, No. 179, 1982
El-Eman N & Bayoumi A., A Study on the Suitable Techniques for Improving the Flow
Properties of the Egyptian Waxy Crude Oils, Revue De Inst Francais Du Petrole, Vol. 48,
No. 4
Brod M Deane B C & Rossi F., Field Experience with the Use of Additives in the
Pipeline Transportation of Waxy Crudes, Journal of the Inst. Of Petroleum, Vol. 57, No.
554, 1971
Price R C, Flow Improvers for Waxy Crudes, Journal of the Inst. Of Petroleum, Vol. 57,
No. 554, 1971
H-0806.35
10-55
1-Dec-00
10.5
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Section 10.5.1
Section 10.5.2
Section 10.5.3
H-0806.35
10-56
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Section 10.5.4
Section 10.5.1
Section 10.5.1
Section 10.5.5
H-0806.35
10-57
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Because the pipewall is inherently rough, it provides suitable nucleation sites and the
precipitated waxes become incorporated into an immobile layer.
dC w
dr
where :
n md
?w
D md
dC w
dr
H-0806.35
10-58
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
H-0806.35
10-59
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
nsd
C md
rate of shear (s -1 )
The dispersion rate constant can be determined empirically and is a function of the wax
particle morphology.
Shear dispersion becomes important at low temperature where a significant fraction of
wax has precipitated in the bulk oil and is possible where the fluids are at ambient
temperature. Increasing shear rates should increase the rate of transportation to the wall.
However, shear dispersion will not occur under conditions of no flow.
H-0806.35
10-60
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Gravity Settling
Precipitated wax particles can be of slightly higher density than the surrounding crude oil.
Therefore, in the absence of any agitation these particles will tend to settle under the
influence of gravity. As the density differences are small, under flowing conditions the
shear forces generally exceed the gravitational effect. Hence gravity settling is usually
associated with storage and bulk transportation as described in section 10.4.4.
The rate of settling is governed by stokes, the important parameters being the densities of
the liquid and solid phases and the oil viscosity.
Shearing / Sloughing
In addition to transporting wax to the wall (shear dispersion) the flow regime can provide
energy to remove deposited wax. If the wall shear stresses imposed by the flowing fluid
exceed the adhesive forces binding the wax layer together and/or to the wall, some or all
the wax can be stripped away. Generally the higher the wall shear stresses the slower the
wax layer build-up rate, contrasting with shear dispersion.
Waxes developing under high shear stresses tend be harder and more tenacious than those
formed under static or low shear fields. Here the softer loosely bound depositing waxes
are continuously stripped away.
Aging
It has been observed that depositing layers tend to harden and change in composition over
time. Fresh deposits tend to be soft and contain a high fraction (>80 percent) of entrapped
oil. Over time these deposits reorder and some of this entrapped oil is excluded, resulting
in a harder more tenacious layer. The mechanisms are still unclear and the effect is often
ignored. However, this may be of significance when considering infrequent cleaning
strategies where the wax may have be so hard and impervious that it proves difficult to
remove (see section 10.5.5).
Overall Deposition Mechanism
The actual deposition rate is a combination of all the above mechanisms. Laboratory and
field evidence indicates that deposition begins at the cloud point and on further cooling
rapidly attains a maximum rate. This then tails of to zero as the fluids cool as shown in
Figure 10.5-3.
H-0806.35
10-61
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Temperature
p
em
li T
O
te
Ra
n
o
siti
po
e
D
Cloud Point
Ambient Temp
Distance
H-0806.35
10-62
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Laminar
Deposition Rate
Turbulent
Laminar
Under laminar flow conditions wax layers tend to be
fairly soft and smooth containing a high oil fraction (>90
percent). The deposit is generally evenly distributed
around the circumference of the pipe. If flowrates
increase the growth rate is slowed and some of the softer
deposited wax can be removed.
H-0806.35
10-63
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Turbulent
H-0806.35
10-64
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Slug Flow
Slug flow can be characterized by a period of relatively low
Slug
liquid flow followed by the rapid acceleration and
deceleration of oil slugs to the gas velocity. The flow
within these slugs can be extremely turbulent and will
dominate the formation of any deposit. Any deposit formed
in the relatively calm period between the slugs is likely to
be stripped away once the slug arrives. The high stresses
within the slug may be compounded by the action of entrapped gas bubbles that can
impact the bottom of the pipe at high velocities further eroding the deposit. Thus deposit
growth rates at the bottom of the pipe are likely to be lower and harder in nature than at
the top.
H-0806.35
10-65
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
H-0806.35
10-66
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Water increases the thermal capacity of the fluids resulting in higher temperature
profile thus effecting deposition.
In the form of an emulsion water can substantially increase the fluid viscosity
inhibiting deposition.
A water wet surface or water external emulsion may prevent wax from contacting the
wall.
They will reduce the internal diameter restricting the available flow area.
Deposited waxy layers are inherently rough increasing the effective wall roughness.
The former two will effect the frictional pressure gradients. Under turbulent flow
conditions the roughness effect will dominate significantly increasing frictional pressure
long before any noticeable restriction in diameter. It is assumed that for relatively thin
deposits <10mms the roughness is equal to the thickness of the wax layer.
The latter effect is also important, as wax is an effective insulator. Here the thermal
profiles will change as wax is deposited. This may impact fluid temperatures, viscosities
and subsequent deposition rates. It is also of significance in heat exchangers where the
efficiency of oil coolers will be severely impaired.
Deposit Composition
At any given position (below the cloud point) along the length of the production system
the waxes precipitating from solution will have a specific Molecular weight distribution
depending on the temperature of the pipewall and bulk oil. The deposit will typically
exhibit a guassion distribution of n-paraffins. Figure 10.5-5 illustrates a HTGC analysis
of a deposit, showing the distribution of n-paraffins. The peak to the right hand side
represents the deposited waxes while the components to the left are the oil entrained in
the deposit (C 7 C20 ).
H-0806.35
10-67
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
H-0806.35
10-68
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
H-0806.35
10-69
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
the sample is handled correctly to ensure that no waxes are lost during sub-sampling or
sample transfers.
To ensure correct waxing behavior it is important to restore the fluid to a condition it
would have during production. Here the fluids would start out at reservoir temperature
potentially with all the waxing in solution and gradually cool until waxes start to
precipitate. Therefore a pretreatment to condition the fluid is always recommended prior
to any testing. Suitable pre-treatments are outline in section 10.4.2 and 10.6.1.
Onset Conditions (Cloud Point)
Wax has the potential to deposit onto any surface that is being cooled and is below the
wax appearance or cloud point temperature.
Cloud points or wax appearance temperatures are usually determined experimentally on a
small sample of stock tank oil. With care the cloud point can be determined to within
5C. Although the effects of pressure and GOR can be measured they are usually
determined via a thermodynamic prediction tuned to the dead oil value. The methods
used to measure cloud point are discussed in section 10.3 and described in detail in
section 10.6.1.
Note. It is the deposition surface temperature that is important, deposition can occur onto
a cold surface even when the bulk oil temperature is above the cloud point.
Solid Wax Fraction Behavior
A measure of the solid wax fraction with respect to temperature is required to calculate
the wax concentration gradient for molecular diffusion (section 10.5.1). Wax content
alone is insufficient as it does not account for the effects of temperature and pressure.
A thermodynamic simulator is generally employed to predict the phase behave and yield
the solid fraction with respect to temperature oil composition and pressure. Details of the
fluid parameters needed together with a description of the predictive models are given in
section 10.3.3 and 10.3.4.
Oil Viscosity
Oil viscosity is a crucial parameter governing the rate of transport of wax by molecular
diffusion.
H-0806.35
10-70
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Once the oil has cooled below the cloud point solid wax is present and the oil can exhibit
non-Newtonian behavior. Here the oil viscosity will be dependent on flowrate as well as
temperature. Simple extrapolation of kinematic or PVT data obtained from above the
cloud point can seriously underestimate the viscosity at low temperatures.
Non-Newtonian viscosities should be determined for at shear rates appropriate to the
range of normal production rates. Transient flow periods and shut- ins are generally
ignored as wax deposition is considered a steady state flowing phenomena.
In addition to any shear rate dependency, other issues to consider in determining viscosity
include the oils' sensitivity to past thermal and shear history, any time dependent
behavior and the effect of solution gas and pressure.
Methodologies to measure non-Newtonian viscosities are detailed in section 10.4.2.
Deposition Rate Measurement
In order to estimate deposition growth in a production system a measure of the fluid's
tendency to deposit wax onto a surface is required. Although true diffusion coefficients
can be determined experimentally, the complex nature of crude oils and the combination
of shear rate effects require an alternative measure of the oils overall transport
mechanism incorporating shear dispersion and shear stripping. This is usually achieved
by measuring the rate of deposition in a laboratory or pilot plant scale test apparatus.
The are a number of test configurations commonly employed including simple cold
fingers where a cooled deposition surface is immersed into a reservoir of oil through to
large scale flowloops. The choice of which to use will depend on availability of samples
and level of data required. Test equipment and methodologies are described in section
10.6.1.
The deposition rate itself should ideally be measured directly as a mass recovered in a
given time period. However, the duration of the test can influence the outcome. Here in
a closed system with a set volume of oil as the deposit builds up depletion of wax in the
oil n begin to inhibit deposition. As the deposit grows thicker insulation effects will also
restrict heat flow, the main driving force. It may not be possible to always recover the
wax therefore, an indirect measure of growth may be derived from increasing in frictional
pressure or changes in the thermal conditions within the test cell. These issues are
discussed in section 10.6.1.
H-0806.35
10-71
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
The deposits formed both in the laboratory and field will contain high proportions of
entrapped oil (>70 percent by volume). Depositio n rates are most often quoted including
this entrapped oil. Where pure wax has been isolated from the deposit to determine a
deposition rate the subsequent predictions must consider addition of an entrapped oil
phase.
Deposition Rate Terms
Parameters measured will depend on the methodology used to scale up the laboratory
deposition rate to the full scale. This is generally accomplished by deriving the
molecular diffusion and shearing terms from the measured data and applying these to full
scale thermal and flow conditions.
The diffusion rate element of deposition is separated from the phase behavior of the
waxes, by calculating the concentration gradient of wax derived from the thermal
conditions within the test cell or flowloop.
Flowrate effects cannot easily be separated from diffusion. Therefore, the diffusion rate
coefficient is usually measured as a function of flowrate. Experimental test programs
must therefore simulate the likely flow conditions expected in the full scale system.
Generally increasing the flowrate reduces deposition especially when the flow becomes
turbulent.
The flow parameter to use to scale to field conditions can be crucial. . Unfortunately due
to the different flow geometry, the exact flow regimes cannot be simulated. Whatever
parameter is chosen to match field conditions the other flow parameters may be
significantly different. The parameters usually chosen are either shear rate or actual fluid
velocity
Example: In studying deposition in a flowloop with 1/100th the internal bore of the full
scale line the shear rates will be 100 times greater in the flowloop for the same fluid
velocity.
These effects can be crucial if the flowrate of interest is in the laminar or transition
regions but less significant is under fully developed turbulent flow. It is also important to
consider that under turbulent flow conditions, laminar calculation of shear rate (8V/D)
are not be appropriate and turbulent shear calculation are needed. (Turbulent vs. laminar
shear is discussed in section 10.4.4).
H-0806.35
10-72
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Oil entrapment in the deposit will substantially effect the derived diffusion rate terms and
impact subsequent prediction modeling. As the oil fraction can be greater than 80 percent
in both the laboratory and field the diffusion rate coefficient can be 5X to low if the oil
fraction had be subtracted from the deposit. It is usual to quote deposition rates inclusive
of the oil fraction. However, values obtained from the literature and defaults
programmed into deposition rate models may only be for the wax components. These
points must be clarified with the source of the data.
Determining the diffusion rate term can be a complex procedure especially if the
temperature and thermal gradients vary within the test. It is therefore recommended to
determine these parameters at a series of constant temperature and flow rate conditions.
Deposition Tendency
The Deposition Tendency is a measure of the overall deposition rate normalized to heat
flux. It enables the diffusion coefficient and wax phase behavior effects to be isolated
from temperature gradients within an experimental set- up. Thus, waxing characteristics
determined under different temperature regimes can be directly compared.
Deposition tendency is a function of surface temperature and flowrate rate, as illustrated
in Figure 10.5-7, and is usually quoted in units of grams/day*watt.
Clo
ud
Poi
nt
Increase flowrate
Deposition Tendency
Deposition Tendency
Temperature
10-73
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
As temperatures cool below the cloud point, the wax concentration gradient increases,
raising the deposition tendency. The increase in deposition tendency may be reversed at
low temperatures due to high viscosity inhibiting the diffusion rate.
Deposition tendency is determined at a number of discreet surface temperatures ranging
from just below the cloud point to the minimum ambient temperature. The effects of
flowrate or flow regime are accounted for by producing these data at a number of shear
rates or fluid velocities.
Diffusion Coefficients
The diffusion coefficients (required by some models) can be backed out from the
deposition rate or deposition tendency by isolating the wax concentration gradient with
respect to the deposition surface. To achieve this knowledge of the wax phase behavior
and temperature gradients within the experimental set-up are required. The temperature
gradients can be derived experimentally and the phase behavior predicted as detailed in
section 3.4.
This derived diffusion coefficient (quoted in units of cm2 /s) is dependent on liquid
viscosity and will therefore vary with temperature. It also incorporates the shear
dependent deposition mechanisms and therefore will be a function of flowrate.
Diffusion Constant
If viscosity is isolated from the diffusion coefficient the deposition rate term can be
described as a constant for a given oil. However, it is still a function of flowrate and
must be determined appropriately. This diffusion constant (cP.cm2 /s) is the parameter
most often used as input for deposition rate modeling.
Wilke Chang proposed a valve, however, those derived from most crude oils are
substantially higher, ranging from 1E-5 to 1E-4 cp-cm2 /s. These derived values may or
may not take account for the entrapped oil fraction (see previous page).
H-0806.35
10-74
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Deposit Analysis
Although not used in estimating deposit growth, the properties of the deposit itself can be
useful in selecting remediation strategies including inhibitor selection.
Deposit Composition
In the first instance a melting temperature (section 6.1.6) will indicate the relative
Molecular weight and relative conditions under which the deposit formed. The higher the
melting temperature the higher the average Molecular weight of the waxes and the higher
the temperature at which the deposit formed. Heating will also highlight any non-waxy
solids present. If they do not melt they are unlikely to be waxes.
The ratios of paraffins to aromatics are useful in further identifying the origin of the
deposit as wax or other solid precipitation. High resin and/or asphaltene contents would
indicate other deposition mechanisms involved. These ratios are determined using a
SARA or PARA analysis (section 10.6.1).
The distribution of individual Molecular weight wax components will help identify the
conditions under which a deposit formed (section 10.5.1). This can be achieved using
HTGC (section 10.6.1). Figure 10.5-8 illustrates a typical HTGC fingerprint of a waxy
deposit. The ratios of the entrapped oil can also be determined using the relative
quantities of C20 + material to C20 and below.
H-0806.35
10-75
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Mechanical Properties
The mechanical strength of the deposit is not normally determined but can also useful in
assessing intervention requirements and effectiveness of inhibitors. The softer the
deposit the more easily it can be removed. However, some soft deposits can be very
sticky which can agglomerate in front of a pig.
There are no set methods for estimating deposit strength. The adhesive forces between
the wax and pipewall are difficult to determine and ideally should be done so with the
wax deposit in-situ. However, most measurements are carried out on samples of wax
recovered from pig traps or laboratory tests. The yield stress may be measured using a
number of rheological tests such as oscillatory viscometry and creep tests. Alternatively
a probe penetration test developed for greases will yield an approximate value.
10.5.3 Description of Deposition Models
Overview
Wax deposition models fall into two categories:
Thermodynamic models. These predict the phase behavior and onset conditions for
wax formation. These describe the total amount of wax precipitating with respect to
pressure and temperature. However, they do not describe how much and at what rate
the wax builds- up on a pipewall or other surface.
Deposition rate models. These estimate the rate of wax growth onto the wall along
the length of a pipeline or tubing. They may also estimate the thickness profile over
time and evaluate the impact the deposit has on frictional pressure drop and
temperature profile.
H-0806.35
10-76
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
There are a number of these thermodynamic and deposition rate models available both
commercially and as proprietary in-house models offered by specialist fluid/engineering
design houses and oil companies.
The deposition rate models are all based on the assumption that molecular diffusion is the
predominant mechanism. They differ from one another in their treatment of the diffusion
term, the effect of shear, phase behavior and to a lesser extent the treatment of
temperature and pressure within the pipeline simulator.
Thermal profiles, fluid properties and deposition rates are calculated within individual
calculation elements making up the production systems. The output of one element used
as the input for the next.
Deposition Rate Terms
The deposition rate is defined as:
Molecular diffusion + shear dispersion shear stripping
The diffusion term calculated from
dC w
dr
The diffusion coefficient Dmd is calculated from a user defined constant divided by the
liquid viscosity. This diffusion constant can be either a single value for a given fluid or
multiple values depending on the temperature range or Molecular weights of the waxes
depositing.
rate = ? w D md
Diffusion constants are usually derived from experimental deposition rates, although
most models incorporate a default value the commonest being that defined by Wilke
Chang. User defined values normally incorporate a high fraction of entrapped oil present
in most deposits. However, default values may or may not incorporate this fraction
depending on the model or source of the data.
Liquid viscosity is estimated using the calculated temperature profiles, pressure and
GOR. The models can generally only handle Newtonian viscosities. Non-Newtonian
viscosity behavior may have to be accounted for within the user input data.
H-0806.35
10-77
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
dCw
is calculated using a
dr
solid/liquid/vapor equilibrium thermodynamic model to yield the concentration gradient
of wax with temperature and a steady state pipeline simulator to estimate the thermal
profiles.
The shear rate terms are not normally evaluated separately. The effects of shear or flow
rate are handled by making the diffusion rate term a function of flow rate. This is
achieved by either:
applying a shear factor to the diffusion constant, depending on the shear rate or flow
velocity. This factor can be user defined or derived from a database of measured
values from a number of fluids.
H-0806.35
10-78
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
1
1
1
x
x
=
+
+
+
U
h int h ext K wall K insl
Ignoring radiation effects the overall heat transfer is defined as:
Where:
hint = Internal heat transfer coefficient (W/m2 C)
hext = External heat transfer coefficient (W/m2 C)
Kwall = Thermal conductivity of pipewall (W/mC)
Kinsll = Thermal conductivity of insulation (W/mC)
x = Thickness of pipewall or insulation layer
The internal pipewall temperature is calculated from:
H = hintA(Twall Toil)
Where:
Twall = Internal pipewall temperature
In deposition modeling the internal pipewall temperatures and heat transfer coefficients
must be estimated with reasonable accuracy.
Depending on the model the input data can vary from a single overall heat transfer
coefficient to a composite of individual environmental parameters and insulation data.
Multiphase Flow
Currently the models available treat the flowing fluids, including those in multiphase
flow regimes as a homogenous single-phase fluid. Thermal and hydraulic profiles and
flow velocities are adjusted via the average liquid hold-up in the line. However, the flow
regime effects described in section 10.5.1 have not yet incorporated into modeling.
The effect of water cut is taken into account in the thermal and physical of the liquid
phase. Any effect on the deposition mechanisms is ignored.
Heat transfer is also treated as single-phase homogenous flow. Heat transfer coefficients
for internal films in multiphase flow regimes is complex and still under investigation.
H-0806.35
10-79
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Assessment of where and when deposition may occur. This requires an accurate
knowledge of the wax onset conditions and the temperature profiles within the
system. The tools available to assess these are fairly mature and have proven
reasonably accurate.
Estimating deposition rates and thickness throughout the production system. This
type of modeling is more subjective providing an indication of the profile and
magnitude of the problem. They are valuable design aids is assessing the level of and
level of risk to production from deposition and in assessing the relatively
effectiveness of various design mitigation options.
H-0806.35
10-80
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Direct comparisons between fields producing similar oils are often used but these can be
misleading, as deposition behavior is complex and case specific. Two oils of similar
gravity and wax content can exhibit very different behavior. Furthermore the main
driving forces for deposition, flow-regimes and temperature profiles, within the
production schemes are likely to be different.
Onset Conditions
Wax has the potential to deposit onto any cooled surface that is below the cloud point or
wax appearance temperature. Providing the pipewall can be maintained above this
temperature wax will not deposit.
With care the cloud point can be determined to 5C. The effects of pressure and
dissolved gases in the live fluids can be simulated but the confidence in the accuracy
reduces especially if not confirmed with a measured value.
The origin and validity of the sample used to determine the cloud point must also be
considered. Is it representative of the production fluids over the life of the field
especially if producing from multiple zones?
However, consideration must be given to the accuracy of the predicted production and
temperature profiles. Uncertainties in the environmental conditions and effectiveness of
insulation can lead to substantial ranges temperature profiles within a flowline. This can
be compounded by uncertainties in the projected production profiles where the well rates
and WHFTs can be significantly different than expected.
Areas of the production system subject to changes in environmental conditions or
different levels of insulation must be evaluated. Although the bulk fluid temperatures
may not be greatly effected, it is the wall temperature that is critical and this can drop
significantly in an uninsulated section.
It is also important to ensure the assessment is based on the minimum environmental
temperatures and the lower range of projected production rates.
All these factors must be taken into consideration when assessing the risk of whether wax
will form within a specific area of the production system or in assessing the level of
insulation required to maintain the system above the formation temperature.
Figure 10.5-9 illustrates the point for a typical well and flowline system. The darker
shaded area represents the range in predicted temperature profile based on normal
H-0806.35
10-81
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
production rate forecasts. The lighter shaded area represents the uncertainty in formation
onset conditions or cloud point.
Temperature
Choke
Distance
Flo
wli
ne
We
llbo
re
Re
ser
voi
r
H-0806.35
10-82
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
wax will form. If this cloud point value were to be used the system in the example would
always be above the onset temperature.
However, in the flowline where temperatures are likely to cool to the cloud point the
pressure is lower and system will be multiphase. Light end solvents will have eluded into
the gas phase and the cloud point will increase. This behavior is indicated by the lower
boundary of the lighter shaded area. Here the onset conditions occur towards the exit of
the line.
The level of risk from deposition increases as the lower temperature boundary falls below
first the STO then the live cloud points. If both the live and STO cloud points are below
the lower temperature boundary wax will be avoided under these flowing conditions.
When the upper temperature boundary falls below the live cloud point wax mitigation
measures will be required.
In the example there is still a degree of uncertainty as to whether wax will occur due to
the range in the temperature profile.
Deposition Profile
Experience has shown that wax generally always deposits wherever it has the potential to
i.e. onto any cooled surface that is below the cloud point. Once the risk has been
identified measures to assess the magnitude of potential deposition will be required.
Wax deposition is dominated by temperature. Deposition rate is dependent on the
temperature and directly proportional to heat loss through the pipewall. As a
consequence deposition rates are very low or zero at ambient temperatures, even though
there may be a high percentage of wax out of solution. Deposition rates are highest
where heat losses are greatest. This usually occurs immediately downstream of where the
pipewall first cools below the cloud point. Figure 10.5-10 illustrates a typical deposition
and temperature profile for a flowline.
H-0806.35
10-83
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Thickness / Temperature
te
Ra
n
io
sit
po
e
D
Cloud Point
Ambient Temp
Distance
Surface chemistry or high flow velocities including cavitation of gas bubbles may
prevent wax from sticking.
Self hot oil flushing: in an uninsulated system the flowing oil phase may be
substantially hotter than the cloud point. Here Mechanical action from turbulent
bursts together with the heat and solvency of the hot oil may effectively flush the wax
from the surface.
Self limiting thickness: as the wax layer deposits it forms an additional insulating
layer on the pipewall. Overtime the temperatures of the flowing oil and inne r surface
of the wax layer will increase. When the wax surface temperature rises to the cloud
point wax deposition will cease.
The first two are virtually impossible to predict and it must be assumed that deposits will
form. The latter case can be predic ted and is relevant to short uninsulated sections such
as connectors and manifolds where the fluids are still hot.
H-0806.35
10-84
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Sensitivity
It is imperative to have an accurate estimation of thermal conditions within the system.
Uncertainties in calculating internal pipewall temperatures and heat flow will directly
impact where wax will form and the rate of deposition. Temperature profile will also
have an impact on the waxing properties of the oil via the solid liquid phase behavior and
viscosity.
Sensitivity studies should be considered to assess the impact of these issues on the overall
deposition rate profile. Figure 10.5-11 illustrates the point. The dark shade area
represents the predicted wax profile that exists under all conditions. Whereas, the upper
boundary of the lighter shaded area represents the profile that only occurs from a
composite of worst case conditions. The likely profile exists within the light shaded area
Deposit thickness
Distance
H-0806.35
10-85
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
0.8
0.7
0.6
Uninsulated
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
Insulated
0.1
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Distance Kms
H-0806.35
10-86
1-Dec-00
100
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
will be roughly the same irrespective of the level of ins ulation. Thickness and overall
mass will impact mitigation strategies (discussed in section 10.5.5).
The impact on production is not so clear and must be individually assessed. In the
uninsulated case the deposit may form a localized restriction with a potential risk of
blocking the line. Overall pressure drop may not be significantly effected if the
restriction is fairly short. However, in the insulated case the increased roughness over a
long length of the line may cause higher overall frictional pressure drops. But the lower
viscosities due to the warmer profile may counter this.
External environment
External environmental conditions will also govern the temperature profiles in the
production system.
The external temperature will dictate the ultimate fluid temperature, while the thermal
properties and potential convection currents will govern external heat transfer rates. Here
wind speed or sea currents will dictate the external heat transfer coefficient having a
substantial effect on the rate of cooling and thus deposition.
A typical production system can be exposed to a number of different environments.
These may vary widely in their thermal and physical properties. Each section of the line
will have to be assessed individually.
It is usual to design to worst case environmental conditions. However, as deposition is a
relatively slow process daily fluctuations and conditions that occur very infrequently for
short periods should be ignored (i.e. absolute minimum temperatures may only occur
once every 10 years and then only last less than a day). Rather an average minimum
winter temperature should be used.
The variation in mean seasonal temperatures and currents should also be considered.
Here, deposition rates may be substantially different at different times of the year
impacting mitigation strategies.
Example Arctic or alpine environmental minimum temperatures will occur during the
winter However, buried lines will be surrounded by frozen ground preventing convection
and affording some insulation. During the spring thaw, meltwater flowing through the
ground can increase the heat transfer and deposition rates by orders of magnitude even
though the ultimate temperature is warmer.
H-0806.35
10-87
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
External heat transfer coefficients can be difficult to estimate because of uncertainty and
variations in these environmental conditions. Therefore, it is generally appropriated to
utilize an overall heat transfer coefficient (U). This is useful where assessing the impact
on deposition for a range of design options.
Typical values for an exposed uninsulated system range from 80 to 150 W/m2 C. Here
the environment dominates U.
Overall U values for insulated systems become less dependent on environmental
conditions. Values range from < 1 to over 20 W/m2 C. These are discussed in section
10.5.5.
Exposed systems (risers & flowlines)
External heat transfer is highly dependent on convection. Here air or sea currents
accelerate the heat losses. Only a slight current is needed to induce forced convection,
which will have dramatic effect on the external heat transfer coefficient. Figure 10.5-13
shows the differences in the predicted deposition profiles for an exposed subsea pipeline.
The lower deposition rate was produced assuming no subsea current while the higher rate
resulted from a current of 1knot flowing over the pipe. The impact will be greatest in
poorly insulated systems.
H-0806.35
10-88
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Thickness
1 Knot
Static
Distance
Figure 10.5-13: Impact of Seawater Currents on Deposition Profiles
Burial
Burial can prove very effective at reducing heat losses, as the pipe is insulated from the
major environmental convection currents.
External heat transfer coefficients will depend on the thermal properties, porosity and the
level of saturation of the soil. These properties will vary over the length of the line. A
muddy seabed will have a considerably high thermal conductivity than a dry sandy soil.
Also natural convection may also take place in saturated soils further accelerating the
heat losses. If the pipeline is buried less than 1mtr below the surface, and currents along
the seabed may have an effect. Subterranean currents such as spring melt water flows
must also be considered. Here heat losses can be orders of magnitude greater than from
normal convection.
H-0806.35
10-89
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Partial Burial
Flowlines are rarely fully exposed to sea or air. A significant proportion will be in
contact with the ground. Here external heat transfer will be predominantly from the
exposed area of the pipe. This will greatly affect the rate of heat loss and deposition rate.
Sections of a flowlines may also become totally buried. Here heat losses and deposition
rates will be suppressed.
Overall the deposition rates may vary significantly over short distances. However, given
the uncertainties in predicting these environmental conditions, these localized effects are
ignored and an average heat transfer coefficient U should be used for the whole system.
Flow rate effects
Changes in fluid velocity or flow regime will have a number of effects on deposition.
Increased flow velocity will change the temperature profile and heat transfer rates; which
will also be different between laminar and turbulent flow. Mechanical shear will also
impact the rate of transport to the wall and rate of stripping of wax from the wall.
The combined effects are illustrated in Figure 10.5-14. In laminar flow the heat losses
are relatively low but the deposition rates are high because of the low shear rates. As
flow rates increase the onset point is moved downstream. As flow becomes turbulent the
heat transfer rates increase which raises the deposition rate, this is countered by the effect
of increased shear. As flow further increases the deposition rates are dominated by the
effect of shear stripping depositing wax from the wall.
H-0806.35
10-90
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Deposit Thickness
w
Lo
ce
len
u
rb
Tu
nar
mi
a
L
ly
gh
Hi
t
len
u
b
r
Tu
Distance
H-0806.35
10-91
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Thickness
Laminar
Turbulent
Distance
The impact of using an inappropriate deposition rate constant is shown in Figure 10.5-15.
Here the temperature profiles and heat losses are normalized so as to highlight purely the
effects of flow regime and shear.
Line Sizing
For a given throughput a smaller diameter line will reduce overall deposition growth
rates. Here maintaining a high fluid velocity will maintain a higher temperature profile
displacing deposition down stream and increase the wall shear stresses which will restrict
growth. However, the impact of the deposit roughness on frictional pressure drop will be
increased and negate any benefit of reducing the deposition rate.
Viscosity
The liquid viscosity will also impact deposition rate and predicted heat transfer rates.
Deposition rate is inversely proportional to viscosity.
Proper account of non-Newtonian behavior should be made. Viscosities at low shear
rates can be significantly higher than those estimated by extrapolation of PVT data. Also
live oil may be significantly less viscous than the STO experimental data.
H-0806.35
10-92
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
H-0806.35
10-93
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Transients
Wax deposition is relatively slow and considered as steady state process, building into
thick layers over significant time periods. Although, transients such as shut- ins and startups can be modeled, the impact of deposition during these periods is relatively minor.
Shut ins are not normally modeled as the deposited waxy layer is very weak and is
usually stripped away by the shear stresses as soon as the flow is restored.
A shut in can be modeled as a static no- flow condition (higher diffusion constant).
However, over time the fluid temperatures fall and the driving force will diminish.
Eventually deposition will cease when the fluids have cooled to ambient.
Deposition during a shut- in will not plug the line. However, accumulation of solids at
low points and oil gelation at low temperatures (pour point) may occur. These are
described in section 10.4.4.
In periods of steadily decreasing flow, wax will continue to deposit on top existing wax
layer.
Increasing flow rate or temperature will effect existing wax deposits. Any increase in
fluid temperature will start to dissolve and soften the wax layer.
Some simulators allow wax to be redissolved out of the deposit back into the flowing oil.
However then softened wax may begin to be stripped away especially if the shear
stresses are increased due to higher flow rates. This phenomenon is not currently
predictable.
Despite the dissolution or removal of the existing wax layers fresh wax will start to
deposit (providing conditions are suitable) and these deposits will be more resilient to the
prevailing shearing forces.
Sensitivity Studies
Given all the potential uncertainties in predicting wax deposition it is advisable to
perform a sensitivity study to determine the probable range of depositions rates that
might occur for a given production scenario.
These should include the ranges in expected environmental conditions, production
profiles and deposition rate parameters derived from laboratory tests.
H-0806.35
10-94
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
While these uncertainties can be significant in certain cases the prediction modeling is
still extremely valuable in assessing the impact deposition could have on production
operations. They are also especially useful in the comparison of different production
scenarios, production rates over the field life and the relative effects of insulation as
indicated in Figure 10.5-16.
Deposition Rate Sensitivities
Deposit thickness
Uninsulated
Insulated
Distance
H-0806.35
10-95
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
The latter is discussed in the next section. However, it may directly impact production in
that intervention or servicing of inhibitor systems may require downtime.
Reduced Productivity
In addition to the actual amount and profile of the wax deposited, the impact on
productivity is required to assess design and mitigation requirements.
Wax layers will impact frictional pressure drop through both the reduction in internal
diameter of the pipework and through increased surface roughness. In most cases, flow is
turbulent and the increase in roughness will dominate the frictional pressures long before
the reduction in pipe area. For relatively thin waxy layers (<10mm) the roughness can be
taken as equal to the thickness of the wax layer. Thicker layers may differ but it is
unrealistic to allow wax layers to build-up to that level. Figure 10.5-17 shows the effects
of roughness and ID change compared with field data for a turbulent flow line.
14
12
10
0
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
Wax Thickness mm
H-0806.35
10-96
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Under turbulent flow conditions very thin layers can have dramatic effects on the
frictional pressure. Most large export pipelines require regular pigging in the order of
days to prevent the deposition from restricting throughput as pressure approaches the
capability of the pumps or design pressure of the line. The example above and several
other major trunk lines required cleaning continuously with a pig launched every couple
of days even though the wax thickness where less than a millimeter in thickness.
For systems operating near capacity in which thin layers will quickly impact throughput,
regular frequent cleaning will be required. Where pipelines are operating below capacity
there is more scope for thicker layers to deposit before throughput is restricted. Here
deposition rate modeling can be used to estimate cleaning frequencies based on the rise in
frictional pressure.
Sufficient pressure must be available to overcome the additional frictional component
due to deposited wax, otherwise the throughput will be restricted. This will have a knock
on effect in reducing wall stresses and changing the temperature profile. The deposition
rates may be accelerated and onset point may start progress up stream as the flowrates
reduce. As more wax is deposited the frictional pressure component increases and the
throughput continuously declines.
Figure 10.5-18 illustrates this effect on the performance curves of a typical well. Wax
starts to deposit at the top of the well effectively choking back production. Within a few
days the deposition has growth significant to restrict production by 60 percent. Here the
effect of wax is represented by new performance curves.
H-0806.35
10-97
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Well Performance
Wellhead Pressure
Shut-in
Pressure
Clean Tubing
Production
3 Days
1 Day
Flowrate
Figure 10.5-18: Impact of Wax Deposition on Well Performance
The overall productivity of the production system can be very susceptible to deposition
within the flowline. Deposition anywhere in the flowline or riser system will increase
frictional pressure. If the flowline inlet pressure exceeds the well performance the system
will be choked and production will be restricted. As deposition continues the rate at
which the well(s) can supply the flowline will decline. Even when operating below
capacity the wax may ultimately restrict production either when production is stimulated
and higher rates are delivered or when sufficient wax has built- up to increase the inlet
pressure requirements to the well performance curve. Figure 10.5-19 illustrates this
effect.
H-0806.35
10-98
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Well Performance
Well Performance
1 week
Deposit
Clean
Flowrate
Figure 10.5-19: Impact of Wax Deposition on System Performance
In deepwater systems and/or long flowlines the margins in available pressure are smaller
as the flowline inlet conditions are further up the well performance curves. Wax
deposition can rapidly impact throughput in such circumstances. Figure 10.5-20
illustrates this effect on deepwater/long flowlines.
H-0806.35
10-99
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Well Performance
Clean
1 week
deposit
Well Performance
Flowrate
Figure 10.5-20: Impact of Wax Deposition on Deepwa ter/Long Flowline
Performance
Deposition anywhere within the entire system can lead to production restrictions and
subsequent deposition upstream. The decline in productivity may accelerate and it may
be possible to kill a well or system without completely blocking the flowline or wellbore
with wax.
It is therefore important to assess both the deposition rates and their impact on hydraulic
and thermal performance throughout the entire system over the production lifetime. The
results will be a series of deposition profiles and a plot of potential productivity decline
over time, both of which are needed to assess and optimize mitigation strategies and
project economics.
Start-up
Deposition rates can be extremely high for relatively short periods of time where
flowlines or wellbore are warming- up i.e. following a start-up. Here the pipewall or
tubing and any surrounding insulation or soil will be cold. Heat losses and deposition
H-0806.35
10-100
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
rates will therefore be relatively high until steady state thermal profiles have been
achieved. This can be in the order of several days.
As the system warms up deposition may slow down stop and wax may even be stripped
away if temperatures rise above the cloud point.
However, it may be possible for deposition rates to be sufficiently high that production is
restricted prior to steady state conditions being achieved. Such conditions have occurred
in wellbores where the top of the tubing and annuls temperatures never achieve thermal
equilibrium before the wax deposit chokes production. Here wireline is run to clean
deposits out during which time the wellbore begins to cool. Consequently the well is
regularly shut in to treat wax. If the wellbore can be preheated or the deposition inhibited
so as the system is in thermal equilibrium deposition rates can be significantly restricted
allowing the well to operate for longer before cleaning is required. Similarly flowlines
may also require similar treatment, if deposition rates are unacceptably high during startup.
Potential Blockage
Wellbores and Flowlines
If left unchecked wax can completely plug a flowline or wellbore. Such occurrences
(purely from deposition) are rare as production will have dramatically declined and some
form of remediation will have been attempted long before the system could physically
plug.
The decline in productivity or increase in frictional pressure is an effective indicator of
wax build-up. In highly turbulent systems relatively thin layers can be detected,
however, under multiphase flow conditions any effect on hydraulic performance may be
harder to discern.
The greatest risk form forming a blockage arises from the inability to effectively clean a
partially blocked line of deposited wax. The most common cause of blockages due to
wax deposition is a stuck pig resulting from inappropriate remedial action. Such
occurrences can be avoided through careful selection of cleaning strategy or ideally
through preventative measures.
Ideally the intervention or cleaning frequency should be dictated by the productivity
decline. However, it is more usual to specify intervention requirements based on the
ability to clear the line of deposition.
H-0806.35
10-101
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Methods to deal with total and partial blockages are described in section 10.5.6
Instrumentation Lines / Metering
Narrow bore tubing for instrumentation and or drainage can plug with solid wax.
Plugging through deposition is rare as the fluids within these lines are usually static and
at ambient temperature. Here there is insufficient wax and no driving force for wax to
deposit. However, deposition can occur if the fluids are flowing, i.e. a sampling point.
These lines are more susceptible to plugging caused by solid wax being forced into them
during a pigging of other wax remediation operation.
Some flow meters can be adversely effected by the presence of solid wax particles or
more usually by wax depositing onto the turbines or internal cavities of the meter.
Meters are generally sited where deposition is unlikely to occur i.e. where the fluids are
above the cloud point or at isothermal conditions.
Insulation and/or heat tracing or the ability to back flush to melt or blow out any deposit
should protect crucial instrumentation lines and equipment.
Process Equipment
Deposition rarely effects possessing equipment other than oil coolers. Here the high heat
fluxes and cold surface temperatures will promote high deposition rates. Fouling of heat
exchanges with solids is a common problem and there are a wide number of anti- fouling
solutions available. Fouling due to wax will only occur in oil coolers and is difficult to
control. The build up of a solid wax layer will reduce the efficiency of the cooler due to
the insulation effects of the layer. Some designs especially plate exchangers are more
susceptible to fouling from wax. Shell and tube exchangers are preferred ideally with the
maximum effective tube diameter suitable.
Methods to control wax in coolers are detailed in section 10.5.6. However, the most
effective solution is to occasionally flush the oil side with hot oil to soften and melt out
any deposits. This should be performed before the cooler becomes totally plugged.
Other process equipment such as separators and storage vessels may occasionally fill up
with solid wax particles settling out from the oil. This can usually be solved by
increasing the process temperature or introducing some agitation. These phenomena are
described in section 10.4.4
H-0806.35
10-102
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
H-0806.35
10-103
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
10-104
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Spheres: An inflatable sphere used to sweep accumulated liquids form gas and gas
condensate lines. Fairly ineffective for removing wax.
Foam Pigs: Compressible polyurethane foam pigs generally form a seal with the
pipewall and can be pumped or pushed with production. The pigs will deform to fit the
pipework and as such can be deployed around tight bends and elbows and though dual
diameter pipework. Petrobras have successfully deployed foam pigs around dual
diameter pipeline loops in the Campos basin.
However, tight fitting foam pigs can to accumulate the removed wax ahead of them as a
long slug. Here there is very little bypass of liquid around the pig to disperse the
removed wax. Eventually this slug can become sufficiently long that the force needed to
displace the pig and slug becomes greater than that available forming a blockage.
Foam pigs come in a range of densities suited to different applications < 30Kg/m3 for
light cleaning and up to 180kg/m3 for heavy scraping. Brushes metal studs and cutters
can be embedded into the pig body to provide additional mechanical scrapping as the pig
traverses the line.
Solid Cast Pigs: These are one piece solid pigs moulded usually from polyurethane.
They consist of a series of discs or cups along the length of the pig. They are usually a
tight fit into the pipe with the front and back discs or cups forming a seal against which
the pig is driven by the flow. These pigs are fairly effective at removing wax but again
susceptible to forming a plug of wax ahead of them.
Pigs moulded with discs perpendicular to the main body are generally preferred over cups
as they are more effective at scrapping wax and can be flowed in either direction in case
of a blockage.
Mandrel pigs: These have a central body tube, or mandrel, on to which various
components can be assembled for a specific duty. The front and back will usually consist
of a series of discs or cups enable the pig to be driven with the flow. The front discs also
often provide the main cleaning or scrapping edge. A wide variety of cutters brushes and
studs can also be attached to provide additional cleaning. However, the effectiveness of
these has not been fully verified.
Mandrel pigs are amongst the most effective pigs for removing wax deposits on a regular
basis but are fairly inflexible and require precise sizing and shallow radii bends. They
can be designed with a significant bypass of fluid which can be utilized to disperse the
H-0806.35
10-105
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
removed wax into the flow ahead of the pig. Thus they rarely accumulate significant
deposits ahead of them.
Aggressive Pigs: Where significant amounts of wax have been allow to deposit into a
thick layer it may be necessary to consider the use of heavy duty cleaning pigs. There are
a number of these available but the selection will depend on individual circumstances.
They are not recommended for routine cleaning operations.
Dual Diameter Pigs: These pigs can be deployed along a pipe of one diameter then
expand into a larger flowline. There are a number of designs consisting of petals that
open up in the larger line. However, the cleaning efficiencies of these type of pigs are
significantly lower than for the rigid body or madreal pigs. Foam pigs may also offer an
effective method of pigging or deploying through dual diameters.
Coil Tubing
Coil tubing can be deployed into a flowline or wellbore as a last resort to clear a totally or
partial blocked line. The coiled tubing is used to deploy heat, chemicals, mechanical
cutters or hydraulic jetting to the wax plug. Currently coil tubing can only be deployed
less than2 miles into a line. However, new technology has been developed Startak in
which the coil is deployed on skates. Here the coil can be pushed much further into the
line with little resistance. 5miles + is estimated to be readily achievable.
Shear Stripping
Existing wax deposits can be removed by increasing the wall shear stresses through
increased throughput. The increase in stress of flowrate required to achieve removal will
depend on the nature of the waxes and the conditions under which they deposited.
Increases of an order of magnitude may be required which is likely to prove unattainable
for most production systems.
Thermal
Thermal methods can be used in a number of ways to control and remove solid wax
deposits. Firstly if the temperature of the fluids and pipewall can be maintained above
the cloud point wax can be totally avoided. Contingency will be required for shutdown
and start- up. Secondary the deposition rate can be significantly reduced through
inhibiting the rate of heat loss to the environment i.e. through insulation. Finally wax
deposits can be softened and removed or melted by heating the line either directly or by
flushing with hot fluids.
H-0806.35
10-106
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Insulation
There are a number of insulation systems available for wellbores and flowlines including
risers. These range from external coatings to complex pipe- in-pipe and bundle systems.
The type chosen will depend on the performance required and the suitability with the
external environment
For relatively short systems and systems carrying benign fluids a simple external
insulation coating may be sufficient to maintain temperatures above the cloud point. In
subsea systems with flowlines in excess of 5 miles simple insulation is unlikely to be
sufficient to prevent deposition. Here high performance insulation systems will be
required. However, beyond 20 miles these become infeasible both on cost and
performance grounds.
Where wax cannot be avoided standard external insulation offer a capital cost solution to
inhibiting deposition rates. The level of inhibition is directly proportional to the thermal
resistance afforded by the insulation. Table 10.5-1 presents some typical external
insulations and coatings.
Table 10.5-1: External Coatings and Insulation
Material
Therma l Conductivity*
Btu/hrFft.
W/mC
Typical Overall U+
Btu/ft 2 hrF
W/m2 C
26
0.115
45
0.2
25 35
20 25
150 - 200
100 - 150
1.18
0.156
0.017
2.04
0.27
0.03
3.5 10
2 3.5
0.2 2
20 50
10 - 20
1 - 10
PVC Foam
0.023
0.04
0.07
0.04
0.07
0.12
0.2 2
1 - 10
1 2.5
5 - 15
Syntactic PU
There area number for high performance insulation systems available which are
described below:
Pipe-in-pipe: The flowline carrying the process fluids is contained within a second pipe.
The annulus between the pipes provides the thermal insulation. Depending of the system
H-0806.35
10-107
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
it may contain a gas (including air), a variety of insulation materials such as crushed
quartz or foams and may even be evacuated.
Pipeline Bundles: A similar principle to pipe- in-pipe in which a number of flowlines and
utility lines are contained within a carrier pipe or pipes. The internal flowlines may be
individually insulated within the system. Again the carrier pipe offers protection from
the harsh environment with the annulus providing additional insulation. The carrier pipe
may be evacuated or contain a high-density gas for buoyancy.
There are a number of pipe-in-pipe and bundle systems operating successfully in the
North Sea and GoM. Typical thermal properties range from overall U values of
0.1W/m2 C to 1W/m2 C. However, the method of fabrication, installation restricts the
ultimate length to under 20miles.
Vacuum Tubing/pipeline: Vacuum insulated tubing strings and pipeline sections are
available. Here a vacuum within a doubled skinned wall provides a very high degree of
insulation. It is possible to achieve flowing wellhead temperatures within a few degrees
Celsius of the bottomhole temperature. Special insulated connectors are required, as this
is the major source of heat loss.
Flexible Pipes: Through the nature of their construction, flexib le flowlines have an
inherent insulation effect built into them via the polymer layers. The actual level of
insulation afforded by these layers will be case specific but typically it will be equivalent
that afforded by an inch of concrete.
In order to prevent deposition it is most likely that additional external insulation will be
required. However, selection of a foam which is compatible with the flexing of the
flowline is essential.
Wellbore gelled annulus fluids: Within the wellbore the major mechanism for heat loss is
usually through convection from the annulus fluids. By utilizing a fluid with a low
thermal conductivity such as a hydrocarbon (diesel) and preventing convection through
solidification the wellbore can be effectively insulated. Gelled diesel has been
successfully employed in a number of GoM developments.
Burial: Burial of a pipeline offers protection for forced convection currents. Thus heat
losses can be substantially reduced even where the backfill is relatively poor in insulation
properties. In many cases the heat losses are treated as conduction. But in fully saturated
H-0806.35
10-108
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
soils such as sea beds natural convention may also have an effect. Here insulation may
not be as effective as expected.
An additional advantage of burial is the large thermal mass of soil surrounding the pipe.
During normal operation this soil will warm- up and on shutdown will significantly slow
the cooling.
Heating
While insulation offers a passive method for preventing and inhibiting wax deposition,
heating offers a method for both preventing and removing existing deposits. In order to
remove existing deposits the pipewall temperature must be heated sufficiently to either
melt the deposited wax or sufficient to soften it such that the shear impacted by the flow
can strip it away. In most cases the ability to raise the pipewall to 60C couple with flow
at normal production rates is sufficient to remove the majority of deposits. Higher
temperature > 80C may be required to totally remove all waxes in some cases.
Electrical Heating: A number of electrical systems exist for heating pipelines and
tubing, each with its own limitations of applicability and power requirements. Where
installed electrical heating is usually employed to continuously prevent deposition or to
provide minimum temperature protection against a shut-in.
Trace heating. The most widely used on-shore and on surface production equipment.
Heating elements are wrapped around the pipework and covered with insulation.
This is effective but subject to high maintenance and safety concerns where
hydrocarbons may be vented.
Impedance heating. This has been tested and used to heat tubing on onshore
installations. Here an electrical current is passed along a series of carrier wires or
pipes which induce current within the main pipe producing heat.
Direct heating. Current is passed along the main pipe itself inducing heat with the
pipe wall.
All these systems require good thermal insulation to be effective. The latter two may be
suitable for subsea use providing good electrical insulation is also achieved. However,
power consumption, reliability and insulation costs have yet to be fully proven.
Heated Bundles: Bundled pipelines have been installed in which additional flowlines are
included through which hot water or gas can be circulated to warm the entire system.
The systems can be used either to maintain a higher thermal profile thus avoiding
deposition or to heat the system in the event of a shut- in or cleaning requirement.
H-0806.35
10-109
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Caution should be used with heating. Applying external heat to a shut- in pipe can lead to
the build-up of excessive pressure. This is especially true when dealing with plugged
lines (especially hydrates) in which large volumes of gas can be generated. See hydrate
section.
Hot fluid Flushing: Wax deposits can also be removed by flushing with hot liquids. This
technique is widely employed onshore especially in wellbores where it has proven to be a
very effective remediation technology.
The fluids must be heated sufficiently so that they warm, soften and melt out the
deposited wax. As indicated above this will require a temperature generally in excess of
60C at the point where the wax is to be removed. To facilitate removal the fluids are
pumped at a high rate.
Ideally hot oil is used as this is a reasonable solvent for the wax and gives rise to minimal
compatibility issues. Solvents can also be used however as with the oil the low flash
point can give rise to safety concerns. Alternatively hot water has been used. Although
not a solvent for the wax the higher heat capacity of water allows longer lines to be
flushed while achieving a minimum flushing temperature.
In flushing wellbores the fluids should be pumped down the annulus and returned
through the tubing. This will avo id displacing solid wax from the tubing into the
perforations and reservoir. Solid wax may have a melting temperature higher than the
reservoir temperature and permanent formation damage may occur.
Flush of flowlines will require a deployment or return line. The levels of insulation on
the flowline must be sufficient to achieve the minimum flushing temperature at the point
where wax first occurs within the flowline.
The amount of wax that can be removed will depend on the temperature and solvency of
the flushing fluid and the time and flow rate over which it is deployed. In theory all the
wax can be removed. However, the flow path must not be totally plugged otherwise the
flushing fluid cannot be deployed.
Chemical reactions: An exothermic reaction can be created by the mixing of various
salts. Several processes are available the most notable based on nitrogen salts such as
SGN from Petrobras. The reagents are mixed and deployed with an organic solvent to
aid dissolution and removal of the wax. The chemical reaction produced heat which
softens and melts the wax and N2 gas which helps mechanically remove the deposit.
H-0806.35
10-110
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
The chemical reagents are deployed either via a small diameter service line or by directly
into the riser and allowed to flow down to the blockage. Controlling the reaction so as to
take place in contact with the major wax blockage is crucial. This is achieved by
delaying the reaction via the control of pH and further chemical reagents.
Petrobras have used this system to clean a significant number of wax blockages in the
Campos basin. However, this is considered a drastic remediation technique to be
deployed when flowlines have become severely restricted or blocked. It is not a method
for the routine frequent cleaning to maintain maximum throughputs.
Chemical
Chemical additives can be used to both remove existing deposition and to inhibit growth
rates. They offer an operation cost based solution requiring minimal capital investment
for installation of injection facilities.
Methods for selecting inhibitor are presented in section 10.6.2
Solvents and dissolvers
Solvents are used to remove or soften and aid removal of deposited wax layers and plugs.
Large quantities are usually pumped into the flowline or wellbore and allowed to contact
the wax for a given period of time depending on the severity of the wax plug.
Wax solvents are usually aromatic based solvents (xylene is very common) containing
proprietary agents and dispersants to aid dissolution and dispersal of the wax. Given
their nature they can pose HSE concerns in storage and handling of the large quantities
required. Plus they may be incompatible with seals and liners in injection facilities and
flowlines. As such the use of solvents are usually reserved to back-up any severe
remediation requirements where intervention is difficult.
Solvents are also used in hot flushing operations (see above).
concerns preclude their use in some regions.
H-0806.35
10-111
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
of a chemical is difficult to predict ahead of start- up. Therefore, chemicals are generally
used as an additional safe guard and to optimize intervention requirements and
operational costs.
There are several main categories of inhibitor available:
Solvents: Thermodynamic inhibition is possible using wax solvents. However,
substantial quantities (>10 percent vol) are required to have any significant beneficial
effect on suppressing the onset temperature (cloud point) and subsequent deposition rates.
Deployment and cost render these infeasible for most production scenarios.
Wax crystal modifiers: These inhibitors interfere with the growth of wax crystals, though
exactly how they inhibit deposition growth on a pipewall is unclear. They are generally
polymeric (EVAs and PAAs) and only just soluble in the oil. As the chemicals effect
wax crystallization they must be present in the warm oil prior to crystallization occurring.
To have maximum benefit they should be injected above the cloud point of the oil.
Crystal modifiers are generally dosed at between 100 and 500 PPM vol/vol basis. Due to
their polymeric nature many of these inhibitors are waxy solids at minimum seabed
temperatures. Therefore they often diluted into aromatic solvents to facilitate deployment
through long umbilical. Increasing water cut adversely effects some chemistries. Any
such effects should be can during the screening process. However, chemical usage and
selection can be optimized once the filed is on production.
Crystal modifies may also effect the oil rheology effecting low temperature viscosity and
pour point. When used in this capacity they are known as Pour Point Depressants (PPDs,
see section 10.4.5). However, not all pour point depressants will reduce wax deposition
rates and not all wax crystal modifiers will are effective PPDs. It is crucial to select a
PPD and a wax inhibitor accordingly (see sections 10.6.2).
Dispersant /Surfactants: These are similar to the crystal modifiers in tha t they inhibit the
deposition growth rate. However, they work by coating the wax particles and preventing
them from agglomerating together and reduce the adhesive forces sticking them to the
pipewall.
They are generally effective at concentrations of between 100 and 1000 PPM vol/vol and
are less viscous than the polymeric crystal modifiers. They also tend to be less sensitive
to water cut but can cause compatibility and process separation problems.
H-0806.35
10-112
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Deployment Issues
As with the continuous use of any production chemicals consideration must be given to
deployment and compatibility issues. Umbilicals and injection facilities must be suitable
for dosing significant rates of potentially viscous materials. Many wax inhibitors can be
very viscous or even semi solid at temperatures close to 40F, which poses significant
pumping problems for long umbilical. Storage facilities may also have to be heated if
low ambient temperatures are anticipated. Alternatively the inhibitor may have to be
diluted or winterize in-order to be deployed. This will require increased injection
capacity.
Wax inhibitors are generally inert but the solvent used for deployment may give rise to
compatibility issues with umbilical and injection pump seals and materials. The chemical
compatibility with other production chemicals must also be examined both in terms
mixing and inhibitor performance (see section 10.6.2). Wax inhibitors are known to be
incompatible with methanol prior to injection into the flowing oil stream.
Pipewall Coatings
Internal pipewall coating to prevent wax from sticking have been extensively studied.
However, to date no coating have be identified which will prevent wax from depositing.
The only correlation established with reducing deposition has been the thermal insulation
effects afforded by the thicker coatings.
Novel Techniques
In addition to the traditional mitigation technologies indicated above an increasing
number of novel black box technologies such as magnets are being proposed to prevent
and/or remove wax deposits. While some of these have been used in field for many years
there is no conclusive evidence that they actually provide any benefit. With only
circumstantial evidence and no methods of evaluating the performance or how these
technologies work it is not advisable to rely on them as the major or sole mitigation
strategy.
Wax Control Strategies
Choosing a particular strategy to control wax deposition will be cases specific It will
depend not only on the severity of the waxing but also on the efficiency and applicability
of the mitigation technologies for the particular production scenario. The solution must
H-0806.35
10-113
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
H-0806.35
10-114
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Costs p.a.
Cost of Intervention
inc. Lost production
Optimal nos of
interventions
12
15
No of Interventions pa
10-115
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
under normal flowing conditions. Fortunately in most cases this is relatively easy to
achieve with no additional insulation. Gelled annulus fluids have been utilized to provide
additional insulation and vacuum tubing provides ultimate protection if required.
Flowline jumpers and manifolds are also difficult to intervene and should therefore also
be protected with suitable insula tion where possible.
Flowlines can be pigged but the length of the line and the required cleaning frequency
will dictate the method of delivering the pig to the inlet. Relatively short lines
(<25miles) requiring regular cleaning usually incorporate round trip pigging or TFL
systems. TFL also allows intervention into the wellbore and jumpers. Longer flowlines
and lines with infrequent cleaning requirements may incorporate a subsea pig launcher.
Round trip pigging and TFL provides a technically robust solution in which pigs can be
run frequently if required. If problems are encountered reversing the flow can retrieve
the pig and subsequent cleaning frequencies can be adjusted accordingly. The system
also provides dual lines if one should become plugged production may not be totally lost.
However, production may be affected as the system may have to be shut in while the pig
or TFL is pumped down the line to the inlet. It may be possible to flow the pig back with
production but it is usual to pump it around the entire circuit. In a relatively long circuit
this may take a day with the associated lost production intervention cost can escalate.
A subsea pig launcher provides a much lower capital investment but carries a higher
technical risk. Here the cost and availability of launching pigs may be limiting if
deposition is worse than expected. There is also the risk of being unable to retrieve a
stuck pig as flow cannot be easily reversed. However, a normal pigging operation will
not impact production as the pig is pushed by normal flow.
The cleaning frequency itself must be determined from an assessment of the amount of
wax deposited in the line, the impact and cost to production, the efficiency of the
intervention technology and the cost of performing the intervention.
The amount of wax present and its impact on production can be estimated using a
deposition rate simulator. This yields the productivity decline curve illustrate in the
previous figure. The efficiency of the cleaning technology is harder to assess and will be
dependent on the type of pig or TFL tool chosen. Some manufactures recommend a
maximum thickness of deposit that can be removed while others recommend a total
volume or mass that can be removed. Either way these estimates are based on individuals
experience and require further investigation to tune these models.
H-0806.35
10-116
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Costs p.a.
Poorly insulated
Highly insulated
6
9
No of Interventions pa
12
15
Having assessed the intervention requirements for a given production scenario the effects
of inhibiting the deposition rate can be addressed. Here the effects of insulation on
reducing heat loss and thus deposition rate can be predicted with a deposition rate
simulator. The capital cost of each insulation and production option can be compared
with the impact it has on intervention frequencies and costs.
Insulation is generally a very cost-effective method of reducing the intervention
frequency. For long lines where the fluid still cool to ambient temperature it will only
reduce the average thickness but not the total mass deposited. This may be beneficial
where the cleaning technology is determined by thickness alone and not by total mass.
Figure 10.5-22 illustrates this.
Chemical inhibitors provide an alternative operational cost method to reduce intervention
freque ncies. However, their performance is not guaranteed but they can be optimized
once the field is producing.
H-0806.35
10-117
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Costs p.a.
Ineffective
Good Performance
Exceptional
100% effective
6
9
No of Interventions pa
12
15
The optimal solution for a given filed is often a combination of all the above methods. It
is advisable to rely on insulation to provide sufficient inhibition to optimize development
and operation costs providing a workable technically robust wax management solution.
Chemical inhibitors enable the operational costs to be optimized by further reducing
cleaning frequencies. However, they can also be used to provide additional protection or
reduce insulation requirements if needed to protect production during specific production
periods, i.e. initial production stages where temperatures are low prior to full rates or
water breakthrough.
10.5.7 HSE
The safe operation of a production system is dependent on understanding the fluid
behavior and design capabilities of the system. If the implications of transporting waxy
H-0806.35
10-118
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
fluids are not fully considered pipeline blockage and even rupture may occur. The buildup of solid wax layers gives rise to additional HSE implications above and beyond the
handling of crude oils and multiphase hydrocarbon production streams. Chemicals may
be required to treat the oil. With good design practice the risks posed by these issues can
be fully assessed and minimized.
The following issues are specific to the deposition of solid wax from crude oils.
10.6
The attempted removal of solid wax layers can lead to the build-up of solid wax plugs
ahead of pigs. These can totally plug the line which may require abandonment or
opening for further cleaning. These wax plugs can also foul downstream process
equipment and instrumentation lines.
Any blockage within a system has the potential for generating high local pressures
with pose a risk to pipeline integrity. Wax plugs can support high differential
pressures.
Heating hydrocarbons to prevent or alleviate wax problems will lead to higher vapor
pressures and flash point concerns.
Wax recovered from pig traps and TFL operations are hydrocarbons. They will be
flammable and may contain carcinogens. Handle accordingly.
The use of chemicals and solvents to treat waxy oils also leads to a number of HSE
concerns. While most wax inhibitors themselves are generally of low toxicity many
contain substantial proportions of aromatic solvents required to facilitate deployment.
Here unless the products are sufficiently dilute they can block delivery systems and
umbilicals. At typical treatment rates significant quantities of these products must be
shipped and stored onsite on a regular basis. In some cases the cold flow
characteristics required these products to the stored in heated tanks. Most solvent
systems have a high flash point and are carcinogenic.
Any chemical treatments or oil heat must be compatible with all materials they come
in contact with both in the physical pipes and seals and other production chemicals.
Wax inhibitors tend to be incompatible with metha nol.
Waxy oils and the use of inhibitors can have detrimental effects on dehydration and
on the quality of the oil in water discharge specs. Here it is essential that chemical
treatments are compatible with the whole process.
Experimental Parameters
This section outlines the main experimental parameters associated with waxy oils and
deposition. They are intended as a guide to what the parameters are, how they are
H-0806.35
10-119
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
determined with respect to crude oils and the parameters which may influence them.
Also presented are guidelines as to screening and selecting chemical inhibitors.
10.6.1 Fluid Characterization
Fluid flow and deposition properties are predominately determined on dead oil at
atmospheric conditions. Although measurement techniques exist for examining live fluid
flow behavior, it is usual to rely on dead oil measurements and apply live oil correlations.
Live oil measurements need only be considered when dealing with specific cases where
fluid properties at production or ambient temperatures could significant cause pumping
difficulties.
Cloud Point (Wax appearance temperature)
The wax appearance temperature (WAT) or cloud point is the singularly most important
parameter relating to wax formation. It is the temperature at which waxes first crystallize
from solution. Waxes can exist above the cloud point, if previously precipitated due to
hysteresis. But generally from a design standpoint if the fluids and pipewalls throughout
the production system can be maintained above the cloud point wax formation can be
avoided.
There not as yet a standard procedure for determining cloud points. There are a number
of generally accepted measurement techniques available, each with a number of
advantages and disadvantages. The choice of which to use will depend on the type of oil
and amount of sample available as well as each companys individual preference. These
preferences are usually linked to experience and comparisons with a database.
Cloud point is a crystallization temperature and therefore kinetics will influence any
measurement. That is the methods used to determine cloud point will influence the value
derived. Given the potential influences the measurement techniques may have on the
derived value, it is strongly recommended that cloud point be determined using two
different techniques. With care the cloud point can be determined to an accuracy of
5F.
Cloud points are usually determined experimentally at standard conditions on dead oil.
This dead oil Cloud point is generally conservative, but does agree well with field data
for the onset point of wax layer build-up (see section 10.5.3). However, system pressure
and the presence of light ends will both have an effect. Live oil cloud points
measurements at elevated pressures are possible but it is more usual to utilize a
thermodynamic simulator to predict these effects.
H-0806.35
10-120
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN E
Comparisons between live and dead oil cloud points are not always valid, as the
sensitivities of the different tests used may be significantly different. Suitable live oil
measurement techniques such as the filtration are generally less sensitive than those used
for dead oil determinations. It is therefore advisable to calibrate the live method with a
dead oil condition test.
Tables 10.6-1, 10.6-2, and 10.6-3 compare commonly used cloud point measurement
techniques.
H-0806.35
10-121
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTA
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN
Description
Cross Polar
Microscopy
Sensitive
Small sample size
wide range of cooling rates
Validated
Filtration
Cold Finger
Kinetics eliminated.
Representative sample size.
Automated.
Suitable for live fluids
Actual measure of wax deposit
H-0806.35
Advantages
10-2
Disadvantages
1-Dec
DEEPSTA
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN
Infrared
Detection /
Light
Scattering
Description
When wax crystallizes from crude oil, small
quantities of heat are generated (much like heat
given off when water freezes). The temperature at
which this "heat of fusion" first occurs can be
detected by a Differential Scanning Calorimeter
DSC
Wax crystals will deflect and scatter light passing
through the oil. Infrared can be absorbed by waxes
and will penetrate black oils. Changes in light
reflected or absorbed as the oil cools will indicate
wax formation
NMR
Technique
Thermodynamic
prediction
H-0806.35
Advantages
Small sample size
Automated
quick
can estimate wax content
Sensitive
Small sample size
suitable for live fluids
Sensitive
Small sample size
estimate solid wax content
suitable for live fluids
Description
Model uses detailed compositional analysis of oil and
published properties of components to predict
solubility of wax components.
Disadvantages
Advantages
Predicts cloud point and solid wax
phase for range of pressures and oil
compositions.
10-3
Disadvantages
Very detailed input data.
Needs tuning to measured value
1-Dec
DEEPSTA
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN
Description
Disadvantages
Simple.
Representative sample size
Adaptable for live fluids
wide range of cooling rates
Viscosity
As solid wax crystallizes it will effect the oils Representative sample size.
rheology causing non-Newtonian behavior. The
Newtonian viscosity / temperature relationship of the
oil is altered as the solid phase increases.
Pyknometry
(ASTM D2500)
Density/volume
changes
H-0806.35
Advantages
10-4
1-Dec
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
When considering the merits of a particular method the following should be considered.
Sensitivity
Wax crystallization is a gradual process with only a tiny fraction of the wax forming
compounds crystallizing at the cloud point. Methods that rely on detecting a phase
change, such as DSC, may not pick-up the first crystals or require subjective
interpretation if the rate of crystallization is slow. Visual methods lead themselves well
to detecting individual crystal formation. The higher the magnification the greater the
sensitivity but the smaller and less potentially representative the area under study.
Filtering techniques will require a finite amount of wax to block sufficient pores to be
detected. The pore size and sensitivity of the pressure sensor will also dictate the
sensitivity. Rheological techniques need sufficient a solid wax phase present in order to
influence viscosity. Sensitivity of the viscometer is also critical as most oils are of fairly
low viscosity (<10Cp) and changes eve n over a wide temperature range may be small.
Thermodynamic simulators define cloud point at a preset concentration of solid phase
wax. A specification of 100-PPM solid wax may yield significantly lower values than a
specification of 10 PPM.
Supercooling
There is a finite time and energy required to initiate wax crystallization. Most methods
used to determine cloud points cool the sample from reservoir temperature using a single
cooling rate. Care must therefore be taken to ensure that the fluids do not become
artificially super-saturated with wax and subjected to supercooling. This can be avoided
by using cooling or heating steps or more usually by using an appropriate or several
cooling rates and extrapolating to those projected profiles for the field. Work by
Deepstar (CTR 90-A) and Marathon suggest that to avoid supercooling when determining
cloud points, cooling rates should ideally not exceed 0.2F/min.
Kinetics
In addition to supercooling is also important to ensure that the sample under test is free
from any pre-crystalline waxes or other introduced particles, which could serve as crystal
nuclei yielding inconsistent results. This is normally achieved by conditioning the
sample at reservoir temperature for a given time.
H-0806.35
10-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Forties
Beatrice
6% wt
17% wt
Alaskan
S. E. Asia
Prudhoe
Dulang
3% wt
30% wt
Arabian Light
2-4% wt
5% wt
GOM
Mid. East
There are two primary ways in which wax content is usually defined. The first method is
to use a compositional analysis of the crude oil (see below) to determine the weight
H-0806.35
10-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
percent of normal waxes with a chain length of C17 or greater. The second method is to
precipitate solids from the crude oil at a given temperature. The amount of solids
precipitated will depend highly upon the procedure used and the temperature at which the
test was performed. Most precipitation tests are performed at approx. 35F. This is
substantially lower than most operating temperatures, where for example the actual
amount of solid wax present in an oil at seabed temperature may be less than 25 percent
of the total wax content.
A much more useful measurement is the amount of wax precipitated as a function of
temperature. This type of information is used in wax deposition models to predict rates of wax
deposition. Wax content as a function of temperature can be obtained experimentally via
filtration, NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance) or inferred from the DSC (Differential Scanning
Calorimetry). Figure 10.6-1 presents the wax content as a function of temperature for two oils.
18
16
Waxy Crude (17%wt)
Solid Wax Fraction %wt
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
-25
-5
15
35
55
75
95
115
135
Temperature F
It is now more usual to predict the wax content as a function of temperature using
thermodynamic models. This information is then used in subsequent deposition
modeling.
H-0806.35
10-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Asphaltene Content
Asphaltenes are very complex high molecular aromatic components which can
agglomerate and deposit primarily due to a reduction in pressure. They are usually
associated with resins and will flocculate if these resins are solubilized by light end
saturates such as pentane.
Asphaltene content is usually determined by precipitation. The oil is titrated with a light
paraffinic solvent usually n- heptane until precipitation occurs (IP143/90). The amount of
material precipitated from a given oil will be dependent on the solvent used.
There is much confusion as to the nature of solids formed form hydrocarbons due to the
precipitation methods used to describe asphaltenes and waxes. Some high molecular
waxy saturates can be precipitated in the asphaltene content test and visa versa.
Saturates, Aromatics, Resigns & Asphaltenes (SARA)
SARA or PARA (paraffins Aromatics Resins and Asphaltenes) is a useful way of
characterizing a crude oil or fraction. A sample is characterized according to its main
constituent groups. These can be used to assess solvency of an oil and in wax modeling
to identify the relative paraffinic components from a total carbon number analysis.
Wax Dissolution Temperature
The wax dissolution temperature is the temperature at which precipitated wax crystals in
the bulk oil dissolve. In theory the cloud point or wax appearance temperature should be
the same as the dissolution temperature. However, because of kinetic effects like
supercooling, the cloud point is often times lower than the dissolution temperature by a
few degrees to over 30C depending upon the heating and cooling rate.
The dissolution temperature is not commonly measured but can be used for ensuring that
all wax is re-dissolved back in solution before filtering or storage of a crude oil.
Wax Melting Point
The wax melting point is the temperature at which a sample of solid wax melts. The
solid deposit is often obtained from the wax content measurement or from a field sample.
The melting point is higher than the wax dissolution temperature because there is no
solvent for the wax to dissolve in. Soft waxes have melting temperatures in the range of
50-60C while harder waxes may have melting temperatures as high as 90C.
H-0806.35
10-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The wax melting point may be used to define the temperature at which pipe walls or
storage facilities may need to be heated in order to remove solid deposits or sludges
Compositional Analysis
To predict the wax phase behavior a detailed compositional analysis of the crude oil is
required. A standard C7+ analysis from a PVT report is not adequate for predicting the
cloud point or the wax precipitation as a function of temperature, both of which are used
by some models for predicting wax build-up.
At a minimum, a quantitative
compositional analysis out to C30+ is required. This type of analysis can be obtained from
a PVT or geochemistry laboratory. The analysis can also be used to estimate the wax
content by totaling the normal waxes from C17+.
A second quantitative compositional analysis called high temperature gas
chromatography (HTGC), sometimes referred to as an extended paraffin analysis is
highly desired for the purposes of predicting cloud points and wax precipitation as a
function of temperature. This technique has been only been recently developed and is not
as readily obtainable. In general, a geochemistry lab is the most likely source for this
analysis. Figure 10.6-2 is a plot of HTGC data for two crude oils which shows normal
waxes extending out to carbon number 80. Recent research has indicated that the cloud
point of a crude oil can possibly be correlated to the C50+ fraction.
H-0806.35
10-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
10
CrudeA
N-Paraffin (wt%)
1
0.1
Crude B
0.01
0.001
0.0001
0.00001
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
CarbonNumber
Sensitivity of HTGC above C40 is a major concern. It is these high carbon number
paraffins that have been identified as the major wax forming compounds. However, they
are only present in tiny amounts oft en at the very limits of detection. Methods to
improve sensitivity include topping the oil by distillation of the lighter volatile
fractions, concentrating the waxes in the remaining oil and high resolution HTGC, the
resolution of HTGC is improving but it is a difficult and costly procedure.
Most predictions require this extended analysis on the normal straight chain paraffins.
However, there may be a significant proportion of iso and cyclic paraffins present as
well. Although HTGC is sensitive to the normal paraffins it will detect these other
components so it is important to differentiate the normal paraffin in the analysis.
As the predictive models become more complex some may require detailed analysis of
the iso and cyclic paraffins. In these cases HTGC Mass Spectrometry will be required
H-0806.35
10-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
10-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
30
25
20
Pour Point C
15
ASTM D97 (IP15)
10
5
0
-5
-10
-15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Re-heat Temperature C
Above a certain reheat temperature the pour point values can significantly decline. In
many cases, if subjected to reservoir temperature the resulting pour points are
significantly lower than the ASTM Upper value. The re-heat temperature where the pour
points decline is sometimes referred to as the Pour Point Inversion Temperature".
Kinematic Viscosity
H-0806.35
10-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
ln Viscosity
Transition
Newtonian
Temperature
H-0806.35
10-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
10-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In addition to thermal history and pretreatments the effects of mechanical shear should be
assessed. Here the samples can be subjected to agitation or known shear during the
temperature cycle. High shear rates can induce very different fluid behavior from low
shear or fluids cooled statically.
If the subsequent low temperature flow behavior of the fluids is insensitive to
pretreatment then a single sample conditioning treatment can be employed. Otherwise
further investigation of each potential fluid state should be performed.
Dynamic Viscosity
Dynamic viscosity is an essential parameter in predicting pressure drop and heat transfer
rates in flowlines and wellbores. It will dictate Reynolds number and thus determine
whether flow is laminar or turbulent. It will used to predict friction factors and in
determining gas-liquid holdup. It is also important in governing wax deposition rates.
Often referred to simply as viscosity, dynamic viscosity is essentially the fluids
resistance to flow. When a fluid is subjected to a force it will deform and flow. The fluid
is then said to be under a shear stress and will flow with a shear (strain) rate. Its viscosity
is given by the ratio of shear stress to shear rate. Dynamic Viscosity is expressed in Pa*s
or cP (Note: 1 Pa*s = 1000 cP and 1cP = 1 mPa*s).
Viscosity is sensitive to changes temperature and pressure. An increase in temperature
will result in a decrease in viscosity, while increasing pressure will result in increasing
viscosity. However, for hydrocarbon fluids below the bubble point, increasing pressure
will increase the solution gas oil ratio, which in turn will actually reduce viscosity.
Viscosity can also vary with shear rates or flowrates. This behavior is termed nonNewtonian and the measured viscosity at the shear stresses or strain rates applied is called
the apparent viscosity. Details of non-Newtonian behaviors relevant to waxy oil are
given in section 10.4.1.
Most oils will exhibit both Newtonian and non-Newtonian behaviors depending on
applied shear rates and temperature. It is therefore important to assess the viscosity over
the appropriate shear rate range of interest as well as temperature. This can be achieved
by a series of flow curves at a number of fixed temperatures over the range of interest.
Alternatively viscosity can be measured as a function of temperature for a series of fixed
shear rates.
H-0806.35
10-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 10.6-5 illustrates the relationship between shear rate and shear stress for
Newtonian and shear-thinning oils.
Shear Stress
Non-Newtonian
Shear Thinning
Newtonian
Shear Rate
Constant rate. A shear (strain) rate is applied to a fluid either as a fix flowrate
through a pipe or a fixed speed in a rotational viscometer. The viscosity is derived
from measured stresses via pressure drop or torque on sensor.
Constant stress. A set shear stress is applied either as a fixed pressure drop across a
pipe or an applied torque to a movable surface. The resultant flowrate, deformation
or speed of rotation is measured to derive shear rate and viscosity.
The constant rate principle is widely used and suitable for most analysis. It enables the
behavior at set shear rates to be studied. The constant stress principle is more complex,
but allows study of flow behavior at fixed stresses (i.e. set pressure drop). It is better
suited for analyzing complex non-Newtonian behaviors such as thixotropy or flow
development following a start-up.
H-0806.35
10-12
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In addition to the detection principles there are a number of sensing methodologies used
to measure viscosity. Table 10.6-5 described the basic principles and advantages of the
most commonly used types of instruments available for measuring oil viscosities. All can
be utilized with either the constant stress or constant rate principles.
Suitability
Many oils exhibit low viscosities requiring fairly sensitive instruments, especially at low
shear rates. When examining fluids over a wide temperature range, care must be taken to
ensure the viscosity remains within the instrument calibration range. Several viscometers
of different ranges may be required to cover reservoir to seabed temperatures.
Commonly used sensor configurations include the concentric cylinder and the tube or
model pipelines. These can suffer significant dimensional errors such as end effects,
which if not properly accounted for can amount to 30 percent of the measured values.
Most viscometers are open systems that could lead to significant evaporation when
dealing with light oils leading to higher viscosities. While when cooling over a wide
temperature the fluids may contract effecting the surface area (stresses) under test,
yielding false low readings.
It is important to note that the nominal shear rates used for calculating viscosity in most
laboratory studies are based on Newtonian behavior in Laminar flow. If fluids are being
measured under turbulent flow or are non-Newtonian then the actual shear rates will also
be a function of the flow properties and well as the flow rates and instrument or pipe
geometry. This is of significance for model pipeline viscometers. Correction factors for
shear thinning behavior are often applied to pipeline design but should also be applied to
the measurement of viscosity
H-0806.35
10-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTA
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELIN
Methods
Description
Falling/rolling Ball/sinker
Concentric Cylinder
Cup and Bob
Rotating disc
Capillary/Tube/pipeline
Pipe flow.
Possible to measure turbulent conditions
Enclosed system. Less evaporation.
Suitable for live fluids
Wide range of shear rates
H-0806.35
Advantages
10-2
Disadvantages
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Yield Stress
If an oil cools below its pour point, e.g. during a shut down, it is possible that it may
solidify. The resultant structure, which is gelled oil and not solid wax, will flow
providing sufficient force is applied. This force required to initiate flow is known as the
yield stress.
If the oil is likely to cool below its pour point and potentially gel, then yield stresses
should be determined at the minimum environmental temperatures.
There are two principle methods used to determine yield stress. The most commonly
used is the model pipeline. Here a sample is pumped through small-bore tubing then shut
in and cooled to the required temperature. Incremental pressure steps are applied until
the sample is displaced in a given time. The yield stress can be calculated and scaled-up
to the design system via the wall stress:
Pressure x diameter
4 x length
The pipeline method can be easily adapted to measure the properties of live fluids at
elevated pressures if required.
The second method is viscometry in which the sample is cooled statically in the
instrument then subjected to either a small hear and the resultant stress measured or
preferably a given stress and the resultant stain (shear) measured. The stress or strain at
which flow occurs is detected.
Alternatively the relationship between measured shear stress and shear rate is
extrapolated to zero shear as shown in Figure 10.6-6.
H-0806.35
10-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Shear Stress
Yield Stress
It is important to note that these methods may not always measure the yielding stresses of
the gel structure. If the gel structure is strong (>20 Pa), breakdown often occurs at the
wall resulting in plug flow of the gel, or in the case of the viscometer breakdown at the
moving surface resulting in a thin fluid layer. This behavior is difficult to scale and is not
consistently repeatable.
However, the available stresses in a typical flowline are likely to be lower than the values
at which this wall breakaway yield behavior generally occurs. For example a yield stress
of 20 Pa is equivalent to a restart pressure of 60 psi per mile in a 12- inch diameter line
and 180 psi per mile in a 4- inch diameter line.
Complex Rheological Properties
For the majority of light fluid oils the apparent viscosity temperature behavior over the
temperature and shear rate range appropriate to the production rates of interest will be
H-0806.35
10-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
sufficient for production system design. Here the fluids exhibit limited non-Newtonian
behavior and are unlikely to cool below their pour points.
However, this may not be the case for waxy, high pour point fluids. Here the pour points
may be significantly above the minimum environmental temperatures. In these cases,
while apparent viscosity may be sufficient to calculate equilibrium steady state pressure
drop, more complex rheological data will be required to predict how flow will develop
during transients such as start- up. Here the development and breakdown of gel structures
with time (thixotropy) as well as flowrate and temperature can be very complex.
Any studies to examine the complex flow properties of waxy oils should be designed and
conducted with the assistance of an expert rheologist. In most cases flow development
studies using constant stress rheometers or model pipelines are appropriate. Studies to
assess theses complex fluid properties should be individually tailored to the specific fluid
and conditions of interest. When conducting a detailed rheological study the issues of
sample handling and past history must still be considered.
Live Oil Rheology.
While nearly all the data for determining the flow properties of waxy oils are performed
at standard conditions on dead oil, yet the fluids in a production system will be live
with associated solution gas, light ends and pressure. The viscosity of live reservoir and
flowline fluids can be significantly lower than that of dead oil especially when containing
a high solution gas fraction.
Fortunately most light oils exhibit low viscosities and near Newtonian behavior even at
low temperatures such that the impact of non-Newtonian behavior on design is minimal.
Here live viscosity data from PVT studies may suffice together with dead oil correlations.
However, these viscosities can only be extrapolated if the fluids exhibit Newtonian
behavior.
Once a solid wax fraction is present the live fluid properties are difficult to predict from
dead oil measurements. If the fluid flow properties (determined on dead oil) are likely to
cause pumping or transportation difficulties then an assessment of the non-Newtonian
properties of the live fluids may be appropriate
PVT viscosity determinations are normally performed using a rolling or falling ball or
sinker viscometer. Here a body is timed as it falls through the fluid under gravity and the
viscosity is derived from Stokes Law. Data from these viscometers, like the kinematic
H-0806.35
10-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
viscosities, must be converted to dynamic viscosity before it is usable for pipeline design.
The fluids are assumed to be Newtonian and shear rates are not measured or controlled.
If the fluids exhibit non-Newtonian behavior PVT type viscosity data is insufficient.
Apparent viscosities are required at a range of appropriate shear rates. Such
measurements are difficult to obtain for live fluids requiring specialist equip ment.
Although commercial instruments are available most are not suited to the viscosity and
low shear rates ranges associated with transportation of crude oils. The sensitivity
required many suffer from significant errors due to friction through seals or magnetic
couplings.
Tube or pipeline viscometers offer a suitable solution. Capillaries through to small-bore
(<1 inch) pipelines can be used as sealed systems. The fluids can be pumped through at a
fixed rate or pushed through at a fixed pressure. Care must be taken that the flow is
laminar and single phase and that the sensitivity of the measurement system is suitable
for the range of viscosities and throughputs. The measurement section should ideally be
straight, isothermal and be at least 100 pipe diameters from any sharp bends or intrusions.
While viscosity is the most important parameter other live fluid flow properties such as
pour point and yield stress can also be considered if the dead oil properties indicate a
potential problem. Both the live pour points and yield stress are likely to be significantly
lower than the equivalent dead oil values. The methodology and equipment used are
essentially the same as for the dead oil tests.
Any measurements made on live oils require the same considerations to temperature and
shear history as for the dead oils. In addition these parameters may have to be
determined for a range of pressures and solution gas fractions.
Deposition Rates
There are no standard procedures for assessing wax deposition and each company or
research group has developed its own methodology. However, most agree that in order to
estimate the rate of solid wax layer build- up on pipe walls some measure of the oils
ability to deposit wax on a surface is required.
A variety of tests ha ve been devised ranging from single static cold fingers to plant sized
flowloops. The Table 10.6-6 details some of the more common equipment used.
H-0806.35
10-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
While all these techniques form a deposit not all directly measure the thickness deposited
or rate of build- up. The main problem is that as yet there is no remote wax thickness
detector. Therefore, the thickness must be derived from the total mass measured at the
end of a test or inferred from other parameters such as pressure rise across a section of
pipe. Similarly the rate of deposition can must be derived from such parameters or
averaged over time given the final mass deposited.
A major concern for studying wax deposition is how to scale-up from the lab test to the
field. There are many parameters which can effect deposition including the surface and
fluid temperatures, heat transfer, flow regimes and stresses and time. They may be
competing and not all can be simulated and scaled together.
Most studies deriving a deposition factor as a function of flow rate and temperature. A
test will simulate a specific portion of the system where the oil or surface temperatures
and a flow parameter (usually shear rate) are fixed. The deposition factor is then used to
scale to field conditions typically from heat transfer rates.
In assessing the deposition rates of an oil the following points should be considered and
incorporated into any study:
Mass Detected. The amount of wax deposited should be within the sensitivity of the
detection system. In small test cells and mini- flowloops this may be fractions of a gram.
Where very little wax has deposited the boundary layer of oil wetting the surface may be
95 percent or more of the total mass. Oil entrapped in thicker deposits may still account
for between 50 and 90 percent of deposit mass (see aging below). Errors here will be
compounded when scaling- up over weeks of months in the field.
H-0806.35
10-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Description
Advantages
Disadvantages
No flow effects
risk of depletion of wax in small sample
vol.
Quick Simple.
Small vols of sample.
Deposit formed.
Deposit directly inspected.
Accurate control of temperatures
Adaptable for live oil
As above
Addition of shear.
Accurate control of shear/stress or flow
velocity.
Quick, Simple
Small vols of sample
Qualitative measure of in-situ
deposition rates.
Live oils
Complex equipment
Cannot scale all flow parameters
No direct measure of deposit at specific
points.
Need to recondition recirculating oil.
DP insensitive in Laminar flow
Potential waxing outside deposition
section.
Dynamic cold
finger
Recirculating
flowloops
H-0806.35
10-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Description
Advantages
Disadvantages
Once through
flowloops
Field Side
Streams Tests
Viscometry
H-0806.35
10-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Duration of Test. This will effect the amount deposited, too short and insufficient wax
will be deposited leading to large errors. If the oil layer wetting the surface is counted as
deposit then the projected deposition rates will be to high (see figure). Too long a
duration and three effects; aging, depletion and insulation may occur all limiting the
build-up as shown in Figure 10.6-7.
The tests should be designed so that the deposition rate is determined in the area for
steady build-up and effects described can be ignored or accounted for.
Mass Deposited
Averaged
Actual
Time
Figure 10.6-7: Deposit Growth
Ideally, the rate of build-up should be monitored throughout the test to identify this area.
Also in realty the build- up is not steady, especially in a flowing system. Waxes may be
deposited and stripped away unevenly. These peaks and troughs can significantly effect
the average deposition rate.
Aging. Deposits formed in the laboratory are generally forced with high differential
temperatures between the oil and deposition surfaces so as to generate sufficient deposit
in a reasonable time frame. This tends to produce a deposit containing a high proportion
(>80 percent) entrapped oil. In reality deposits are formed over longer periods. Here the
H-0806.35
10-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
deposit structure reorders as the waxes are concentrated towards the wall and oil is
excluded. Thus the deposit appears to harden or age with time as the oil content
reduces. The final oil content of the deposit may be anywhere from 25 to 75 percent.
This effect is very difficult to reproduce in laboratory test cells or flowloops unless the
test is run for long enough.
Depletion. At any given temperature there is only a finite fraction of the waxes available
to deposit. In a closed system using a finite volume of oil this can cause significant
problems where the deposition will slow and eventually cease as all the available wax at
the test temperature is used. At temperatures near the cloud point there will only be a
very small fraction of the wax available to deposit. If depletion of the wax phase occurs,
the deposition rate will be underestimated. This can be avoided if fresh oil is continuous
used.
The composition of the liquid phase is also continually changing in a closed system.
Wax Insulation. As a waxy layers builds up on a cooled surface it will act as an
insulator. Heat transfer will predominately be by conduction through the layer and both
waxes and crude oil have a fairly low thermal conductivity. In a test where the deposit
growth is forced through high temperature differences, this insulation effect will reduce
subsequent heat transfer rates and will slow deposit ion growth.
Temperature profiles. Most tests force deposition growth via high heat transfer rates
and high temperature differences between the oil and surface. This may be the case in a
totally uninsulated system by not for the majority of systems even with minimal
insulation. The situation of hot oil above the cloud point flowing over a cold surface at
seabed temperature rarely occurs in reality. The oil and pipewalls will both cool
simultaneously.
Tests that mimic actual conditions would consist of the oil and surface cooling from
above the cloud point to ambient temperatures. In order to scale-up tests which form a
deposit over a wide temperature range must be able to distinguish the growth rates at
specific points or temperatures. A series of fixed temperature condition tests to mimic
specific points in a pipeline may be more appropriate
Flow effects: The flow of oil over the deposition surface will substantially change the
amount and character of the deposit. Heat transfer and temperature profiles will change.
Shear dispersion may also take place but the major effect is from shearing depositing wax
off the wall (sloughing). There is debate as to how the flow should be scales from the
H-0806.35
10-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
test to the field. Shear rate or flow velocity are the parameters most often used.
However, the flow regimes could still be totally different, turbulent in the field versus
laminar in the test. Turbulent flow can reduce the measured deposit thickness by an order
of magnitude.
Multiphase flow regimes effects are much harder to simulate and little is yet known as to
how many of these effect deposition growth.
Sample conditioning. The prior handling of a waxy oil can have a significant effect on
the viscosity. Deposition is indirectly proportional to liquid viscosity so it is essential to
ensure the correct viscosity during the test. Pretreating the oil is recommended both to
achieve the correct fluid state and ensure all waxes are returned to solution so as to be
available for deposition.
Live Oil. Flow loops el nd themselves well for live oil testing if required. However
significant quantities may be required for such a study. Another significantly problem is
depressurizing the system to recover the deposit without destroying it. Here gases
entrapped in the deposit will expand potentially blowing the deposit apart.
Deposition Factors
Having measured a deposition rate in a test cell or flowloop the results must be scaled to
the field. This is usually done by deriving a deposition factor from the tests. This factor
is based on the molecular diffusion mechanism. The factor may incorporate or be
described as a function of temperature and flow rate.
Deposition Tendency
Based on molecular diffusion, deposition tendency is a measure of the fluid deposition
rate normalized to heat transfer rate. It is usually quoted in grams per day per watt. It is
a function of temperature and determined at a number of discrete surface temperatures as
illustrated in Figure 10-22.
As temperatures fall below the cloud point, deposit ion tendency will increase with
concentration gradient of precipitating waxes. However, viscosity has a competing effect
slowing down the rate of diffusion to the surface. Eventually the viscosity will dominate
and the deposition tendency will reduce.
The parameter is easily derived providing an accurate measure of the deposit mass is
taken along with the rate of heat transferred from the oil through the cooled surface.
H-0806.35
10-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Clo
ud
Poi
nt
Increase flowrate
Deposition Tendency
Temperature
Flow rate will influence the results as wax is stripped from the surface. It is usual to
determine a series of deposition tendency temperature curves at several shear rates (see
Figure 10-22). Laminar flow may enhance deposition rates but once turbulent is
established deposition rates fall significantly.
Deposition Diffusion Coefficient
The deposition rate and tendency can be further reduced to the diffusion rate by isolating
the phase behavior of the waxes, viscosity and the temperature gradients in the fluids.
Although not a true diffusion coefficient the derived value will vary with flowrate.
A single value can be used to describe the waxing characteristics over the entire
temperature range, providing the fluid viscosity is accounted for. A different value can
be used for each flowrate or flow regime to account for the wax sloughing.
Wilke Chang proposed a value of (HOLD). However, values derived from most crude
oils are substantially higher, ranging from 1 x 10-5 to 1 x 10-4 cP-cm2 /s. These derived
values may or may not take account of entrapped oil depending on the further analysis or
modeling to be performed.
H-0806.35
10-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Inhibitor Evaluation
The selection of any form of fluid property modification usually consists of two stages: 1)
the rapid screening of products to identify a number of potential inhibitors, and 2)
detailed performance studies of the best candidates.
Any screening program must be relevant to the problem and conditions being addressed,
e.g. if a low temperature viscosity improver is required then low temperature viscosities
should be measured.
Having identified a number of potential candidates the final performance of each must be
fully assessed. Here the modified fluid properties should be measured under the full
range of flow conditions appropriate to design conditions. Here the information given in
sections 10.4 and 10.5 should be followed.
The conditions at which the inhibitor is injected can also be critical to performance.
Temperature and shear conditions at the point of injection can have substantial impact on
performance but are often neglected during screening studies. The ultimate success of
any screening and selection program also depends on evaluating a valid representative
sample at representative conditions.
Flow Improvers (PPDs)
Pour Point Depressants are so called because of their ability to modify wax crystallization
and hence low temperature flow properties including pour point. Therefore, pour point is
a useful rapid first screening tool. Several pour point tests are recommended as the fluid
can exhibit different sensitivities to shear and temperature depending test methodology.
The ASTM D97 upper pour point generally this produces a highly sensitive viscosity
state, while restoring the fluid to reservoir temperature may subsequently result in a less
sensitive state in which the inhibitors may not perform so well.
In addition to pour point some measure of flow behavior is essential. Pour point is not an
indicator of flow and some measure of the modification of viscosity is required. It may
not be necessary to inhibit the pout point to below the environmental temperature to
maintain flow in a pipeline. The low temperature dynamic viscosities should be
determined either as several flow curves at set temperatures or measured while cooled
under several separate shear rates. Here both a measure of performance and the
sensitivity to flow conditions can be assessed both above and below the pour point.
H-0806.35
10-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Final performance evaluation of the selected inhibitors should take account of the wide
range of flow and thermal conditions the fluid can be subjected to both in normal
production and during transients.
Restart (PPDs)
As above the pour point test is a useful indicator of modification to flow properties
including yielding behavior. A good inhibitor will not only lower the pour point but will
also significantly reduce the yield stresses and/or dynamic viscosities at a given
temperature. Again it is not always necessary to inhibit pour point to below
environmental temperature to enable a restart. Here an inhibitor should reduce the yield
stress to the design value at the average minimum environmental temperature.
Unfortunately this can be a lengthy test requiring significant quantities of sample or
complex if using constant stress rheology which can also to assess flow development
following restart.
These tests do not lend themselves easily to a quick screening program. However, pour
point is still a useful first indicator and yield stress can be used as a final performance
parameter.
Wax Deposition Inhibitors
To assess the effectiveness of a wax deposition inhibitor, its ability to inhibit the build-up
of solid wax must be measured. Parameters such as pour point or viscosity are of little
relevance. In fact the rate of wax build-up can be accelerated by reducing viscosity.
Irrespective of the test equipment used there are a number of issues associated with
deposition that must be considered in both initial screening and final performance testing:
The ratio of entrapped oil to deposited wax should be assessed. Inhibitors which
reduce overall deposit may in reality only reduce the entrapped oil fraction producing
a harder deposit.
Tests performed under static or low shear are not indicative of field conditions. The
flow regime or shear rates can have significant impact on the nature of the deposit.
Higher flowrates result in harder deposits containing less entrapped oil. Inhibitors
H-0806.35
10-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
which affect the amount and/or nature of the deposit under static condition may not
perform as well under flowing conditions.
p
em
lT
i
O
p
em
la l T
W
te
Ra
n
io
sit
po
e
D
Cloud Point
Ambient Temp
Distance
Figure 10.6-9: Deposition Rate Profile
10-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
these tests which is also uncontrolled and unrealistic of field conditions. A series of
incremental decreasing temperature steps is preferable Here rates of blocking can be
assessed at each temperature step. The drawback is that no deposit is recovered although
some measure of mechanical strength is feasible through yielding stress measurement.
Both the above provide relatively quick screening procedures with minimal use of
sample. The cold finger has the added advantage of a quantifiable measure of deposit
which can be used for predicting field deposition profiles. However, the performance of
the selected inhibitor must be assessed over the full operating conditions expected in the
line.
Chemical Compatibility\
Wax inhibitors and flow improvers tend to be fairly inert. However, wax solvents and
the solvents used to dilute wax inhibitors tend to be low flash point aromatics that may
give rise to HSE and compatibility problems.
Prior to selecting any production chemical it is essential to establish its compatibility with
the production system including seals and liners, production processing, other production
chemicals and its impact on Health Safety and the Environment. Some regions of the
world preclude the use of certain highly toxic chemistries and all have strict regulations
on oil in water discharges. The use of wax inhibitors especially surfactant type can cause
process and separation problems which could jeopardize the discharge spec.
Prior to using a wax inhibitor the chemical compatibility with other production chemicals
that it may come into contact with in storage or within the injection facilities. Table 10.67 outlines where some incompatibilities are known, notably with methanol. However,
the compatibility must always be checked with the chemical service company.
In addition to checking the above chemical compatibility and that with materials it is also
important to check that the inhibitor does not impair the performance of other production
chemicals and visa versa. This should be done on an individual case by case basis.
H-0806.35
10-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Hydrate
Inhibitors
Olefin/maleic
esters (C18-C30)
Ethylene vinyl
acetate copolymers
Xylene
Polyvinylcaprolactam
Methanol
NO
NO
OK
Ethylene glycol
NO
NO
OK
OK
Xylene
Corrosion
Inhibiors
Scale
Inhibitors
Biocides
Demulsifiers
H-0806.35
Imidazolines
(WATER SOLUBLE)
NO
NO
NO
Imidazolines
(OIL SOLUBLE)
NO
NO
NO
Phosphonates pH 4-8
Polyacrylates pH 4-8
Quaternary ammonium
chlorides (cationic)
Gluteraldehyde (nonionic)
Dithiocarbamates (anionic)
OK
Sulfonates (anionic)
OK
OK
OK
OK
10-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Glossary
Alkanes
Apparent
Viscosity
Aromatics
Asphaltenes
Cloud Point
Cyclic
paraffin/alkane
Deposition
Deposition
Tendency
Diffusion rate
Dilatancy
(Shear thickening)
Dynamic
Viscosity
Dynamic Yield
Stress
Gelation
HTGC
H-0806.35
10-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Iso paraffin/alkane
Kinematic
Viscosity
Molecular
diffusion
Newtonian
Non-Newtonian
Fluid whose viscosity varies with applied shear or stress. Fluids can
exhibit increase or decreasing viscosity with increasing shear.
Normal
Paraffin/Alkane
PARA
Paraffin.
See alkanes. Often applied to alkanes > C17 and to waxy solids
recovered from operations.
Paraffin Wax
Alkanes >C17 .
Pour Point
Highest temperature at which a fluid is observed to flow under presubscribed conditions (usually gravity)
PPD
Pour Point Depressant. Chemical to reduce the pour point and improve
low temperature flow pumpability.
Rheology
SARA
Shear dispersion
Shear rate
Internal velocity gradient or strain rate within a fluid under flow. Unit s-1
Shear Stress
H-0806.35
10-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Shear Thinning
Thixotropic
Viscosity
Wax
Wax appearance
temperature (WAT)
Wax content
Wax dispersant
Wax inhibitor
Yield Stress
H-0806.35
10-12
1-Dec-00
11.
ASPHALTENES
11.1
Introduction
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The ASTM D-3279-90 (IP143/90) test defines asphaltenes as solids that precipitate when
an excess of n- heptane or n-pentane is added to a crude oil. Chemically, asphaltenes are
high molecular weight, polynuclear aromatic, polar compounds containing carbon,
hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, sulphur and some heavy metals such as vanadium and
nickel. Figure 11-1 gives a representation of an asphaltene molecule; however,
asphaltenes do not have a single, unique structure or molecular weight.
Unlike waxes, asphaltenes do not melt. Consequently, thermal methods such as
insulation, hot oiling, etc. do not work to prevent or remediate asphaltene deposition.
H-0806.35
11-1
1-Dec-00
11.2
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
If the resins separate from the asphaltenes, then the asphaltenes will flocculate
(aggregate). Asphaltene flocculation may be irreversible. That means if asphaltenes have
flocculated in a sample container, it may not be possible to put the asphaltenes
completely back in suspension. Sampling procedures need to be carefully designed to
preserve the original temperature and pressure conditions.
H-0806.35
11-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The resins can separate from the asphaltenes for several reasons. A few of these are
highlighted below:
11.2.1 Pressure Decrease
The resins can separate from the asphaltenes as the pressure drops from reservoir
pressure to the bubble point pressure of the fluid. The pressure decreases as the produced
fluids travel up the wellbore. Asphaltene deposition stops at the point in the wellbore
where the bubble point pressure is reached. As the pressure drops from the reservoir
pressure to the bubble point pressure the resins become increasingly soluble in the liquid
phase and separate from the asphaltene micelles. Below the bubble point, the likelihood
of asphaltene deposition drops dramatically.
Figure 11-3 illustrates the process described above in a pressure and temperature diagram
showing the region where asphaltene deposition is expected.
Asphaltene deposition can begin deep in the wellbore while the pressure is well above the
bubble point. The potential and severity of the problem can be estimated using the graph
shown in Figure 11-4.
H-0806.35
11-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The greatest potential for asphaltene deposition occurs for low in-situ crude densities
with reservoir pressures much greater than the bubble point of the fluid (Reference 1). It
is important to note that density changes do not cause asphaltene deposition but can be an
indicator of potential problems.
11.2.2 Miscible Flooding with CO2 or Natural Gas.
Asphaltenes can deposit during miscible flooding. The miscible gas dissolves into the
crude and decreases the density and viscosity so that the crude oil will flow more readily.
Unfortunately, this causes the micelles to become unstable with the resins more likely to
separate from the asphaltenes, which leads to the asphaltenes flocculating.
11.2.3 During An Acidization Process
If a crude oil containing asphaltenes comes in contact with a typical acid solution during
an acidizing job, asphaltenes can flocculate in the near wellbore region. Some wells have
been seriously damaged and even unrecoverable due to asphaltene flocculation during
acidizing. If the potential for the problem is recognized ahead of time, the service
company providing the acidizing job can typically formulate an acid mixture that will
minimize the flocculation.
In addition, certain operational procedures can be
H-0806.35
11-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
implemented as well. For example, it is possible to push a batch of diesel or xylene into
the formation ahead of the acid. This will minimize contact between the in-situ crude oil
and the acid. Also, all chemicals to be pumped into a well (including diesel and xylene)
should be tested for compatibility.
11.2.4 Mixing of Very Different Fluids
Asphaltenes can flocculate when two hydrocarbon fluids are mixed. For example, a
problem may occur when a condensate is mixed with a black oil. This can occur
wherever fluids are being commingled (i.e., in a wellbore, flowline, separator or an
export line). This problem typically occurs when fluids of very different densities (API
gravities) are mixed. For an individual oil, the resin/asphaltene micelles may be stable,
but when another fluid of a lower density (high API gravity) is added, the density of the
entire liquid phase decreases. Resins are more soluble in lower density fluids and
consequently separate from the micelles to dissolve in the hydrocarbon mixture. When
the resins separate from the micelles, the asphaltenes aggregate (flocculate). The
likelihood of the micelles destabilizing in a particular oil can be estimated using the
asphaltene titration technique with a normal alkane or by titrating it directly with the
second hydrocarbon fluid. For live conditions (such as downhole), it is possible to mix
the two fluids directly under live conditions.
11.2.5 Gas Lift
Gas lift can be either detrimental or beneficial to an asphaltene problem. If a lean gas is
used as the lift gas, then the lift gas will extract some of the light ends of the crude oil
into the vapor phase. This will result in increasing the density of the remaining liquid
phase which will promote the resins remaining attached to the asphaltenes and enhance
asphaltene stability.
If a rich gas is used, some of the heavier ends of the rich gas (i.e., butane, propane,
ethane, etc.) will dissolve into the liquid phase and decrease its density. When the
density of the liquid phase decreases, the resins become more soluble in the liquid and
separate from the asphaltenes. If enough resins separate from the micelles, then
asphaltenes will begin to flocculate. This is similar to asphaltene deposition caused by a
light gas (such as CO2 ) dissolving in the crude oil during a miscible flood.
11.2.6 Effect of Asphaltenes on Emulsions
Asphaltenes are polar compounds, which can interact strongly with water. Because of
this interaction, asphaltenes can cause emulsion problems. The emulsions can include a
H-0806.35
11-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
heavy tar type substance (the asphaltenes) and can be very difficult to break. In fact, it is
possible that the first sign of an asphaltene flocculation in the production system is an
emulsion problem showing up on the platform.
Any emulsions that are particularly difficult to break and appear to have a heavy tar type
substance should be tested for asphaltenes. If asphaltenes are found to be enriched in the
emulsion, then it should be investigated as to where the asphaltenes are actually
flocculating in the system so that any necessary remedial action can be taken to prevent a
blockage.
11.3
Crude oils with low asphaltene contents may be more likely to have an asphaltene
problem than those with higher contents.
Crude oils with low specific gravity and high asphaltene contents are mostly likely to
have asphaltene problems.
H-0806.35
11-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Reservoirs with pressures significantly greater than the bubble point of the fluid are
more likely to have asphaltene problems.
Table 11-1 shows a comparison between the compositional make up of oils with few or
no asphaltene problems and those with severe asphaltene problems.
Table 11-1: Comparison of Properties of Crude Oil Without Asphaltene
Problems to One with Asphaltene Problems
Name
Crude
Composition
Tank oil
Composition
Properties
Crudes with
North
North
North
North
North
Sea
Sea
Sea
Sea
Sea
oil
oil
oil
oil
oil
1
2
3
4
5
severe problems
1 - C3
<27 mole %
>37 mole %
C7+
>59 mole%
<46 mole%
asphaltenes
>3 weight %*
<0.5 weight %
saturates
<62 weight %
>75 weight %
aromatics
>26 weight %
<22 weight %
heavy ends
>11 weight %
<4 weight %
asphaltenes
>3 weight %*
<1 weight %
bubble point
<6.2 MPa
>10 MPa
reservoir pressure
<35 MPa
>40 MPa
Compressibility at
reservoir
temperature and
bubble point
<1.6 x 10-9/Pa
>2.3 x 10-9/Pa
Compressibility at
reservoir
temperature and
pressure
<1.0 x 10-9/Pa
>1.2 x 10-9/Pa
H-0806.35
11-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
Asphaltenes are more complicated chemically and therefore more difficult to model.
11-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
While wax, hydrates and scale formation are common operational problems,
asphaltenes problems are less prevalent; consequently less effort has been put into
development of laboratory and modeling techniques.
There are only a couple of commercial models available and a few companies that have
in- house models. Please contact your company's resource person for recommendations
on asphaltene modeling.
Generic information about asphaltene models
Asphaltene models are designed to predict the conditions under which the asphaltenes
flocculate. In several of the models, the theory is that a critical number of resin
molecules are required to keep the micelle stable. When the number of resin
molecules drops below the critical concentration then the micelles are no longer
stable and the asphaltenes flocculate.
The models attempt to predict the conditions where the micelles drop below the
critical resin concentration. These models always require both compositional data as
well as an estimate of the critical resin concentration from laboratory data.
In
addition it is desirable to have actual asphaltene flocculation measurements on live
samples so that the model can be tuned.
Mechanical
Thermal
Chemical
Novel
These techniques are further discussed in the prevention and remediation section of
this chapter.
H-0806.35
11-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
11-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Coiled Tubing
Like wireline cutting, coiled tubing can be used to remove asphaltene deposits provided
the deposit can be reached. At this point in time, the limit of coiled tubing is about 1
mile. New technology is being tested by DeepStar to extend the reach of coiled tubing.
11.3.3 Thermal methods for Asphaltene Prevention
Asphaltene deposition is not a strong function of temperature but rather a strong function
of pressure. So, thermal methods will not alleviate asphaltene problems. Unlike wax and
hydrates, keeping the crude oil warm rarely prevents asphaltenes. Similarly asphaltene
deposits do not melt so heat alone will not remove an asphaltene deposit.
11.3.4 Chemical Methods for Asphaltene Prevention and Remediation
Asphaltene Inhibitors
Asphaltene inhibitors have been developed to prevent asphaltene flocculation. They can
be added either continuously or through a squeeze treatment. Asphaltenes occur much
less frequently than scale, hydrates and wax; consequently, not as much effort and testing
has been put into aspha ltene inhibition.
Asphaltene inhibitors are polymeric dispersants, which help stabilize the micelles, which
prevents the asphaltenes from flocculating. It is believed that the inhibitors act in the
same manner as the resins interacting with the asphaltenes and stabilizing the asphaltene
micelles in the crude oil. These asphaltene inhibitors have a stronger association with the
asphaltenes than the natural resins and are able to stabilize the asphaltenes through
greater changes in pressure, temperature, shear and chemical environment.
Asphaltene inhibitors can be squeezed into the formation or continuously injected
downhole. Squeezing the inhibitor into the reservoir can prevent deposition of
asphaltenes in the near-well bore area. It is important that the asphaltene inhibitors are
added to the crude oil before the asphaltenes become destabilized and flocculation
occurs.
Asphaltene Solvents
The good news is that unlike wax, asphaltenes are very soluble in aromatic solvents such
as benzene and xylene, eve n at seabed temperatures. This is very fortunate since
asphaltenes can form in the near wellbore region and the only way for remediating the
formation damage is to use a squeeze treatment of an aromatic solvent.
H-0806.35
11-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Laboratory Testing
H-0806.35
11-12
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
11-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
11-14
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Compositional Analyses
Additional compositional analyses such as high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC)
or gel permeation chromatography (GPC) may be required as input into an asphaltene
model. The laboratory tests necessary may be specific to the model that you will be
using should be identified early in the project during the sample planning stage. Please
contact your company's resource person to identify the asphaltene model and tests that
they recommend.
11.4.2 Asphaltene Sample Requirements
Two kinds of samples may be required for asphaltene analysis. For asphaltene
flocculation measurements, single-phase samples are required. This is because there is
some evidence that asphaltene precipitation may not be completely reversible. That
means that if asphaltenes precipitate in a sample container it may not be possible to get
all of the asphaltenes back into solution when the sample is reconditioned to reservoir
conditions.
Once the intermolecular forces that stabilize the asphaltene resin micelle is broken, the
micelles may not be re-solublized in their original configuration. For the sample to be
completely representative, the oil must be sampled and maintained as a single-phase
fluid. For these types of measurements, it is suggested that you contact the laboratory
where the measurements will be performed as well as the company performing the
downho le sampling. Several vendors supply sampling systems that are designed to keep
the sample in a single phase.
For titration measurements at atmospheric pressure, wellhead or separator oil samples
collected under standard sampling procedures are sufficient.
11.5
Field Examples
"Asphaltene Deposition Due to Miscible Flooding and Use of Inhibitors" Beaverhill
Lake Unite in Canada operated by Shell Canada.
Production of the field began in 1957. In 1989, phase 1 of the field was reconfigured into
a water alternated gas (WAG 2:1) drive and was commenced in early 1990. A miscible
solvent (liquified natural gas- LNG) was used consisting of 67% ethane and 33%
methane. Almost coincident with the LNG breakthrough, problems were experienced in
several producers with downhole equipment plugging, such as ESPs and rod pumps.
Compositional analysis of the solids revealed that the problem was caused by
asphaltenes.
H-0806.35
11-15
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Initially wells were cleaned with a commercially available aromatic solvent by means of
circulating 2 m3 down the annulus and squeezing it into the reservoir. This treatment was
repeated every two weeks. These solvent squeezes were costly due to production
interruption and treatment costs.
Asphaltene inhibitors were tested in the laboratory and in the field. Effective asphaltene
control was obtained at 66 PPM inhibitor resulting in both a technically and an
economically successful trial. Prevention of asphaltene deposition was achieved through
continuous injection through a capillary string resulting in no lost production.
11.6
References
1. SPE 24987, Screening of Crude Oils for Asphalt Precipitation: Theory, Practice, and
the Selection of Inhibitors, 1992.
Additional information reference to asphaltenes can be found in Asphaltene Literature
Database, by P. Ting, G. Hirasaki, and W. Chapman, 1999 (CD-ROM from DeepStar
4200).
H-0806.35
11-16
1-Dec-00
12.0
EMULSIONS
12.1
General
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Although water and crude oil are immiscible, produced fluids may be emulsified by the
simultaneous action of shear and pressure drop such as at wellhead chokes and valves.
The produced emulsions can be stable, i.e. the oil and water phases may not readily
separate within a short time scale. Separation can take from a few minutes to a very long
time (for very tight emulsions). From a multiphase flow perspective, the primary effect
of emulsion formation is an increase in fluid viscosity. If the emulsion is stable, this
increase in viscosity can significantly affect pressure drop.
12.2
Temperature
Water cut
Flow history, including shear rate experienced when formed
Flowing shear rate, i.e. the flow rate in the pipeline.
Physical characteristics of the oil, the produced water, and presence/size of any
suspended particulates.
Depending on the particular multiphase simulation program being used, there are several
methods to model the effect of water (in general) and emulsions on fluid viscosity:
H-0806.35
12-1
1-Dec-00
12.3
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The liquid-phase fluid viscosity can be estimated using a weighted average of water
and water viscosity. The program should modify this liquid-phase viscosity to
account for the presence of gas in the live oil.
The liquid-phase fluid viscosity can be estimated using oil viscosity when water cut is
below the inversion point (the point where the liquid changes from oil-continuous to
water-continuous) or water viscosity when water cut is above the inversion point. The
approach may be more meaningful than the weighted average method above.
A special viscosity estimate may be used to account for tight emulsions when water
cut is near the inversion point, such as the Woelflin correlation. Care should be taken
to assure that viscosity values used in calculations are meaningful.
12.3.1 Terminology
An emulsion is a heterogeneous system consisting of at least one immiscible liquid
intimately dispersed in another in the form of droplets.
The phase present as droplets is the dispersed or internal phase. The liquid phase forming
the matrix within which these droplets are suspended is called the continuous or external
phase.
Two common types of emulsion are:
H-0806.35
12-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
2 gr 2 ( )
9z
Where:
V =
H-0806.35
gravitational constant
droplet radius
12-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Notes
i) Velocity is a function of the square of the radius.
ii) The viscosity is that of the continuous phase, not of the emulsion.
iii)
Stokes Law is useful but often misused. In particular, no account is taken
of the Brownian Motion of the droplets, which are under constant bombardment from
the molecules of the external phase. A detailed comparison of the Stokes Law Effect
versus Brownian Motion is beyond the scope of these notes. Suffice it to say that
only very large droplets (typically >50 microns) truly obey Stokes Law, whereas the
physical displacement of small droplets (typically <1 micron) is dominated by
Brownian Motion.
Breaking of an emulsion occurs when droplets which are flocculated or which collide
(during creaming, Brownian Motion, external turbulence) actually coalesce. To reiterate,
the action of coalescence reduces the free energy of the system by reducing the interfacial
area. In fact:
Gow = owA
Where
Gow = the excess interfacial free energy associated with the oil- water interface,
ow = the interfacial tension,
A = the total interfacial area.
The interfacial tension (units, mN/m) is defined as the force acting parallel to the planar
interface between two immiscible liquids and at right angles to a line of unit length
anywhere in the interface. In effect, the tension arises because the intermolecular
interactions of molecules (of either phase) at the interface are fewer than those between
molecules in the bulk (or interior) of the liquid.
To this point, the discussion has been solely in terms of two components - oil and water.
It is essential that a third component (or class of materials) is present to bestow stability.
This component will provide a physical (repulsive) barrier to droplet-droplet coalescence,
will reduce the interfacial tension (and therefore reduce the free energy of the system), or
both.
H-0806.35
12-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
frictional contact
Notes
i) Because the permittivity of oil is low, stabilization through electrical repulsion is
generally of significance only in water continuous (i.e. o/w) emulsions.
ii) Electrical stabilization is mainly ascribed to the long range forces of repulsion
between electrical double layers.
iii) Increasing electrolyte concentration (i.e. increasing the external aqueous phase
salinity) compresses the double layer and, therefore, increases the rate of coalescence.
Thus, electrical stabilization tends to be minimal or insignificant in seawater or
produced water external phase emulsions.
Interfacial Films
The strength and compactness of interfacial films are primary factors favoring (o/w and
w/o) emulsion stability. These are related to the type and amount of surfactant adsorbed.
The formation of a highly viscous, rigid film at the oil-water interface provides a
mechanical barrier to the coalescence of droplets. The formation of such a film is usually
also associated with a decrease in the interfacial tension. Measurements of interfacial
tension versus interfacial area provide useful information about the adsorption and
orientation of surfactant species; in particular, whether the film is gaseous, expanded, or
condensed, as illustrated in Figure 12.3-2.
H-0806.35
12-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Steric Stabilization
When droplets are stabilized with long-chain surfactant molecules or polymers (notably
block or graft copolymers), interpenetration of the chains as the droplets approach one
another gives rise to steric repulsion. This effect can arise in both o/w emulsions,
stabilized, for example, by nonionic surfactants, and w/o emulsions where the
hydrocarbon tail of the stabilizer extends into the oil phase.
Solids Stabilization
Stabilization of emulsions by solid particles, such as sand or produced fines, depends,
firstly, upon the size of the partic les in relation to the dispersed phase droplet size and,
secondly, upon the relationship of the three interfacial tensions: sw (between solid and
water); wo (between water and oil): so (between solid and oil).
If so > wo + sw, the solid remains suspended in the aqueous phase
If sw > wo + so, the solid remains suspended in the oil phase
If wo > sw + so, the solid will collect at the oil- water interface.
It is seldom possible, in practice, to measure sw and so directly. Rather, it often has to be
assumed, from the preferred environment of the solid particles, just which of the above
three conditions holds.
H-0806.35
12-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Notes
i) the size of the solids must be smaller than that of the dispersed phase droplets
typically by an order of magnitude.
ii) the bulk of the particle will be in that phase which most nearly wets it - this phase
should then constitute the outer phase.
iii) coalescence is inhibited because it takes work to displace the particle from the
interface.
If the conditions described above prevail, extremely stable emulsions can be formed.
12.3.4 Crude Oil Emulsions
Except when water cuts are extremely high (>70 to 80 percent), crude oil emulsions are
oil continuous, i.e. of the water- in-oil (w/o) type. At present, produced crude oil- in-water
(o/w) emulsions are exceptional - for our purposes their treatment can be regarded as
being similar to that of oily effluent. This section will discuss only the stability and
destabilization of the more commonly produced w/o type crude oil emulsions.
These produced emulsions are usually stable with respect to water separation - sometimes
extremely stable, remaining unchanged even after several years storage. In the first
instance, therefore, we require to consider, in the light of the preceding section, what
factors (physical and chemical) give rise to pronounced stability.
Naturally Occurring (Indigenous) Surfactants
Water droplets within crude oil are often stabilized by a viscous film (or skin) of
surface-active materials indigenous to the crude oil. This is readily observed, even with a
light crude, by forming an oil droplet at the tip of a syringe immersed in water, allowing
the droplet to age, then withdrawing some of the oil from the droplet via the syringe; a
mechanically strong film is clearly left behind.
It is impossible to define, singularly, the chemical structure of all crude oil surfactants.
Their concentration and composition vary widely from one crude oil type to another.
Indeed, consideration of this fact alone reveals why crude oils of different origin (yet of
similar physical characteristics, such as viscosity, API gravity) can show widely differing
emulsion characteristics. It is, however, possible to categorize broadly four main classes
of crude oil surfactant.
1) Low molecular weight (< ~500) paraffinic/naphthenic hydrocarbon derivatives
H-0806.35
12-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
containing polar functional groups e.g. hydroxyl (phenol), ester, carbonyl, amide,
sulfoxide. (These materials reduce the interfacial tension between crude oil and
water).
2) Asphaltenes these are high molecula r weight species (typically 2000 or greater).
They are highly aromatic in nature and generally consist of condensed aromatic
systems linked by aliphatic chains and often containing aliphatic side chains. The
nucleus of the molecule usually consists of a sheet of (typically 6-16) condensed
aromatic rings. Heteroatoms, e.g. metal ions, oxygen, nitrogen, and sulfur, may be
present in small quantities. Asphaltene molecules have a strong tendency to
associate, the resulting structures (sometimes termed micelles) having molecular
weights supposedly as great as several hundred thousand. Asphaltenes are insoluble
in light n-alkane solvents (e.g. pentane, heptane).
3) Resins these are similar to asphaltenes, but are of lower molecular weight
(generally < 2000) and are soluble in light n-alkanes. They are generally more highly
polar than asphaltenes, containing greater proportions of nitrogen, oxygen and sulfur;
however, the dividing line between asphaltenes and resins is obscure. Their
definition (in literature) often being associated with the chemical means used to
extract either species from the crude oil in question.
4) Waxes in an analytical sense, wax is usually defined as that fraction of a
deasphalted crude oil which is insoluble in dichloromethane at -32C. For our
purposes, the term wax is used to describe all the high molecular weight paraffinic
substances (generally > C20 ) which have crystallized (or precipitated) from the crude
oil at a given temperature. As well as straight chain n-alkanes, the term includes
near-normal paraffins, which contain only a moderate number of short side chains
(branching).
Asphaltenes, and more particularly, resins, may slightly reduce the interfacial tension
between oil and water (ow); the presence of waxes at the interface does not reduce ow.
The relative importance of each of the above four categories of natural crude oil
surfactants in stabilizing water- in-crude oil emulsions depends largely upon the
composition of the crude oil. The stability of heavy (API gravity <20) and of medium
heavy (API gravity >20 to 30) crude oil emulsions is dominated by the presence of
resins and asphaltenes. All four types of surfactant may stabilize lighter crude oil
emulsions (API gravity > 30), but in particular, waxes and wax-asphaltene (-resin) coprecipitates are known to play a dominant role, especially in stabilizing
H-0806.35
12-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
range
(i.e. 45 to 10API)
fresh water
1.0 kg/l
produced water
1.0 - 1.20 kg /l
Note that certain heavy oils (<10API) are denser than fresh water in certain
temperature ranges. Most crude oils vary in density from 0.8 to 0.95 kg/l and
formation water densities vary from just over 1 kg/l to about 1.20 kg/l. Thus overall
density differences between crude oils and their respective produced waters may vary
from about 0.05 kg/l to about 0.40 kg/l.
ii) The rate of sedimentation will increase in proportion to the droplet radius squared when Stokes Law is valid. The droplet size distribution of produced crude oil
emulsions is polydisperse (as against monodisperse). In most cases, >90 percent by
volume of the water is dispersed as droplets in the size range 5 to 25 microns, and
many droplets may be smaller than 5 microns. Droplets of this size range will not
sediment under gravity. Note that the droplet size distribution may be determined in
part by the degree of mixing at the wellhead choke and the wellhead flowing
pressures.
iii) The rate of sedimentation will decrease with increasing crude oil viscosity. Crude oil
viscosity can vary widely, typically (at 15C) from 10 mPas (light, conventional
crude oils) to 10,000,000 mPas (heavy oils, bitumen, tar sand oils). At the appropriate
temperatures and shear rates of production, most crude oils of interest will have
H-0806.35
12-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Elevated temperatures
Electrostatic field
Chemical demulsifier
Of these three, the use of an electrostatic field would not generally be applicable for
subsea production and is, therefore, not discussed further here.
Elevated wellhead temperatures will tend to promote demulsification of emulsions that
form near the wellhead (e.g., as a result of passage through a wellhead choke.) However,
it will not be generally practical to add head to the flow stream for the purpose of
H-0806.35
12-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Effect of Temperature
-
Hence, the overall effect of higher temperature is to increase the rate of sedimentation
and the number of droplet-droplet encounters and to assist coalescence. In short, higher
temperatures decrease emulsion stability.
With many light, waxy crude oils (such as are produced in the North Sea) what is
observed during chemical demulsification is not a gradual change in emulsion stability
versus temperature, but a discontinuity within a relatively small temperatures interval
(typically 10 to 20C).
12-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
This discontinuity occurs in the temperature range at which fine wax crystallites
(observed by optical microscopy) dissolve. In the above example, note that emulsion
stability changes little in range of 20 to 40C, whereas considerable wax dissolution does
occur. The explanation for this lie within the observation that while the overall
concentration of crystallites is essentially unaffected: as fine crystallites dissolve, they are
continuously repleted in number by large wax crystals partially dissolving. Eventually, a
sufficiently high temperature is reached at which an insufficient number of large particles
exists to compensate for the dissolution of the small crystallites - at this point emulsion
stability rapid ly decreases.
While increasing the temperature reduces emulsion stability and facilitates emulsion
breaking, it is found that, even at high temperature, a chemical demulsifier is often
required.
Chemical Demulsification
The addition of a properly selected chemical demulsifier, at very low concentrations
(usually 1 to 50 PPM) can cause rapid and virtually complete breakdown of otherwise
stable water- in-crude oil emulsions.
Chemical demulsifiers comprise, typically, 40 to 60 percent surface active agent
(polymers, usually nonionic, e.g. ethoxylated phenols) and 60 to 40 percent solvent
(usually aromatic).
At present the number of formulations, patented and commercially available, is
enormous; tens of thousands of different demulsifier formulations exist.
How do demulsifiers work? The active ingredient is highly surface-active and can reduce
the interfacial tension (ow) between crude oil and water, from a value of
~30 mNm-1 to <1 mNm-1 at the concentration of usage.
At first sight this seems a paradox, since according to the equation,
Gow = owA
a reduction in Gow should reduce the free energy of the emulsion and, therefore, reduce
the driving force behind coalescence. The explanation lies with the fact that the barrier to
coalescence of water droplets in crude oil emulsions is largely physical: comprising the
film of resins, asphaltenes and waxes surrounding the droplets. The primary function of
H-0806.35
12-12
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
the demulsifier is to break or displace the film of natural surfactants, which prevent
coalescence.
It the stabilizing film is highly condensed, the demulsifier will require assistance to
penetrate it. Increasing temperature, as well as possibly dissolving and reducing the
viscosity of the film, will also increase the rate of droplet-droplet collision; when droplets
collide, if they become non-spherical, the surface area increases and the film is expanded.
H-0806.35
12-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
iv) Other surface-active oilfield chemicals (notably corrosion inhibitors) may interfere
with the demulsifier itself or the mechanism by which demulsifier displaces the
natural crude oil surfactants from the oil- water interface.
12.4
Chemicals,
electrostatic precipitation
H-0806.35
12-14
1-Dec-00
13.
SCALE
13.1
Introduction
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Scale is a deposit of the inorganic mineral components of water. This is in contrast with
wax and scales that deposit from crude oil. The key concept in scaling is solubility.
Solids may precipitate and deposit from the brine once the solubility limit or capacity is
exceeded.
Chemical species of interest in oil and gas field brines are present as ions. Certain
combinations of these ions have a relatively low solubility in water. Solid precipitates
may either stay in suspension in the water or form an adherent scale on a surface such as
a pipe wall. Both are undesirable.
Suspended scale solids may cause problems like formation plugging. Adherent scale
deposits can restrict flow in pipes as shown in Figure 13-1 below and damage equipment
such as pumps. Corrosion and microbiological activity are often accelerated under scale
deposits. Because water-formed scales are responsible for many production problems,
scale control is a primary objective of any efficient water handling operations.
H-0806.35
13-1
1-Dec-00
13.2
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Solubility of Scale
The solubility of individual scale species is dependent on the equilibrium constants
(dependent upon temperature and pressure) and the activity coefficients (dependent upon
concentrations plus temperature and pressure) of each individual species, the bulk ionic
strength of the solution and other ionic species present. Once the solution exceeds the
saturation limit, scale will begin to precipitate.
A number of models are available to predict the solubility of the various scales given a
formation water and injection water. Please contact your company's resource person to
identify which model is recommended or used by the company.
H-0806.35
13-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Effect of Pressure
The effect of pressure on ionic equlibria in aqueous systems has largely been neglected
due to the scarcity of relevant, thermodynamic data. The variation of the equilibrium
constant as a function of pressure must be known for every chemical equation in the
model.
13.2.2 Effect of Bulk Ionic Strength on Solubility
The solubility of a given scale also depends upon how much and what other ions are
present in the solution (the ionic strength of the solution). The ionic strength of a
solution is given by m:
m = ci zi2
where c is the concentration of the ith ion and zi is its valency. A plot of barium sulfate
solubility as a function of ionic strength of the solution is shown in the figure below.
Figure 13-2: Example of Ionic Strength vs. Solubility Chart for Barium
Sulphate
H-0806.35
13-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
As ionic strength increases from zero, barium sulfate (and all other scales) become more
soluble. This is easily understood in terms of ionic activities:
The presence of foreign ions shields the barium and sulfate ions from each other,
reducing the activities and allowing more of them to co-exist in solution. A solubility
plateau is then reached, whereupon further increase in ionic strength reduces the
solubility. At these ionic strengths, the ions are "unhappy" because they are not well
solvated and the activities begin to increase again with ionic strength. For comparative
purposes, the ionic strengths of various formation waters and North Sea water can be
seen for some sample water analyses shown in the table below:
H-0806.35
13-4
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
FORTIES
BUCHAN
MILLER
ULA
PRUDHOE
BAY
N. SEA
WATER
HP/HT
BRINE A
HP/HT
BRINE E
Sodium
7805
29370
56723
28100
52225
8000
11010
72000
81600
Potassium
200
372
1525
1630
3507
83
460
6300
8000
Magnesium
25
504
1250
113
2249
84
1368
4000
2500
Calcium
70
2808
16075
615
34675
180
428
48000
20000
Strontium
20
574
938
65
1157
24
1000
2000
Barium
70
252
23
770
91
1200
3700
Iron
<1
<1
60
<1
107
<1
11500
52360
121600
46050
153025
11500
19700
21000
174000
11
220
44
10
2960
Bicarbonate
1650
496
100-300
1655
134
2222
124
Total Dissolved
Solids
21350
86747
198614
79003
247214
22107
36058
N/A
N/A
.359
1.58
3.90
1.35
5.28
Chloride
Sulfate
Ionic Strength
H-0806.35
13-5
0.712
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The following are conditions identified by the sign of the saturation index:
H-0806.35
13-7
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
13.3
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
When two incompatible waters (suc h as formation water rich in calcium, strontium and
barium and sea water rich in sulfate) are mixed. Scales formed under these conditions
are generally sulfate scales.
Table 13-2 lists the most common water- formed scales in oilfield waters. Table 13-3 lists
the common causes for the formation of these deposits. A few general remarks about the
most common forms of scales are given below. More information on these types of
scales is given in References 1 through 3.
13.3.1 Calcium Carbonate
Calcium carbonate, the most common scale in oil- and gas field operations, occurs in
every geographic area.
Calcium carbonate precipitation occurs when calcium ion is combined with either
carbonate or bicarbonate ions as follows:
Ca2+ + CO 32- CaCO3 (s)
(1)
(2)
Equation (2) shows that the presence of CO2 increases the solubility of CaCO3 in brine.
Increasing the concentration of CO2 in solution shifts this reaction to the left, resulting in
less calcium carbonate scale.
(decreases the pH). Often, calcium carbonate scaling occurs with a pressure drop (e.g., at
the wellbore of a producer). This reduces the partial pressure of CO2 , thereby increasing
the pH and decreasing the CaCO3 solubility.
An unusual and very important property of calcium carbonate is that its solubility
decreases with increasing temperature.
H-0806.35
13-8
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(3)
This scale may occur in different forms. Gypsum (CaSO4 2H2 O), the most common in
oilfield brines, is associated with lower temperatures. Anhydrite (CaSO4 ) may occur at
high temperatures. Theoretically, anhydrite would be expected to precipitate above
100F in preference to gypsum because of its lower solubility. However, gypsum may be
found at temperatures as high as 212F. With the passage of time, gypsum will dehydrate
to anhydrite.
Gypsum solubility increases with salinity up to about 150,000 mg/L total dissolved
solids. Further increases in salt content increase its scaling tendency. In contrast to
calcium carbonate, gypsum solubility is almost independent of pH.
A common mechanism for gypsum precipitation in the oil field is a reduction in pressure
(e.g., at the production wellbore). The solubility increases with higher pressure because,
when the scale is dissolved in water, the total volume of the system decreases.4,5
Gypsum scale is perhaps the most common in west Texas oil fields because these brines
often have high concentrations of calcium and sulfate.
13.3.3 Barium Sulfate
This scale is especially troublesome. It is extremely insoluble and almost impossible to
remove chemically. Barium sulfate scaling is likely when both barium and sulfate are
present, even in low concentrations.
Ba-2 +SO4 2- BaSO4 (s)
(4)
Most barium sulfate scales also contain some strontium and radium sulfate because these
cations are chemically similar to barium. The presence of radium is a special problem
because it makes the scale radioactive. Extra precautions must be taken in the disposal of
barium sulfate scales if the radio activity is high.6,7
Barium sulfate scale is common in North Sea reservoirs. These fields often have barium
in the original formation brine. Seawater injection (high sulfate concentration) for
secondary oil recovery causes the scale problem. As the water flood matures and the
seawater breaks through, these incompatible waters mix and the barium scale forms.
H-0806.35
13-9
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Generally, barium sulfate solubility increases with temperature and salinity. Similar to
gypsum, BaSO4 solubility increases with an increase in total pressure and is largely
unaffected by pH. 8,9
13.3.4 Strontium Sulfate
Strontium sulfate is similar to barium sulfate, except fortunately its solubility is much
greater (generally by 2 orders of magnitude). 1,2
Sr2+ +SO4 SrSO4 (s)
(5)
Strontium sulfate solubility increases with salinity (up to 175,000 mg/L), temperature,
and pressure. Again, pH has little effect.10-13
Pure strontium sulfate scale is rare except for some fields in the Middle East. SrSO4
deposits in producing wells where the strontium- rich formation water mixes with the
sulfate-rich injected seawater.14,15
13.3.5 Iron Compounds
The iron deposits are much more complicated than scales. One reason is that the iron
may come from the formation water, corrosion, or both. Another complication is that the
dissolved iron may be present in two oxidation states: Fe++ (ferrous) and Fe+++ (ferric).
The two cations form compounds with the same anions but with very different
solubilities.
CO2 will react with the ferrous ion to form iron carbonate scale. This scale has similar
solubility behavior as calcium carbonate vs. pH, temperature, etc., except the solubility of
FeCO3 is approximately 100 times lower.16,17
Hydrogen sulfide readily causes iron sulfide to form as a corrosion product. This sulfide
typically is very insoluble and forms a thin, adherent scale. Suspended iron sulfide is the
cause of black water. This also may occur by mixing one stream containing dissolved
H2 S with another containing dissolved iron.
Oxygen can form a number of different compounds when it comes into contact with
water containing dissolved iron. Examples include ferrous hydroxide [Fe(OH)2 ], ferric
hydroxide [Fe(OH)3 ], and ferric oxide [Fe2 O3 ]. "red water is caused by suspended
particles of Fe2 O3 . Oxygen also initiates the formation of "black water when it comes
into contact with a water containing dissolved H2 S and iron.
H-0806.35
13-10
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Chemical
Formula
Mineral
Name
Partial
Pressure CO2
pH
Total
Pressure
Temperature
Total
Salinity
Corrosion
Calcium
Carbonate
CaCO3
Calcite
Calcium
Sulfate
CaSO 4 2H 2 O
CaSO 4
Gypsum
Anhydrite
Barium
Sulfate
BaSO4
Barite
Strontium
Sulfate
SrSO4
Celestite
Iron
Carbonate
FeCO3
Siderite
Iron Sulfide
FeS
Trolite
Iron Oxide
Fe2 O3
Fe3 O4
Hematite
Magnetite
X
X
X
X
Sodium
Chloride
NaCl
Halite
Magnesium
Hydroxide
Mg(OH)2
Brucite
Silicates
Variable
H-0806.35
X
X
13-11
H2 S
Oxygen
X
X
X
X
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Table 13-3: Common Oil Well Scale Deposits Causes and Removal Chemicals
DEPOSIT
OCCURENCE
CHEMICAL
FORMULA
MINERAL NAME
REMOVAL
CHEMICAL
Calcium Carbonate
Common
CaCO3
Calcite
15% HCL
Calcium Sulfate
Common
Gypsum Anhydrite
Same as Above
Converting
Solutions,
EDTA Type Dissolvers
Barium Sulfate
Common
BaSO4
Barite
Mixing of Brines
Strontium Sulfate
Not Common
SrSO4
Celestite
Iron Carbonate
Common
FeCO3
Siderite
Same as Above
Sequestered Acid
Iron Sulfide
Common
FeS
Trolite
Same as Above
Iron Oxide
Common
Fe2 O3
Fe3 O4
Hamatite
Magnetite
Same as Above
Sodium Chloride
Not Common
NaCl
Halite
Magnesium Hydroxide
Not Common
Mg(OH)2
Brucite
15% HCL
Silicates
Variable
H-0806.35
13-12
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
13.4
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
13-13
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
will diminish once the well has been thoroughly flushed with injection water that is
compatible with the aquifer.
13.4.3 Water Production
As soon as a well begins to produce water, there is risk of carbonate scale formation
(assuming that the produced water has a tendency to precipitate carbonate scale). The
severity of the problem will depend upon the water chemistry, the rate of drawdown, and
other factors such as pressure and temperature. At high drawdown rates, carbonate scale
may be laid down in the actual formation. When injection water breakthrough occurs in
production wells, additional (and potentially much more serious) scale problems may
arise. Under certain conditions, formation water and injection (sea) water flow together
towards the wellbore, laying down scale where they mix. For example, sea water
injection into an aquifer rich in strontium and/or barium ions could cause problems.
Damage will be evident in the production tubing before it is evident in the formation.
However, remedial action in the formation is much more serious.
For high temperature/high pressure reservoirs, there are other less well known, potential
scale deposits.
13.4.4 High Pressure (HP) and High Temperature (HT) Reservoirs
HP/HT reservoirs have some potentially unique scaling problems due to the following
characteristics:
High salinity brines will result in halite - NaCl(s) precipitation. ETAP is using desulfated wash water injected above the perforations to dilute the very high salinity
formation brines.
De-sulfated wash water will have 40 to 120 ppm SO42- which may still cause a relatively
severe sulfate-scaling problem in the production tubulars and topside equipment. This is
resolved by continuously injecting a scale inhibitor with the wash water. Thermal
stability is not considered a serious concern in this application.
H-0806.35
13-14
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The PPCA (Polyphosphinocarboxylic acid) inhibitors are more thermally stable than the
phosphonates and exhibit relatively good thermal stability in the dry, solid form at
175C. At 200C there was some degradation, but not as severe as was observed for the
phosphonates.
13-15
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
"pure" formation water, and mixing such waters in the production system is bound to
cause problems sooner or later.
13.5
H-0806.35
13-16
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
13-17
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
13-18
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Scale inhibitors may adsorb onto the surface of the scale crystals just as they start to
form. The inhibitors are large molecules that can envelop these micro-crystals and
hinder further growth. This is considered to be the primary mechanism.
In some cases, the chemical may simply prevent the precipitate from adhering to the
solid surfaces.
There are several criteria that a good scale inhibitor must satisfy:
Inorganic Polyphosphates.
Organic Phosphates Esters.
H-0806.35
13-19
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Organic Phosphonates.
Organic Polymers.
Table 13-4 lists some general performance characteristics of these scale inhibitors.
Table 13-4: Scale Inhibitors
HYDROLYTIC
STABILITY
TEMPERATURE
STABILITY
DETECTABILITY
Inorganic
Polyphosphonates
Poor
Poor
Good
Organic Phosphate
Esters
Good
Fair
Good
Organic Phosphonates
Excellent
Good
Very Good
Organic Polymers
Excellent
Excellent
Difficult
TYPE
13-20
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Type of Scale. Knowing the scale composition, one can select the best scale-inhibitor
chemistry.
Temperature. The relative thermal stability of the different types of scale inhibitors was
discussed above. Higher temperatures and required longer life (e.g., squeeze treatments)
limit the types of chemistry that are suitable.
pH. Most conventional (phosphonate) scale inhibitors perform less effectively in a lowpH environment. This can be a problem for inhibiting sulfate scales in conjunction with
acid treatments or CO2 flooding for EOR.29
Application Technique. This is most important if the inhibitor is to be squeezed into the
formation. This means that the scale inhibitor must survive for several months under
reservoir conditions. This also means that an accurate detection method is available. As
mentioned, there is a standard method for phosphate esters and phosphonates, but the
analytical methods for the polymeric scale inhibitors are uncertain.
H-0806.35
13-21
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(e.g., sudden pressure drop, turbulent zone, or the place where two incompatible brines
mix).
Designing a treatment program for downhole scale prevention is more difficult. We are
less certain where scale deposition begins (where the inhibitor must be placed to be
effective), and applying the chemical at the desired concentration on a continuous basis is
more difficult.
In production wells, scale deposition may start in the formation itself, in the perforations,
in the pump or other downhole equipment, on the tubing, or on the piping on the surface.
The best treatment is the most cost-effective one that gets the proper concentration of
scale inhibitor into the brine before deposition begins. There are three types of downhole
treatment: batch, continuous injection, and squeeze treatments.
Table 13-5 shows some general information on the different types of downhole
application methods.
Table 13-5: Methods to Apply Scale Inhibitors Downhole
TREATMENT OPTION
DEGREE OF
DIFFICULTY
COMMENTS
Simple
Poor Control
More Complex
Good Control
Complex
Batch Treatment
Continuous Injection
Squeeze Treatments
Batch Treatments
Batch treating a producer by periodically pouring scale inhibitor down the annulus is
the simplest downhole application technique. This method has two major drawbacks.
1. It provides little control over the concentration of scale inhibitor entering the
produced brine. The chemical concentration usually is high initially and then
drops off rapidly. This means over treatment followed by under treatment.
2. The scale inhibitor reaches only partway down the tubing. If the scale begins to
form at the bottom of the tubing in the perforations or in the formation, the
chemical enters too late.
H-0806.35
13-22
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Continuous Injection
An improved, but more complex, method is to pump the scale inhibitor downhole
continuously. Two of the more common continuous placement methods are annulus
flush and coiled tubing. A novel technology currently being field tested is the
downhole chemical injection pump (DHCIP). Table 13-6 below compares their
characteristics.
Table 13-6: Continuous Inhibitor Treatments
ANNULUS
FLUSH
COILED TUBING
DHCIP
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Capital Cost
Low
High
High
Low
High
Medium
Should Monitor,
Poor Mixing,
Chemical Build -up
Unproven
Technology,
Plugging
DHCIP Intake
CHARACTERISTIC
Special Problems
The main advantage of these methods is the increased control in injecting the
treatment chemical. The scale inhibitor can be injected into the produced water as far
down as the bottom of the tubing and at the optimum concentration on a continuous
basis. However, these methods do not prevent scale deposition in the perforations or
in the formation itself.
All techniques have the disadvantage of requiring extra equipment (capital and
operating costs) compared with batch treating. The increased complexity means that
such systems require attention (maintenance) to operate properly. Common problems
include pump failures and plugging of critical components. The annulus flush
method and coiled tubing are used frequently.
13-23
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
field brine) and then an overflush (usually field brine) to push the inhibitor several
feet away from the wellbore. The well is shut in for several hours to allow the scale
inhibitor to be retained in the formation by adsorbing onto the rock surfaces or by
precipitating in the formation (usually from excess calcium). Finally, normal
production is resumed.
The produced water entering the treated zone near the wellbore picks up the chemical,
either by desorption or by dissolving a portion of the inhibitor precipitate. As long as
enough inhibitor enters the produced water, no scale should form in the formation,
perforations, downhole equip ment, or tubing. The entire well is protected.
Unfortunately, the chemical feedback concentration cannot be controlled easily (this
is the subject of significant development work). Initially, little chemical is seen as the
overflush returns. Next is a high concentration of inhibitor representing the material
that did not readily adsorb or precipitate. Finally, there is a long, gradual depletion of
the chemical, perhaps stretching out over thousands of barrels and several months of
production. When the inhibitor concentration finally falls below its minimum
effective concentration for that brine, the squeeze treatment must be repeated to
maintain protection. The number of barrels of produced water treated or the duration
of the treatment is called the squeeze life.
13-24
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
13-25
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
It is not possible to readily dissolve sulfate scales. It is possible to use chelating agents to
enhance the dissolution rate of the scale.
Chelation (or sequestration) is the formation of soluble metal ion complexes in the
presence of substances which would normally give a precipitate. An example of
chelation is as follows:
Consider attempting to dissolve a barium sulfate scale. In a water or brine, barium
sulfate has very limited solubility in the range of 5 - 50 mg/l. The barium ions in solution
are complexed by the chelating agent (reaction 2) effectively removing them from the
solution. More barium sulfate dissolves to maintain the equilibrium in reaction 1.
BaSO4 Ba2+ +
SO4 2-
(1)
Ba2+ + L BaL
(2)
Laboratory Testing
Numerous techniques have been used to study scale deposition; however, there are still
no standard laboratory testing techniques within the oil industry.
The testing
methodologies and the interpretation of the results vary widely from company to
company. The methods listed here are examples of the types of measurements that may
be used. Please consult your company's resource person for recommendations.
H-0806.35
13-26
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
13-27
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
13-28
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Paraffin inhibitors and hydrates treating chemicals (methanol and ethylene glycol) can
give rise to serious problems upon mixing.
Some water soluble corrosion inhibitors (imidazolines and alkyl quaternary ammonium
compounds) and paraffin inhibitors can result in serious problems upon mixing.
Mixing methanol and scale inhibitors can cause serious problems upon mixing.
In general, it is recommended that chemical compatibility studies be conducted prior to
selecting production treating chemicals.
H-0806.35
13-29
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Most paraffin inhibitors exhibit no loss in performance when used in the presence of
hydrate, corrosion or scale inhibitors.
Most corrosion inhibitors are compatible with other production treating chemicals in that
they experience no noticeable loss in performance when used in the presence of other
treating chemicals. However, marginally effective corrosion inhibitors may suffer a
noticeable loss in performance when used in the presence of other treating chemicals.
H-0806.35
13-30
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H2
OK
H3
OK
OK
P1
??
NO
NO
P2
??
NO
NO
P2
??
OK
??
C1
??
??
??
C2
OK
OK
OK
C3
??
??
??
C4
OK
OK
OK
S1
??
NO
OK
S2
??
NO
OK
S3
??
NO
OK
B1
OK
OK
OK
B2
OK
OK
OK
B3
OK
OK
OK
D1
NO
??
??
D2
??
OK
??
D3
??
OK
??
??
OK
OK
??
??
??
NO
NO
NO
??
??
??
NO
NO
NO
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
OK
??
OK
OK
??
OK
OK
??
??
??
OK
??
??
??
OK
??
??
??
OK
??
??
??
OK
??
??
??
OK
??
??
??
OK
OK
??
OK
??
OK
??
OK
??
OK
??
OK
??
??
??
??
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
??
??
??
??
??
??
NO
NO
NO
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
P1
P2
P3
C1
C2
C3
C4
S1
S2
S3
B1
B2
B3
Ok = No loss in performance; ?? = UNCERTAIN; testing is needed; NO Avoid using these two chemicals together!
Hydrates: (nonionic)
H1 polyvinylcaprolactam
H2 methanol
H3 ethylene glycol
Top of page
Corrosion inhibitors: (generally cationic)
Demulsifiers
H-0806.35
S1 Phosphonates pH 4-8
Biocides:
P3 xylene
13-31
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
P2
(a)
C1
C2
C3
C4
(b)
H1
OK
OK
OK
OK
??
NO
H2
H3
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
H1
H2
H3
P1
P2
OK
--
NO
--
OK
--
C1
C2
C3
C4
--??
OK
--NO
??
--NO
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
S1
S2
S3
OK
---
NO
---
??
---
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
??
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
OK
S2
S2
S3
??
NO
NO
(c)
NO
--
NO
(c)
??
--
NO
(c)
??
--
NO
NO
??
??
OK
??
NO
??
NO
NO
NO
??
??
??
??
??
??
??
OK
??
NO
??
??
NO
??
NO
OK=No loss in performance; ?? = UNCERTAIN; testing is needed; NO = Avoid using these two chemicals together!
Interpret as follows: Column heading denotes the primary chemical whose performance is being tested in the presence of the "additive"
chemical whose type is denoted by the row heading. For example, the intersection of the S1 column and C1 row is labeled "NO". This means
that the performance of a phosphonate scale inhibitor (s1) will likely be adversely affected by the presence of an amine fatty acid type corrosion
inhibitor (C1).
NOTES:
a. The P2 paraffin inhibitor was not effective on the South Pelto crude used in these tests. The other chemicals actually increased its
performance slightly.
b. The C4 corrosion inhibitor was only moderately effective (55% and 62% in duplicate tests) when tested by itself in the test brine (no other
treating chemicals present).
c. Solutions of polyvinylcaprolactam will turn cloudy above a temperature of 90F, this chemical combination could be labeled as "??" to
indicate that further testing is needed before using a combination of any of these scale inhibitors (S1, S2, or S3) with polyvinylcaprolactam.
H-0806.35
13-32
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
13.7
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
References
1. Patton, C. C.: Applied Water Technology, first edition, Campbell Petroleum Series,
Norman, OK (1986) Chap. 3.
2. Cowan, J. C. and Weintritt, D. J.: Water-Formed Scale Deposits, Gulf Publishing
Co., Houston (1976).
3. Ostroff, A. G.: Introduction to Oilfield Water Technology, National Association of
Corrosion Engineers, Ho uston (1979) Chap. 3.
4. Carlberg, B. L. and Matches, R. R.: "Solubility of Calcium Sulfate in Brine", paper
SPE 4353 presented at the 1973 SPE Oilfield Chemistry Symposium, Denver, May
24-25.
5. Vetter O. J. G. and Phillips, R. C.: "Prediction of Deposition of Calcium Sulfate
Scale Under Down-Hole Conditions", JPT (Oct. 1970) 1299.
6. Waldram, I. M.: "Natural Radioactive Scale: The Development of Safe Systems of
Work", JPT (Aug. 1988) 1057-1060.
7. Smith, A. L.: "Radioactive Scale Formation", JPT (June 1987) 697-706.
8. Blount, C. W.: "Barite Solubilities and Thermodynamic Quantities up to 300C and
1400 Bars", American Mineralogist (1977) 62, 942-57.
9. Templeton, C. C.: "Solubility of Barium Sulfate in Sodium Chloride Solutions from
25C to 95C", J. Chemical and Engineering Data (Oct. 1960) 5, 514.
10. Vetter, O. J. G., Vandenbroek, I., and Nayberg, J.: "SrSO4 : The Basic Solubility
Data", paper SPE 11803 presented at the 1983 SPE International Symposium on
Oilfield and Geothermal Chemistry, Denver, June 1-3.
11. Jaques, D. F. and Bourland, B. I.: "A Study of Solubility of Strontium Sulfate", JPT,
(April 1983) 292-300.
12. Jacques, D. F., Gollberg, J. B., and Whiteside, W. C.: Strontium Sulfate Solubility
and the Effects of Scale Inhibitors", paper presented at the NACE Middle East
Corrosion Conference/79, Bahrain, April 15-17.
H-0806.35
13-33
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
13. Davis, J. W. and Collins, A. G.: "Solubility of Barium and Strontium Sulfates in
Strong Electrolyte Solutions", Environmental Science and Technology (Oct. 1971), 5,
1039.
14. Essel, A. and Carlberg, B. L.: "Strontium Sulfate Scale Control by Inhibitor Squeeze
Treatment in the Fateh Field", JPT (June 1982) 1302-06.
15. Shen, J and Crosby, C. C.: "Insight Into Strontium and Calcium Sulfate Scaling
Mechanisms in a Wet Producer", JPT (July 1983) 1249-55.
16. Greenberg, J. L. and Tomson, M. B.: "Kinetics of Precipitation and Dissolution of
Ferrous Carbonate", paper presented at the 1986 International Symposium on Metal
Speciation, Separation, and Recovery, Chicago, IL, July 27 Aug 1.
17. Shuler, P. J.: "OLI System ProChem Simulator Calculation of Iron Sulfide and Iron
Carbonate Scaling Tendencies for Rangely Field, Colorado", COFRC Technical
memorandum TM88000876 (Aug. 1988).
18. SPE 37274 "The Implication of HP/HT Reservoir Conditions on the Selection and
Application of Conventional Scale Inhibitors: Thermal Stability Studies".
19. Weintritt, D. J. and Cowan, J. C.: "Unique Characteristics of Barium Sulfate Scale
Deposition", JPT (Oct. 1967) 1381-94.
20. Shuler, P. J.: "Scale Inhibitor Analysis by Ion Chromatography", COFRC Technical
memorandum TM8801175 (Oct. 1988).
21. Shuler, P. J., Freitas, E. A., And Bowker, K. A.: "Selection and Application of
Barium Sulfate Scale Inhibitors for a Carbon Dioxide Flood, Rangely Weber Sand
Unit, Rangely, Colorado", paper SPE 18973 presented at the 1989 SPE Rocky
Mountain Regional meeting/Low Permeability Reservoir Symposium, Denver, March
6-8.
22. Hughes, C. T. and Whittingham, K. P.: "The Selection of Scale Inhibitors for the
Forties Field", paper EUR 313 presented at the 1982 European Petroleum
Conference, London, Oct. 25-28.
23. Cruise, D. S., Davis, D. L., and Elliot, R. H.: "Use of Continuous Coil Tubing for
Subsurface Scale and Corrosion Treating Rangely Weber Sand Unit", paper SPE
11853 presented at the 1983 SPE Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting, Salt Lake City,
UT, May 23-25.
H-0806.35
13-34
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
24. Collins, P.,: "The Scaletreat ESL System, A New Approach to Scale Inhibitor
Squeeze Treatment", IDF Report (Aug. 1986).
25. Underdown, D. R. and Newhouse, D. P.: "Evaluation of Calcium Carbonate Scale
Inhibitors for Prudhoe Bay, Alaska", paper SPE 15658 presented at the 1986 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Oct. 5-8.
26. Spriggs, D. M. and Hover, G. W.: "Field Performance of a Liquid Scale Inhibitor
squeeze Program", JPT (July 1972) 812-16.
27. Hong, S. A. and Shuler, P. J.: A Mathematical Model for the Scale Inhibitor Squeeze
Process", SPEPE (Nov. 1988) 597-607.
28. Vetter, O. J. G.: The Chemical Squeeze Process Some New Information on Some
Old Misconceptions", JPT (March 1973) 339-53.
29. Shuler, P. J.: A Mathematical Model for Successive Scale Inhibitor Squeeze
Treatments", COFRC Technical Memorandum TM87001338 (Nov. 1987).
30. Carlberg, B. L.: "Precipitation Squeeze Can Control Scale in High-Volume Wells",
Oil & Gas Journal (Dec. 2, 1983), 152-54.
H-0806.35
13-35
1-Dec-00
14
EROSION
14.1
Introduction
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Velocity is an important parameter for any multiphase flow system. Excessive fluid
velocities caused by incorrect pipe sizing and/or process design can have a detrimental
effect on the pipeline and fittings and the effectiveness of any chemical inhibitors. The
phenomena involved are complex, involving aspects of the hydrodynamics of the
pipeline, the chemistry of the multiphase mixture within the pipeline, and the materials
used to manufacture the pipeline.
14.2
Erosion
The hydrodynamics of the multiphase mixture within the pipeline has a very important
influence on a number of physical phenomena, which determine the corrosion and
erosion performance of the system. In many pipeline applications, particularly those
involving gas fields and gas production systems, liquid droplets are present as the
dispersed phase. The impingement of these droplets on to surfaces can cause erosion.
Experimental evidence indicates that under a wide range of conditions, the material lost
by droplet erosion varies with time. Initially, the impacting droplets do not cause any
erosion due to the existence of protective layers on the surface. However, after a period
of time, rapid erosion sets in and the weight loss becomes significant and will increase
linearly with time.
The hydrodynamics of the multiphase mixture within the pipeline also affects the degree
of wetting of the pipe walls and the distribution of corrosion inhibitors injected into the
pipeline system. Above a certain velocity, the inhibitor film will be removed, leading to
increased rates of corrosion. At present, pipeline designers rely on empirical correlations
such as the API specification (API RP 14, 1991) to determine the critical line velocity.
The empirical correlation takes the form:
Verosion =
where:
Verosion = velocity of erosion (ft/s)
= mixture density (lb/ft3 )
C = constant defined by Table 14.2-1
H-0806.35
14-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Table 14.2-1: Erosion Velocity for Gas-condensate Systems with Various CGRs
droplet
damage
Harwell
CGR
Mixture Density
API 14E
S&V
annular
flow
bubble
flow
(S&V)
kg m-3
lb ft -3
c=100
c=300
c=1370
c=5000
c=35000
kg m-3
lb ft -3
m/s
m/s
m/s
m/s
m/s
1.0
64.0
4.0
15.3
45.7
208.9
762.3
5336.1
10.0
68.5
4.3
14.7
44.2
201.9
736.7
5009.9
50.0
78.5
4.9
13.8
41.3
188.6
688.5
4819.1
100.0
90.5
5.7
12.8
38.5
175.7
641.4
4489.5
H-0806.35
14-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Table 14.2-2: Superficial Gas Velocity (m/s) with Gas Flow Rate and Pipe Diameter
Gas as Flow
MMSCFD
FLOW
8"
10"
16"
24"
30"
36"
10.0
1.3
0.8
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
20.0
2.5
1.6
0.6
0.3
0.2
0.1
50.0
6.3
4.0
2.0
0.7
0.5
0.3
100.0
13.0
8.1
3.1
1.4
0.9
0.6
200.0
32.0
16.8
6.3
2.8
1.8
1.2
500.0
60.0
24.0
16.1
7.0
4.5
3.1
H-0806.35
14-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 14.2-1 indicates the relationship between holdup, velocity, and the erosion
criterion (using the Eaton-Oliemans method). It highlights some of the potential
advantages of operating a multiphase pipeline with a gas of a CGR of 10 bbl/MMSCF at
high superficial gas velocities. Increasing the superficial gas velocity decreases the liquid
holdup in the pipeline. This could lead to a reduction in the pigging frequency or a
smaller slug catcher required at the receiving facility. Figure 14.2-2 also shows the
corresponding API erosion velocity specification for the gas condensate mixture and the
line of no-slip holdup. The graph shows that very high gas velocities are required to
attain the no-slip holdup criterion. Also, there is only a small variation in the
holdup/superficial gas velocity curve with increasing superficial gas velocity, above 6
m/s. The implication of Figure 14.2-2 is that it is not possible to operate under no-slip
conditions without exceeding the erosion criterion. Note that the low dependence of
holdup/superficial gas velocity curve on pipe diameter is a feature of the Eaton
Correlation.
Figure 14.2-3 shows the pressure drop penalty incurred by increasing superficial gas
velocity, for a 25 km multiphase pipeline with a gas of CGR 10 bbls/MMSCF, as
calculated using the Oliemans method. To reach the API erosion velocity specification, a
16-inch pipeline would have a pressure drop of over 30 bar (435 psi). Under normal
operating conditions a pressure drop of more than 0.5 bar (7.25 psi) / km is likely to be
unacceptable - this implies that in most cases pressure drop, not erosion will be limiting.
Finally, in a gas condensate system it is important to consider the possible operating
conditions that may occur during trans ient operations which may result in unacceptably
high velocities, as well as the normal steady state operation of the pipeline.
H-0806.35
14-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
14-5
1-Dec-00
14.3
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
References
1. API RP 14E, October 1991.
2. Salama, M.M. and Venkatesh, E.S., "Evaluation of API RP 14E erosional velocity limitation for
offshore gas wells, OTC Paper 4485, May 1983.
H-0806.35
14-6
1-Dec-00
15.0
CORROSION
15.1
Introduction
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
Fundamental CO2 corrosion research is, at present, restricted to simple laboratory flow
experiments with idealized fluids.
In offshore multiphase production systems, understanding corrosion is a far greater
problem due to the wide range of uncertainties, i.e. basic flow parameters, gas and crude
property variations, effects of flowline geometry and the performance of corrosion
inhibitors. Multiphase flow design schemes and the use of carbon steel flowlines present
attractive capital cost options for field development. The flowline design team must
assess these advantages against high operating costs for inhibition, corrosion monitoring
and line repair during field life.
This chapter is not intended to provide detailed instructions with regard to corrosion
prevention in pipeline design. Rather, the objective is to explain the possible
implications for corrosion phenomena on multiphase flow conditions, and indeed vice
versa. Some basic explanation of corrosion prevention options as well as a design
philosophy (See Section 15.6) is presented.
The flow characteristics in a multiphase pipeline may determine the likelihood of
corrosion and can modify the corrosion rates. It may also have a profound effect on the
effectiveness of any anti-corrosion measures which are taken. Whether or not corrosion
is likely, and what action must be taken if it is may then influence any decisions
regarding the use of multiphase flow systems, and their design.
In a full design, an assessment of that risk is required to see whether corrosion may be
controlled through methods such as corrosion allowance and chemical inhibition. These
specialized tasks combine stress analysis and corrosion engineering specialists.
References 1 to 4 provide more details.
H-0806.35
15-1
Jan - 99
15.2
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
Corrosivity
H-0806.35
15-2
Jan - 99
15.3
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
H-0806.35
15-3
Jan - 99
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
wyes. However, minor changes, e.g. weld beads, gaps at flanges and previous
mechanical or corrosion/erosion damage, can also produce serious corrosion problems.
Major geometrical changes to the direction of a flowline increase turbulence production,
local wall shear stress and redistribute the gas and liquid (also solids, if present) phases.
The degree to which this occurs depends upon the acuteness of the direction change, the
change in flow area, especially a constriction, and the proximity of two or more changes.
Vertical bends, in nominally stratified flow, may create very high local turbulence
activity as the geometry change serves to collect the liquid phases, bridging the pipe
before being blown through by faster moving gas. Examples of this occurring in a 30inch OD flowline, in nominally stratified flow, and 40% watercut, created wall thickness
losses of 80% and corrosion rates in excess of 500 mpy (12.5 mm/yr). Hilly terrain with
long upward slopes may produce slugs, which are dissipated in the downhill sections.
Here, again, an analysis of the flowrates without taking pipeline angles into account may
predict a stratified flow regime, whereas slugs will have formed somewhere in the
system.
Minor changes and details to pipe wall sections may create local areas of increased
inhibitor breakdown due to the abruptness of the change and water retention. Abrupt
wall mismatches due to thick walled fittings or field welds of flowline stock
manufactured from rolled plate, and the metallurgical changes due to the heat affected
zone, are prime targets for water dropout, inhibitor breakdown and accelerated corrosion.
Gaps in flange seals for large diameter flowlines may also promote water dropout so that
a nominally low water cut of less than 10% could locally be subject to, say, 50% or more.
Particular care is required if sections of dissimilar materials are flanged together, e.g.
stainless and carbon steels, due to galvanic corrosion, again reference to a corrosion
engineering specialist should be sought.
15.3.3 Temperature profiles
Temperature has a profound effect on corrosion rates in sweet systems. It is generally the
case that at temperatures below 60C, corrosion rates will increase exponentially with
increasing temperature. Above 60C, the surface may be protected by the formation of
an iron carbonate scale. Thus, corrosion in multiphase lines is likely to be most
problematic in parts of the lines where the temperature is above the sea temperature, but
below 60C. It is important, therefore, to identify the likely temperature profile along the
pipeline at the design stage. It may then be desirable to use a section of special steel or
lined pipe near the inlet section of the pipe.
H-0806.35
15-4
Jan - 99
15.4
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
Corrosion Prevention
Once it has been established whether corrosion is a potential problem, it is necessary to
consider what action should be taken and whether this will impinge on multiphase flow
considerations. Several options for corrosion prevention are highlighted below.
15-5
Jan - 99
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
that the absolute quantity of inhibitor added could make a difference to the total holdup
of liquid in the pipeline, although this is more likely with methanol or glycol.
The physical processes governing the distribution of the inhibitor, and its adsorption onto
the metal surface, are not well understood, especially in multiphase flow. It is known that
the time required for successful inhibitor adsorption may be counted in minutes, whereas,
the time scale of turbulence activity near the pipe wall surface, e.g. in slug flow, is
measured in milliseconds. This time scale mismatch and the intermittent nature of slug
flow are considered to be important factors affecting the corrosion rate.
The design dosing rates are quoted in parts per million, typically in the range 10 - 50
ppm, which requires a known solvent liquid phase flowrate to calculate the inhibitor
injection rate. Inevitably the phase flowrates change so that, unless care is taken, widely
differing dosages are delivered than those required by the design. In addition, operational
problems such as lack of maintenance of the injection equipment can severely affect the
delivered dosages; episodes where the inhibitor supply tank has run dry are not
uncommon. Some success in reducing the corrosion rates to manageable rates, typically
0.05 mm/yr, in inter- field multiphase lines in Prudhoe Bay, has been attained by
increasing the dosing rates to 100 - 200 PPM.
Methanol
In sweet service methanol in the aqueous phase can reduce the corrosion rate
considerably, e.g. a methanol content in excess of 30% of total liquid can lead to a
reduction of 90% in corrosion. In sour systems, this reduction may only be of the order
of 10-25%. Also, at pipeline temperatures above 60C, the effectiveness may be reduced
because not enough methanol remains in the liquid phase. Methanol works by promoting
the formation of a film on a corroding surface, which stifles the corrosion reactions. Like
inhibitors, it relies on good transport to all surfaces of the pipe. In stratified flow, this
may not be the case and, once again, regular pigging may be required. With methanol a
major consideration must be the absolute quantity of liquid added. If it constitutes more
than 30% of the aqueous phase then the effect on overall CGR should be considered. In a
typical North Sea gas/condensate, the CGR could be 10 bbls/MMscfd, plus a water cut
constituting 1 bbl/MMscfd. This could rise to 1.3 bbl/MMscfd or more when methanol is
added. Section 5 covers the effect of CGR on holdup and pressure drop. In true three
phase sys tems, where the flow regime is stratified and the water and hydrocarbon liquids
segregate, it has been shown that even though the aqueous CGR is as suggested above,
the aqueous phase could constitute 50 percent of the liquid hold-up in the pipe. The
H-0806.35
15-6
Jan - 99
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
presence of methanol could increase this holdup, but perhaps more important is the
implication for inventory of methanol required. For example, in a 24- inch diameter, 25
km long pipeline at turndown to about 50 MMscfd, the total holdup is calculated to be
about 8000 bbls. If 50% of this holdup is aqueous and 30% of that is methanol, it implies
that approximately 1300 bbls of methanol will be contained within the pipeline.
Following a flow rate increase, this methanol will be swept out of the pipeline and, in the
case of an offshore installation where this methanol is recovered, a storage capacity of at
least 1300 bbls will be needed to accomodate it.
Glycol
Injection of glycol into wet gas systems reduces the vapor pressure of water. A target
relative humidity of less than 50% is recommended. Below this level, condensation and
hence corrosion should be adequately suppressed. Glycol can be added in the form of
Monoethylene Glycol (MEG), Diethylene Glycol (DEG) or Triethylene Glycol (TEG).
MEG is the preferable agent from the point of view of mobility within the pipeline. If
offshore dehydration is used, then free water should be removed but the gas may still be
saturated and cooling of the gas within the pipeline could lead to condensation and hence
corrosion. Glycol is usually introduced as a spray or mist, which is well distributed
through the gas phase. However, it will eventually drop out of the gas phase and form a
segregated liquid phase. Once this happens, exactly the same arguments apply to glycol
with regard to multiphase flow, as is the case with methanol, i.e. pigging may be required
to disperse the glycol if the pipeline operates in stratified flow and the glycol may
contribute to the overall holdup. The inventory of glycol within the system may also be
an issue. The quantity of glycol required will depend on the temperature, pressure, gas
flow and relative humidity of the gas at the pipeline inlet. This quantity can be calculated
using a vapor- liquid equilibrium (VLE) model such as those found in thermodynamic
flash calculation packages. Some sample data is presented here, assuming that 250
MMscfd of saturated gas (methane) is to be introduced to a pipeline at an average
temperature of 10C and 70 bara. Table 15-1 shows the relative humidity achieved at
different addition rates of 100 percent pure MEG.
H-0806.35
15-7
Jan - 99
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
Relative humidity
(%)
8.0000
0.6500
12.5000
0.1300
42.0000
This indicates that the glycol addition rate is of the same order as the methanol rates
required for that type of treatment. The numbers in Table 15-1 are the equilibrium
conditions that can be reached, given a long enough contact time. If the glycol is
introduced as a spray then the relative humidity may be depressed to close to 50% almost
immediately, but if the glycol exists as a segregated layer it could take some distance
(calculations have shown that it could take from 1 - 2 km) to equilibrate. To avoid
corrosion this equilibration section may need to be lined, or made from a higher- grade
material. These calculations assume that the glycol is 100% pure. Even a small
reduction in purity, for example 90 wt%, will introduce a significant proportion of water
(90 wt% relates to 73 mol%) into the system. Under these conditions at a glycol dosing
rate of 0.13 bbls/MMscf the final relative humidity has been calculated to be 50% - the
rate of glycol would have to be doubled (i.e. 0.26 bbls/MMscf) to reduce the relative
humidity to its original value. If DEG rather than MEG is used then the situation is even
less favorable because on a molar basis 90 wt% DEG would contain 40 mol% water. At
the same addition rate DEG would give a relative humidity of 58%. Even doubling the
rate would only reduce this to 54%.
The situation is even worse if the system contains free water. At a water cut of 1
bbl/MMscf, a glycol dosing rate of 0.13 bbls/MMscf would lead to a relative humidity of
97% the glycol would be totally ineffective. The implications for a multiphase flow
system are clear: if there is a separate aqueous phase then glycol addition is probably
inappropriate as a means of corrosion control (but note that it may still be useful for
hydrate control). If it is a strictly a 2 phase system (gas and liquid hydrocarbons), then
the glycol could add to the overall holdup and the inventory of glycol required could be
large. In addition, in stratified flow the glycol would probably form a separate layer to
the hydrocarbons, with the hydrocarbons covering the glycol. This would prevent the
H-0806.35
15-8
Jan - 99
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
glycol from coming into contact with the gas and it has been shown (Ref. 9) that almost
pure water could then condense onto the top of the pipe. Stratified flow is therefore
highly undesirable. Annular flow would be better, but requires higher pressure drops.
It is suggested that if methanol or glycol is to be used for corrosion control, the addition
rates should be evaluated and the holdup and pressure drop recalculated.
15.4.3 Effect of Multiphase Flow Regime on Corrosion Inhibitor Performance
The implications for multiphase flow have been coverd to some extent, but are worth
reiterating.
If corrosion inhibitors are to be used then slugging flows are undesirable. It has been
suggested that at slug translational velocities greater than 3 m/s, the pipe surface will be
scoured and the inhibitors removed (Ref. 10).
If the flow is stratified, then the upper surface of the pipe may not be treated properly
either because there is no mechanism for transferring the anti-corrosion agent (inhibitor
or methanol) to the surface or as in the case of glycol, it may be sealed off by liquid
hydrocarbons from the gas that it is meant to treat. Also in stratified flow if a separate
aqueous phase forms then a very large inventory of glycol or methanol could collect
within the pipeline. Separation of the flow can also lead to corrosion of the lower,
submerged part of the pipeline. Regular pigging would deal with both these potential
problems.
In annular flow, a good coating of all wall surfaces is guaranteed and pigging may not be
necessary (for corrosion inhibition). At very high Reynolds numbers (or velocities)
however, the fluid to wall shear stress can be sufficient to remove any protective films
and to increase the corrosion rate. In general there is a critical shear stress above which
films are thinned and erosion-corrosion occurs. Figure 15-1 (see Ref. 11 for test data)
indicates how corrosion rates can increase rapidly above this critical conditio n. This
suggests that at actual velocities above 5 m/s, with no inhibitor a serious corrosion
problem could arise. With inhibitors, the critical velocity appears to be in the range
10-15 m/s.
H-0806.35
15-9
Jan - 99
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
H-0806.35
15-10
Jan - 99
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
Where the geometrical changes are more complicated, such as flow through a tee, or at a
greater level of detail, flow in a corrosion pit, the three-dimensional nature of the flow
becomes important. In this instance, specialist computational fluid dynamics (CFD)
software has to be used to predict velocity, pressure, turbulence and temperature
distributions. However, again, the corrosion potential is a value judgement.
15.6
15.7
H-0806.35
15-11
Jan - 99
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
H-0806.35
15-1
Jan - 99
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
References
1. A Corrosion Philosophy for the Transport of Wet Oil and Multiphase Fluids
Containing CO2 BP Report ESR.93.ER.013, March 1993.
2. A Corrosion Philosophy for the Transport of Wet Hydrocarbon Gas
CO2 BP Report ESR.94.ER.016, August 1994.
Containing
H-0806.35
15-1
Jan - 99
TEXACO INC.
DEEPSTAR FLOW ASSUR ANCE DESIGN GUIDE
7. High Speed Video demonstration - 9/9/91 VHS video kept by Multiphase Flow
Group, SPR, Sunbury.
8. Erosion Guidelines - Guidelines on Allowable Velocities for Avoiding Erosion and
on the Assessment of Erosion Risk in Oil and Gas Production Systems BP Report
ESR.94.ER.070, 1994
9. Lammers, J.N.J.J. Phase Behaviour of Glycol in Gas Pipeline Calculated Oil and
Gas Journal, Pg. 50, April 15th , 1991.
10. Jepson, W.P. Three Year Report (1990-1993) of National science Foundation
Industry/University cooperative Research Center for Corrosion in Multiphase
Systems, 1993.
11. Bardal, E. Effects of Flow Conditions on Corrosion in Construction Aspects in
Two-Phase Flow Equipment, 8th Lecture Series on Two-Phase Flow, Norwegian Inst.
Of Tech., Trondheim, Norway, 16-17th February 1984.
H-0806.35
15-2
Jan - 99
16.0
SOLIDS TRANSPORT
16.1
Introduction
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
16-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
16-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
16-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
velocity is steady. However this is not the case when the gas/liquid flow regime is plug
or slug flow, as the depth of the film and the velocities vary.
Plug flow
In plug flow, the gas bubbles move along the top of the pipe and have little effect on the
solids flow with the full range of regimes already mentioned possible (Section 16.2.1).
As the amount of gas is increased the bubble depth increases and the fluctuating
velocities affect the transport similar to that described in slug flow.
Slug flow
In slug flow the transport of solids is complicated as the solid may settle during the
passage of the film region and may be transported in the slug body. There can be a large
diameter effect as the depth of the film varies and shields the bottom of the pipe from the
turbulence of the slug. A bed can be formed if either the slug or film does not transport
the solid. In cases where the solid is transported in the slug, only the motion is
intermittent. The frequency between slugs may be a factor if bed compaction and
stabilization by other products is a possibility.
For slug flow in slightly uphill inclined pipes the solid may be transported backwards due
to the reverse flow in the film region. Therefore, the overall motion of the sand depends
on the efficiency of the forward transport by the slug and the reverse motion caused by
the film region.
Low holdup wavy flow
In wet gas pipelines the liquid can be transported as a thin film along the bottom of the
pipe, in which case the solid concentration in the film can be high, and in the extreme
may appear as a wet solid bed. In this case little is known about the conditions required to
remove the wet solids.
Annular flow
In annular flow the solids may be transported in the liquid film and the gas core. Since
the velocities are high in annular flow the usual concern is whether the erosion rate is
excessive rather than if the solids will be transported or not.
Several factors can significantly complicate the analysis of the conditions required to
prevent the accumulation of solids in multiphase pipelines. These include:
16-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Preferential wetting of the solids by another phase (i.e., water wet solids removal by
the oil phase)
H-0806.35
16-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
laminar sub- layer and check for this condition after the friction velocity has been
calculated.
16.2.5 Particle Diameter
It is important to use the correct particle size in the analysis as this affects the calculation
of the particle settling velocity and also determines which method is used, depending on
whether the particle is smaller or larger than the laminar sub- layer. For single sized
particles this is no problem. However, the solids produced with oil and gas usually
contains a wide range of particle sizes. Figure 16.2-2 shows the particle size distributio n
for the Forties field sand and shows that the size varies from 45 microns to over 1 mm.
For most cases it is recommended to use the mean particle diameter or d50 value (in this
case 255 microns) for the determination of the minimum transport criteria. Though it is
also recommended to investigate the sensitivity of the results to the particle diameter
used.
H-0806.35
16-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
where:
Re =
1488 DVsl
H-0806.35
16-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
16-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
For most cases of interest in oil and gas pipelines, the solids concentration is low and the
first equation is usually sufficient to determine the friction velocity for minimum
transport. However, if the liquid holdup is small, the concentration correction may be
required.
When the solids particle diameter is smaller than the laminar sub- layer the expression for
the friction velocity at the minimum transport condition is:
u* = [100ws ( /d)2.71]0.269
Given the friction velocity and the Reynolds number, the thickness of the laminar sublayer can be calculated and the appropriate friction velocity expression checked.
16.2.9 Pressure Gradient at Minimum Transport Condition
Following the above procedure determines the friction velocity at the minimum transport
condition for the liquid phase. This is easily used to calculate the associated single phase
pressure gradient at this condition using the expression:
Pmtc = (4 l 2 ) / [144 gc D]
where:
gc = 32.174
A two-phase flow pressure drop calculation can now be used to determine the liquid and
gas velocity combinations, which result in the same two-phase flow pressure gradient. It
is useful to plot the locus of these points on a flow pattern map to indicate the conditions
under which solids may or may not be transported. Alternatively comparing the twophase pressure drop with the minimum transport condition for the conditions of interest
will indicate whether solids are deposited or not. Figure 16.2-3 shows a comparison of
the model predictions with some experimental data.
H-0806.35
16-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
16-10
1-Dec-00
16.3
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
References
1. Fairhurst, CP, Sand Transport in the South East Forties Pipe Line, BHRA,1983.
2. Smith, M A Model for Predicting Solids Transport in Near Horizontal Multi-phase Oil
and Gas Pipe Lines, XFE report 8/2/1993.
3. Wasp, Kenny and Gandhi, Solid-Liquid Flow Slurry Pipe Line Transportation, Gulf
Publishing Company, Clausthal, Germany, 1979.
H-0806.35
16-11
1-Dec-00
17.0
SLUGGING
17.1
Slugging Flows
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Slug velocity
H-0806.35
17-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(Sherwood)
17-2
Wytch Farm
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(Bridport)
4-inch
6-inch
(1987)
24-inch
(1989)
24-inch
Kuparuk
(1990)
1024-inch
Don-Thistle
8-inch
The data collected by BP covers a wide range of pipe sizes, lengths, geometries, fluid
properties, and water cuts. The data has been compiled into a database vastly greater
than anything previously available. This database has been used to develope a semimechanistic correlation for slug frequency. By applying one of the available slug flow
models, knowledge of slug frequency yields the mean slug length.
No data have yet been collected from slugging hilly terrain pipelines. A new slug model
has recently been developed to track slug sizes throughout a hilly terrain pipeline system.
It is intended to gather data from the Cusiana in- field flowline system. The data collected
from this hilly terrain system will be used to validate and develop the new model.
In parallel with this data gathering exercise, an extensive program of work has been
carried out to determine how slug lengths are distributed about the mean. This work has
involved analysis of data collected on experimental rigs. Using the limited PBU data
Brill et al. had concluded that slug lengths follow a log-normal distribution. Hence the
Brill correlation always calculates the maximum slug length to be 4.7 times the mean.
BP have found that the distribution of slug lengths actually varies with the location of the
pipeline operating point on the flowmap. As a consequence the ratio of maximum to
mean slug length varies with flowing conditions. Near the stratified wavy boundary the
maximum slug length may be ca. 45 times the mean. However, near the elongated
bubble transition maximum slug lengths are only ca. 2 times the mean. Work on
quantifying slug length distribution is continuing.
The combination of a method for determining slug frequency, a slug flow model, and a
slug length distribution model provides a means of predicting mean and maximum slug
lengths.
Prediction of the liquid volume associated with slug flow requires knowledge of the
liquid content of the slugs (slug hold-up), as well as the slug length. The slug hold-up
method currently used within the RCS slugging model is that due to Gregory. The
H-0806.35
17-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Gregory model is based on laboratory scale experiments and predicts slug hold- up as a
function of mixture velocity only. BP has found that in practice slug hold- up is strongly
dependent on water cut as well as mixture velocity. Hence at Prudhoe Bay slug hold-ups
have increased from ca. 0.3 to 0.9 as water cuts have risen from 0 to 50 percent. Similar
significant increases in slug hold-up have been observed on the FE-FA 6-inch test line
when running wells of different water cuts. Further work is being conducted in this area
to develop a more reliable design method.
Slug Velocity and Forces due to Slugging
Horizontal Lines
When slug flow occurs in an essentially horizontal line the mean velocity of the liquid in
the body of the slug is equal to the mixture velocity, Vm, hence :
Vs = Vm = Vsg + Vsl
Vs = mean slug velocity
It is this velocity, Vs, which should be used when evaluating the forces imposed by a slug
as it travels through a bend.
Pipeline Risers
Although a slug will progress through a riser at the downstream end of a pipeline, it will
tend to decelerate as the line upstream of the slug packs up to provide the pressure to
overcome the increasing hydrostatic head in the riser.
As the slug leaves the riser the hydrostatic head loss in the riser reduces so that the
upstream gas bubble expands and accelerates the slug into the process plant. This
phenomenon is shown schematically in Figure 17.1-1.
H-0806.35
17-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
17-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
As the available design methods for this phenomenon were inadequate and known to
significantly overpredict slug size, BP carried out physical and theoretical modeling
studies to gain a better understanding of the terrain slugging process. These studies have
led to the development of a mechanistic model for slug production from dips. The model
has been validated with data obtained from the experimental facilities.
The two most important aspects of the model with regard to pipeline design are:
The critical gas velocity above which no liquid accumulates in a dip is evaluated by
considering the gas velocity for total liquid removal by the co-current liquid film process.
At gas velocities below the critical value liquid can accumulate in a dip and eventually
this leads to the production of a slug. As a slug moves through the uphill section, liquid
is shed from its rear and runs back down the slope. If insufficient liquid is available in
the preceding film for the slug to scoop up and replace that lost by shedding, then the slug
will collapse before reaching the brow of the hill. For a system with a steady liquid
inflow, liquid will build up in the dip so that eventually slugs will emerge to pass into the
downstream pipework. The model evaluates the frequency of slug production for a
particular geometry. With knowledge of the slug frequency, the slug size is determined
by calculating the volume of liquid entering the system during the inter-slugging period.
Pipeline -Riser Systems
Theory
When a pipeline terminates in a riser a particular type of terrain slugging may occur
which has been variously termed riser and severe slugging. The conditions giving rise to
the occurrence of severe slugging have been outlined in Section 8.
A diagrammatic representation of severe slugging is given in Figure 17.1-2. A detailed
description of the severe slugging phenomenon plus details of the BP test rig studies is
given in Section 8. A brief description of severe slugging is given below:
When a stratified flow occurs in a pipeline and the ratio of gas to liquid flowrate is below
some critical value, a liquid blockage will form at the base of the riser. When such a
blockage occurs liquid accumulates at the base of the riser while gas is trapped within the
H-0806.35
17-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
flowline. The liquid slug now formed at the junction between the flowline and the riser
will continue to grow if the rate of hydrostatic head increase in the riser, corresponding to
the rate at which liquid arrives from the flowline, is greater than the rate of gas pressure
increase in the flowline. Liquid accumulation continues until the riser is full of liquid
(slug generation).
At this point the hydrostatic head loss over the riser reaches a maximum value and the
slug begins to be pushed slowly from the flowline (slug production).
Once the gas slug interface enters the riser the hydrostatic head decreases rapidly while
the expanding gas bubble accelerates the bulk of the liquid from the system (bubble
penetration).
This stage continues until the gas bubble enters the separator. Gas production rapidly
rises to a maximum value and then declines steadily as the line depressures (gas
blowdown).
As the gas flowrate reduces, any liquid held up in the riser falls back and accumulates
together with liquid arriving from the flowline, to form a blockage at the base of the riser.
The cycle is then repeated.
The occurrence of severe slugging is generally associated with flowlines which slope
downwards to the base of the riser. However, a similar surging cycle can be produced in
horizontal and slightly upwardly inclined pipelines.
Modeling
Extensive physical modeling has been carried out to investigate and confirm previous
descriptions of severe slugging and to investigate means of eliminating the phenomenon.
Much of this work was sponsored by the SE Forties project.
Of particular interest to the SE Forties Project was the use of riser gas injection to
eliminate severe slugging both at low throughputs and at start-up. Tests showed that gas
injection would reduce the severity of the severe slugging cycle and that in sufficient
quantity it would completely eliminate the phenomenon.
H-0806.35
17-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
17-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
A computer model of severe slugging was purchased from the Tulsa University Fluid
flow Projects (TUFFP). This program evaluates liquid and gas production rates
throughout the severe slugging cycle and so by feeding the results directly into a dynamic
model of the topsides plant, the effects of slugging on the process facilities can be
evaluated. The TUFFP model was modified to include topsides pipework. The program
could then be used to evaluate the forces exerted on the riser and topsides pipework. The
program was further modified to include the effect of riser gas injection. The predicted
quantities of gas required to eliminate severe slugging were found to be in good
agreement with the data collected from experimental facilities.
It was found that the Taitel-Dukler-Barnea criterion for the onset of annular flow
provided a good estimate of the quantity of gas required to eliminate severe slugging.
This method predicts that the transition to annular flow occurs at superficial gas
velocities in excess of a critical value given by:
Vsg >
3.1[ s * g ( l g )1 / 4
g 0 .5
where:
s = surface tension (N/m)
g = 9.81 (m/s2 )
l = liquid density (kg/m3 )
g = gas density (kg/m3 )
The modeling work showed that partial closure of a choke positioned near the top of the
riser would also eliminate severe slugging.
The choke adds sufficient frictional pressure drop so that the system pressure loss
becomes dominated by friction, rather than by hydrostatic head loss as is the case for the
unchoked pipeline-riser. To establish a stable, friction dominated system, the choke
needs to provide a pressure drop comparable to the hydrostatic head loss over the riser
when full of liquid.
Operational Experience
The SE Forties field is the principal BP-operated site where severe slugging was
considered in the design stage. A number of the Magnus satellite wells may also have
H-0806.35
17-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
exhibited severe slugging had their maximum production rates been reduced to low
values (their arrangement is different to SE Forties in that the chokes are at the top of the
riser - severe slugging would not occur unless the riser- top chokes were almost fully
open).
There is one 12- inch line and one 6-inch line between Forties Echo minimum facilities
platform and Forties Alpha. There are eleven wells on Forties Echo, now mainly assisted
by electric submersible pump. They have chokes on Forties Echo. Therefore once the
flows from the wells are co-mingled into the 12- inch line (or flowing individually or comingled through the 6- inch line), there is the possibility of severe slugging at low
flowrate.
Low flowrate considerations obviously may also include start-up, when one or more
severe slugging cycles may be experienced before a higher steady-state flowrate is
reached.
In April 1988 a major field test was undertaken on the Forties Alpha platform mainly to
investigate the behavior of the 6- inch line over a range of flowrates, and from different
wells that had a range of water cut. The aim was to keep reducing the flowrate from one
well at a time through the 6- inch line until the onset of severe slugging. However, due to
a fear that choking back the wells too far might kill them, it was not possible to reduce
the production rates sufficiently to reach genuine severe slugging during the tests.
Despite this limitation, there was a marked change in the character of the flow pattern,
from steady low liquid hold-up slugging to a regular surging, as the flowrates were
reduced.
Experience with the 12- inch line is limited to start-ups. Operators present at first oil
through the line reported heavy surging. During the 1988 tests three start- ups were
monitored, with several large surges during each. However, because of the steadily
increasing input flowrates it was not possible to assess the accuracy of the predictive
tools, either for the occurrence of severe slugging, or for the cycle time.
The Forties Echo-Forties Alpha line has two methods for ameliorating the effects of
severe slugging - riser-base gas injection, and riser-top choking. The design intention for
SE Forties was that riser gas injection would be the principal means of eliminating or
ameliorating severe slugging at low production rates and at start- up.
H-0806.35
17-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Gas is re-cycled after NGL extraction through a 3-inch line down to the base of the 12inch riser, and a 2- inch line for the 6- inch riser. The gas injection system capacity is
sufficient to put the risers into annular-mist flow at the highest gas rates.
As mentioned above it was not possible to undertake any `steady-state' severe slugging
tests during the 1988 field work. However, the use of gas injection to ameliorate the low
flowrate period of a line start- up was demonstrated on both diameter lines.
The full gas injection procedure was used during the third of the 1988 test sequence of
three start-ups of the 12- inch line, with the maximum recommended gas injection rate
(180,000 Sm3/day) into the 12-inch line flowing before the first production fluids were
introduced at the Echo platform. While there was still an initial surging the gas injection
did serve to reduce the duration of the main surge, and also the number of cycles.
This benefit of gas injection during start-up was also demonstrated while trying to bring
on a weak well through the 6- inch test line. The well began to flow, but as liquid reached
the base of the riser at Forties Alpha the additional back pressure due to the increasing
liquid head was sufficient to cause the well to stop flowing. To overcome this the gas
injection system was switched on in the 6- inch line (up to 60,000 Sm3 /day). The liquid
head build-up was greatly reduced, thereby minimizing any back pressure and allowing
the well to build up to its maximum production rate.
The Forties Echo risers at FA were also fitted with throttling valves, as a back-up to the
gas injection system. Use of the throttling valves was seen as having the disadvantage of
requiring a large pressure drop to be effective. However, installation of ESPs on Forties
Echo has meant that pressure is available to overcome the throttling valve pressure loss,
and this combined with the fact that gas is often not available when FE is started up has
meant that use of the throttling valve on the 12- inch riser has become the standard means
of avoiding severe slugging at start-up. As water cut has risen, surging at start-up has
become more pronounced such that even with the throttling valve shut- in to its minimum
stop (25 percent open) the system was regularly tripping out on high separator level at
start-up.
Forties have recently reduced the minimum stop position to 10 percent and this has
enabled operations to bring FE on line with minimal surging and without high level
separator trips. Data collected during the November 1993 field trials illustrated the
relatively steady nature of a start-up of the 12-inch line when shutting in the throttling
valve to its minimum stop condition.
H-0806.35
17-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Liquid level
Gas pressure
The exact nature of these variations will depend on the way in which
separator/slugcatcher controls are set up.
In some cases the first stage separator is set up on level control. If the control system is
set to respond rapidly to changes in level, the liquid level may rise only slightly, but the
liquid outflow will increase sharply. Under these circumstances the liquid disposal
system (valves and pumps), and the downstream liquid handling plant will have to deal
with rapid variations in liquid flowrate. The problem with this type of system is that the
disposal pumps and downstream liquid processing plant need to be sized for flowrates
well in excess of nominal maximum production rate. In addition, the separator liquid
residence time is reduced during periods of slug production so that oil/water separation
efficiency may deteriorate.
The usual way in which slugs are catered for is through use of a large separator, or
slugcatcher, where the increase in liquid flowrate during slug production is handled by
allowing the liquid level to rise. Provided the liquid level remains within set limits the
liquid disposal rate may be kept constant. The vessel is then said to be on flow control.
Once the liquid level rises above a certain point the liquid flow controller has to be reset
to a higher value to avoid high level shutdowns. The advantage of this type of system is
H-0806.35
17-12
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
that the flowrate of liquid to the downstream plant is maintained near constant. The
disadvantage is the large size of vessel required to accommodate the slugs.
The two types of control philosophy discussed, level control and flow control, represent
the two extreme methods of operation. In practice some blend of the two may provide
the solution for any particular application. To optimize the liquid level and disposal
control systems a dynamic model of the plant should be developed during design.
Dynamic modeling is further discussed below.
In addition to handling the variations in liquid flowrate during slugging, the reception
facilities will have to be designed to cater for the large variation in gas flowrate during
slugging.
In fact generally, it is the gas plant which is more susceptible to operational upsets during
slugging than the liquid plant. As with control of the liquid level, there are two
philosophies for handling gas production from the separator or slugcatcher.
Fixed pressure control
In this system the excess gas flowrate occurring during production of the gas bubble
passes rapidly through the separator to the downstream gas plant.
Allow Pressure in Separator to Rise
Here at least some of the excess gas production is held back in the separator as the
pressure is allowed to rise. This type of system will impart a smaller perturbation on the
downstream gas plant than one with fixed pressure control.
In this case the separator is acting as a gas accumulator. Clearly this type of system
requires the normal operating pressure of the separator to be set at some level below the
design pressure.
Dynamic Simulation of Process Plant
To accurately assess the effect of slugging on the process plant it is necessary to take the
output from a slugging model and input this into a dynamic model of the process plant.
BP has used dynamic simulation on a number of recent development studies including
Bruce WAD, Cyrus-Andrew, and Cusiana. The dynamic process simulation software
should be able to model a wide range of items or process plant including pumps,
compressors, valves, and all their associated control systems.
H-0806.35
17-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
A slugging model produces output in terms of gas and liquid production rates with time.
To accurately assess the interaction between the process plant and the slugging pipeline,
the pipeline simulation can be interfaced with the process simulation. In this way any
pressure changes in the separator or slugcatcher, caused by slugging, are fed back directly
into the pipeline model where they may affect the production rate of subsequent slugs and
bubbles.
The dynamic model can be used to assess the ability of a preliminary design to handle
slugging conditions. If the model suggests that slugging flow will create unacceptable
plant conditions it may be possible to produce an operable system by modifying or
changing the control system. On other occasions new or larger vessels may be required.
The combined model can be used to assess the relative merits of various active slug
control schemes, such as the use of separator inlet throttling. The dynamic simulation
package can be employed to assist in optimizing platform topsides plant conditions and
assessing the effect on the process plant of changes in feed rate and operating conditions.
17.2
17.2.1 Introduction
The pioneering field work on steady-state slug flow was carried out by Professor Jim
Brill (Tulsa University) at Prudhoe Bay in 1978 and 1980. The resulting correlation for
slug length was derived using statistical regression techniques on gas and liquid flowrate,
and diameter.
In the mid 1980s BP began their own program of field data collection on lines in slug
flow. The Field Data section of the bibliography of BP Research reports on multiphase
flow lists the relevant titles. It quickly became evident that the original Brill equation
(and the modification due to Norris) was very conservative in predicting both mean and
maximum slug lengths over a variety of flowrates and diameters. This provided the
incentive to develop an improved method that sought to take into account a greater
number of the relevant variables than the original Brill method, and to do so using a
mechanistically based approach.
BP Exploration have been involved in the development and implementation of this
method. In addition, a number of papers, covering test rig and field data collection and
the development of part of the slug flow method, have been published by BP in the open
literature.
H-0806.35
17-14
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
17-15
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
slug, but at a slower rate than the pickup rate. The slug keeps growing in this way until it
reaches the end of the liquid film shed by the slug in front (with the film shed from a slug
being less deep than the equilibrium stratified liquid film). A stable length is then
maintained.
The fundamental parameters determining the average slug length are therefore the slug
formation frequency, the depth of the equilibrium stratified liquid film ahead of the slug,
the behavior of the liquid film shed from the rear of the slug, and the liquid holdup in the
slug body.
Of these four parameters the one with the least reliable prediction method, before the BP
R&D program, was the slug frequency. Correlations based on small diameter and/or a
limited range of fluid properties have been available for some time, but none performs
particularly well against the field data collected by BP since 1985.
What has now been developed is a relationship between a dimensionless slug frequency
and the equilibrium stratified liquid holdup (Hle) that would result from the prevailing gas
and liquid flowrates and physical properties if slugs were not being produced. The exact
nature of the relationship has not yet been derived mechanistically, and so a correlating
line is used while further work on the mathematics is being undertaken. However, this is
a big step further on than the simple regression techniques, which did not aim to describe
the physics behind the phenomena.
The dimensionless frequency has the form:
Fs D
Vm
where:
Fs = the actual slug frequency
Vg = in-situ gas velocity
Vl = in-situ liquid velocity
Hle, Vg and Vl are calculated from the equations (due to Taitel and Dukler) for
determining the depth of the equilibrium stratified liquid film given the gas and liquid
flowrates, pipeline geometry, and fluid properties.
Gas phase
H-0806.35
17-16
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
dP
Ag = wg S g t S i Ag g g sin
dx g
Liquid phase
dP
Al = wl S l t S i Al l g sin
dx l
where:
Al = A Hle
Ag = A (1 - Hle)
Sg = gas wall contact length
Sl = liquid wall contact length
t wg = gas shear stress to the pipe wall
t wl = liquid shear stress to the pipe wall
t i = interfacial shear stress between gas and liquid
At equilibrium
dP
dP
=
dx
dx
g
l
The two equations may then be solved for Hle.
The form of the slug frequency method that correlates the dimensionless frequency
against the equilibrium stratified liquid holdup, is given below.
l
Fs D
( 9. 91209* Hle' )
+ 24.721 e (0.20524*Hle')
= 24.729 + 0.00766 e
Vm
where:
D in m
Fs D
Fs D
(1 0.05 Vsg ) . D 0.3
=
Vm
Vm
H-0806.35
17-17
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
0.068
'
H le = Hle 1
Vsl
This relationship covers both published and in- house data from test rigs and
producing oilfields. The diameter range is from 1.5 to 24 inches, with fluids such as
air and water, nitrogen and diesel, and actual produced reservoir fluids involved in the
studies.
The interfacial friction factor, fi, used in the development of the correlation, was that due
to Andritsos and Hanratty i.e.
For Vsg 1.5 m/s
fi = fg
For Vsg 1.5 m/s
fi = fg [1 + (Vsg/1.5 - 1) 0.75]
Further work is underway to revise the slug frequency method by the inclusion of
additional test rig and field data, and by reviewing the selection of the interfacial friction
method.
17.2.4 Slug Holdup Method
Currently there is one widely recognized method for the prediction of liquid holdup in
slugs, due to Gregory (4). This is presented as a function of mixture velocity, shown
below:
1
(with Vm in ft/s)
H ls =
1 .39
1
+
(
V
/
28
.
4
)
This correlation gives reasonable performance with two-phase mixtures (e.g. air and
water, or dry crude and associated gas). However, when there is water in the crude the
slug liquid holdup tends to be much higher than predicted.
This does not affect the calculations of average slug volume (as the slug model is a mass
balance determined by the slug frequency, which is calculated independently of slug
holdup). However, calculations of slug length must always be considered in conjunction
with the predicted slug liquid holdup.
H-0806.35
17-18
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The slug holdup becomes an important parameter when considering pipework loads on
bends and supports (see relevant section of the Design Guidelines).
17.2.5 Use of the Creare Slug Model
Models of slug flow are essentially mass balances of gas and liquid flow through the
slug/bubble unit. The main difficulty is encountered in predicting the behavior of liquid
being shed from the back of the slug.
The principal workers in this area have been Dukler and Hubbard (5), who wrote a model
for slug flow in 1975. The model requires slug frequency and slug holdup as inputs. The
model was revised by Crowley of Creare Inc. during 1986 to improve the solution
algorithms.
The solution process involves first calculating the length of the ga s bubble/liquid film
section. Three variables are involved, and they are interdependent (therefore requiring
solution of two simultaneous equations) - the gas bubble length (Lb), the minimum film
velocity (Vc min ) and the minimum film holdup (Hf min ). The gas bubble length is
calculated as a function of the minimum film velocity. The detailed equations for all
inclinations are available from BP Research. For horizontal flow the solution sequence is
given below:
Vsf = velocity of slug front
Ls = mean length of slugs
Slug frequency (Fs ) and holdup (Hls) are obtained from the methods described in the
preceding sections.
Lb =
e
aVm
Vm
1 V
c min
Vsf = 1.3 Vm
(with Vm in m/s)
where:
D 2
e = l
(Vsf V m )
4
H-0806.35
17-19
1-Dec-00
DV
a = 0.046 l m
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
0 .2
D l
H ls (Vsf Vm )
Vc min = Vsf
H f min
From the above equations Lb can be expressed as a function of Hf min . The second
independent equation also expresses the gas bubble length as a function of the minimum
liquid film fraction:
Vsl
Vsf
V
Lb = sf
H f min + 0.3( Hls H f min)
F
F
1
.
3
(
H
H
)
s s
ls
f min
Vm
The two equations are then solved for Lb.
Finally the mean slug length is obtained from:
Ls = s Lb
Fs
17-20
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Work is currently underway on the prediction of which distribution (and the values of
parameters required to apply that distribution) is best applied under any given set of
conditions.
17.2.7 Development of the Maximum Possible Slug Length Method
Under some conditions it may be possible to have only one slug in a line. This could
result from stratified flow that could easily be disturbed by, say, a slugging well to form a
flowline slug, or from very low frequency slug flow, or a relatively short pipeline.
Having only one slug in a line is a special case that requires some additional analysis.
The mean slug length prediction described above assumes that each slug grows until it
reaches the film shed from the slug ahead. If the time period between slug generation is
significantly longer than the residence time of a slug in the line then the slug may not
reach the film shed by the slug ahead of it. The slug length will the n be dependent on the
additional factor of pipeline length.
The procedure for calculating the maximum possible slug length begins with the
calculation of equilibrium stratified liquid holdup (Hle), as described earlier. The
equations below are then used to calculate the maximum length.
Vs = velocity of liquid in slug body
Vbf = velocity of slug rear
Vlf = velocity of liquid in equilibrium stratified liquid film
L = pipeline length
Lsmax = length of maximum possible slug
V sf =
V s H ls Vlf H le
H ls H e
H-0806.35
17-21
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
17.3
The formulation of an improved method for slug liquid holdup prediction that takes
into account water cut as well as gas and liquid superficial velocities and line
diameter.
The broadening of the slug frequency method to cover inclined lines, and high
viscosity liquids.
The completion of the slug length distribution model that will include the effect of
gas and liquid flowrate on the distributions.
17.3.1 Introduction
A significant effort has been made by BP, and by other oil companies and research
establishments, to understand and characterize steady-state slug flow. Such a flow occurs
with steady input gas and liquid flowrates and in pipelines that are normally assumed to
be horizontal. In these cases slugs are formed from hydrodynamic waves, caused by a
gas flow over a stratified liquid film, which rise to bridge the pipe.
Even for non-horizontal lines, or lines that change inclination, there is available to BP a
qualitative assessment of the difference in behavior from a straight horizontal pipe, at
flowrates that would produce slug flow in the horizontal pipe.
A second classification of slug formation is required for systems with a low liquid
loading and an uneven pipeline topography. If the pipeline were horizontal then the
liquid flowrate would not normally be sufficient for slug flow to occur. However, if there
is a dip at any point in the line it may be possible for liquid to accumulate until there is a
sufficient quantity to produce a slug out of the end of the upward sloping line leading
away from the dip.
This section addresses that possibility. It is based on work done largely for the Miller gas
export line. This line normally runs in dense phase flow. However, in a depressurization
situation liquid will drop out. A prediction of possible slug sizes arriving at the
downstream end of the line was required to enable an assessment of slugcatcher size to be
made.
H-0806.35
17-22
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Critical gas velocity: the gas velocity above which all liquid is produced from the
dip.
Maximum stable liquid accumulation: the maximum volume of liquid that can be
retained in a pipeline dip at a given gas superficial velocity (i.e. no liquid production
out of the end of the upward sloping pipeline segment).
Maximum random slug size: the largest liquid slug volume likely to be produced
from a dip under steady-state operation.
= wg S g l S l
dP
Ag
dx g
wg S i l S l
Ag g
Ai i
g sin( )
At equilibrium
H-0806.35
17-23
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
dP
dP
dx = dx
g
l
For given fluid properties and pipe characteristics, the right hand side of the above
equation is dependent on only the gas velocity and film depth.
The solution requirement is a gas velocity (Vgs crit ) such that, at any liquid film depth in
the upward sloping line downstream of the dip, the film flow direction is co-current with
the gas. For the 2- inch air-water test rig the predicted value of Vgscrit corresponded
closely to the observations.
One of the key parameters required during the calculation procedure is the gas-liquid
interfacial friction factor. This variable has an element of uncertainty in its predic tion.
Numerous efforts at a better definition have been, and are being, made.
Maximum stable liquid accumulation
The magnitude of this quantity is dependent on the prevailing gas velocity, as well as the
geometry of the pipeline. The calculation procedure is based round the growth and decay
of slugs in the uphill section of line. The largest amount of liquid contained in a dip
occurs when the uphill section is in slug flow, but with the slugs decaying just before the
end of the section.
If the theoretical average slug decay rate over the uphill section length is equal to, or
greater than, the average slug growth rate over the same section, then any slugs formed
will decay by the section end. The total volume of liquid in the section will pass through
each slug in this limiting case. Therefore, assuming that the liquid holdup in the slug is
constant along the line, and that the slug rear velocity may be approximated by a steadystate correlation, the maximum liquid accumulation (Q eqm ) may be calculated as:
Qeqm =
H-0806.35
( 0.16Vm + 0.59)
A H ls L p
(1.16Vm + 0.59))
17-24
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Hls may be evaluated using a steady-state correlation based on gas and liquid superficial
velocities, A and Lp are the pipe section cross-sectional area and length of the uphill
section respectively. This equation is valid for gas superficial velocities less than Vgs crit .
A rapid increase in gas velocity or the passage of a pig through the dip has the potential
to sweep out the bulk of this maximum liquid accumulation.
Slug frequency
Unlike the case described above, real flowlines generally have a liquid inflow into the dip
from an upstream source. In this situation a balance will be set up in which liquid will be
produced from the end of the uphill section of pipeline at the same rate (on average) as
the liquid inflow into the dip. However, the liquid will not always be produced steadily.
Sometimes it will be produced intermittently in the form of slugs. If this is the case it is
necessary to calculate the slug formation frequency to be able to predict the volume of
the slugs leaving the uphill section.
Slugs are formed at or just after the point of minimum pipeline elevation from the liquid
film collected there as a result of both liquid inflow from the upstream source and the
return of liquid shed from preceding slugs. Calculation of the slug frequency is
dependent on these two liquid flowrates, the gas flowrate, and the depth of liquid at the
pipeline low point required before slugs will form.
The assumptions currently made are that the liquid inflow from upstream is constant, and
that the surface of the liquid accumulation in the dip is horizontal. However, it will be
possible to develop the method to take into account cases when these assumptions do not
hold.
The liquid flowrate draining back into the dip from a previously formed slug is calculated
from a mass and momentum balance on the liquid film shed from the back of a slug.
This flow rate is zero for a short period after slug formation, and then increases to a
steady value as the distance of the back of the slug from the dip increases.
Slug formation will, on average, occur when the depth of liquid in the low point of the
dip exceeds a certain critical value (dependent on the gas flowrate). This critical depth is
calculated using the procedure developed by Taitel and Dukler for predicting the onset of
slug flow from a stratified film.
H-0806.35
17-25
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Slug frequency is then determined by integrating the flowrate into the dip over time,
converting that volume to a liquid depth, and stopping the procedure when the critical
liquid depth is reached. The slug formation frequency is the inverse of the time required
to reach the critical depth.
Slug lengths leaving uphill section
The volume of slugs persisting to, and leaving the end of, the uphill section will, on
average, equal the volume of liquid entering the dip over the time period between the
formation of slugs.
It is, however, important to note that a real system has a degree of fluctuation about these
average values. The length of slugs leaving the dip will be distributed about the mean
value. A succession of short slugs would mean an increasing excess of liquid over the
maximum stable liquid accumulation. A slug much longer than the average could then
result, which decreases the liquid inventory in the system back down to the maximum
stable accumulation.
A factor of 10 times the average is recommended as the safety margin in estimating the
largest slug likely to be produced at the prevailing gas and liquid flowrates.
Complicated topographies
The above discussion has centered on a dip with a steady inflow of liquid. In a real line it
is possible that there will be several hills and dips, with unsteady liquid production from
one dip to the next. The methods described above may be used to track the liquid
movement through the system. However, the dependence of the output on the variation
in slug length must be emphasized.
17.4
Severe Slugging
17.4.1 Introduction
The possibility of significant surging occurring at low flowrates through a pipeline
ending in a riser was first identified in the early 1980s. Work at Tulsa University by
Schmidt, and in the field by Yocum, had shown that if the pipeline to the base of the riser
was inclined downwards, and if the flowrates were low enough, then there could be a
liquid accumulation at the base of the riser that would result in the severe slugging cycle
described in the main body of the text.
H-0806.35
17-26
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
At about the same time BP were planning the development of the SE Forties reservoir, by
running flowlines from above the reservoir (originally from subsea templates, and finally
from a minimum facilities platform) back to the existing Forties Alpha platform. These
schemes involved flowlines sloping downward (about 0.1) to the base of a 120 meter
high riser. Concern was expressed about the possibility of riser induced severe slugging,
which led to experimental and theoretical investigations by BP Engineering and BP
Research. The results of these investigations, and subsequent experience with the SE
Forties flowlines, provide the basis for this work on severe slugging. The detailed reports
covering the work are listed under `Severe Slugging in the bibliography of BP
multiphase flow reports.
17.4.2 Description of Severe Slugging
The four basic stages of severe slugging have already been described in the text. They
are:
Slug Generation
Slug Production
Bubble Penetration
Gas Blowdown
H-0806.35
17-27
1-Dec-00
L = pipeline length
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(m)
H-0806.35
17-28
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
dP
= ( l g ) g sin
dt
(1)
dP d ( nM )
=
dt
dt
(2)
RT
M Vg
Vg = L (1-HL)A
(3)
d (nM )
= Vsg g A
dt
(4)
dh
= Vsl
dt
(5)
Substituting (3) and (4) into (2), and then (2) and (5) into (1), and re- arranging, gives the
equation quoted in the text, given that:
Psep =
g RT
M
and sin = 1
Vsg L(1 H l )( l g ) g
=
Vsl
Psep
(6)
If this equation shows LHS RHS then severe slugging will occur if the pipeline slopes
downwards to the riser, and if the flow in the pipeline is predicted to be stratified at the
prevailing in-situ superficial gas and liquid velocities.
This compared well with the observed boundary on the test rig, and also gave good
predictions of cycle times (stages (1) to (2)) when equation (1) was integrated over the
height of the riser.
The bubble penetration stage may also be modeled simply. If LHS < RHS in equation (6)
then there will be liquid backed up the flowline (i.e. Ls > 0), as well as a full riser (h = H).
Once the liquid column in the riser has reached the top of the riser (maximum liquid
head at the base of the riser) the gas inflow at the start of the pipeline is no longer
required to boost the pipeline gas pressure. The gas flow therefore begins to push the
accumulated liquid along the flowline at a velocity that may be calculated from the inlet
gas mass flowrate, the maximum pipeline pressure, and the liquid film hold- up.
Psep
dLs
= Vsg
dt
( Psep + l g H )
H-0806.35
1
(1 H L )
17-29
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The rate of liquid production from the top of the riser at this stage is simply:
= Vsl +
dLs
(1 H L )
dt
Once the bubble front reaches the base of the riser there begins a period in which the
liquid column in the riser is decreased in length, and is accelerated by the ever- increasing
imbalance between the upstream gas pressure (which remains relatively high) and the
decreasing liquid head. The acceleration of the liquid column in the riser is given by:
=
g ( H h)
h
which obviously approaches infinity as the bottom of the liquid column reaches the top of
the riser. Therefore there is a requirement to model downstream pipework and
restrictions, which determine the upper limit of the liquid production rate.
An empirical approach was used during the test rig studies to estimate the liquid left in
the riser, after bubble penetration and gas blowdown, at the time of bridging. This liquid
would then fall back to the bottom of the riser to produce a liquid column of a height that
is used as the starting point in the integration of:
dh
dt
H-0806.35
17-30
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
17-31
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Test rig studies were carried out on riser-base gas injection after the work described
above on the severe slugging cycle. The principle was demonstrated successfully. Even
gas injection rates that are not sufficient to lift liquid continually out of the riser are of
benefit as the gas reduces the maximum head achievable in the riser, therefore reducing
the cycle time and severity of the severe slugging cycle. The amount of gas injection
needed to prevent severe slugging is such that the combined injected and produced gas
flowrate up the riser must put the riser into the churn flow regime at the given liquid
production rate.
Studies were also carried out to optimize the design of the gas injection tee, to minimize
erosion. The final design comprised a jacket around the riser into which the injection gas
was directed. The gas then flowed into the riser through eight holes spaced equally
around the riser. The holes were at the bottom of the jacketed length of riser.
Thirdly, gas injection into the start of the pipeline may be used to move the pipeline out
of the severe slugging regime, by increasing the ratio of Vsg to Vsl above the critical value
defined in equation (6). This either requires surplus gas at the pipeline start, or the
addition of a gas line out from the pipeline end.
Choking
A fourth method is to install a control valve on the top of the riser. On shutting this valve
a position is reached whereby the frictional pressure drop across the valve acts to stabilize
the gas- liquid flow up the riser. Any acceleration of liquid up the riser due to a decrease
in liquid head in the riser (caused, say, by a gas bubble entering the base of the riser), is
counteracted by the increase in frictional pressure drop across the valve as the liquid
accelerates. The penalty of this way of eliminating severe slugging is that the pressure
drop across the valve will be of the order of a riser height of liquid, thus imposing a
significant extra back-pressure on the system at all times.
A secondary effect of the valve- induced back-pressure, as well as stabilizing the riser,
may be that the flow regime in the pipeline section is moved out of stratified flow
towards bubble flow. This latter effect, if it was predicted to be sufficient to prevent
severe slugging, could also be achieved solely by raising the separator pressure.
H-0806.35
17-32
1-Dec-00
17.5
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
17-33
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
at the start of the downhill section immediately after other slugs. i.e. slugs will
probably shed more than we predict
5. In determining pigged slug volume, simulation software packages may have different
options. The BP in-house software uses Beggs and Brill for upward sections, and
Mechan 92 for horizontal and downward. The consistency of this has yet to be
verified.
6. Despite 5, we still recommend that the design slug volumes from the logic tree be
compared with the thermal-hydraulic simulation pigged slug volume.
7. Whenever slug volumes are quoted they require a slug length and a slug holdup.
These values are the thermal- hydraulic simulation predictions. Slug lengths should
be used in the assessment of each line section until the final delivery into a vessel,
when length should be converted to volume.
8. All slug vo lumes at line end are divided by 1.2 to take into account shedding from the
back of the slug as it enters the vessel.
H-0806.35
17-34
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Yes
No
End
Is La mean / Lb mean
~Ls 1000 / Lb 1000 ?
No
Yes
No
Yes
H-0806.35
17-35
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
No
Yes
Consider non-slugging
section s starting from the
upstream
Yes
No
*** Shed the slug
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No slugs in
vessel
No
Assume line starts at end of
this section and move
downstream to analyze next
section
No
Yes
H-0806.35
17-36
1-Dec-00
17.6
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Inhibitor application
The classic analysis of pigging was developed by Baker and McDonald in 1959. They
identified five zones in a pipeline undergoing pigging:
Pig itself
H-0806.35
17-37
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
To estimate the slug volume and transit time by hand, the designer can use the following
method. The pig and the slug in front of it move at a velocity that is equal to the gas
velocity behind the pig. For a first approximation, this velocity can be assumed to be
equal to the mixture velocity. The transit time of the pig would therefore be:
ttrans = Lf / Vm avg
where ttrans = Transit time for the pig, s
Lf = Pipeline length, ft
Vm avg = Average mixture velocity, ft/s
When the slug exits the line, the volume of liquid ahead of the pig is equal to the liquid
holdup in the line minus the amount of leakage past the pig minus the amount of liquid
produced while the pig is traversing the pipeline or:
Qslug= (Hl Ap Lf) (1 - fleak) - Vsl Ap ttrans
where Qslug = Volume of liquid ahead of the pig, ft3
Hl = Average liquid holdup in the pipe
H-0806.35
17-38
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Qslug
A p Vm avg
where t slug = Time during which the slug enters the slug catcher, s
The liquid rate while the slug enters the slug catcher is:
Qslug = Vm avg Ap
where Qslug = Liquid rate into slug catcher when slug is exiting, ft3 /s
The simplified analysis shown above doesnt account for many effects that occur during
pigging, such as pig acceleration and deceleration, aeration of the liquid slug, etc., but it
gives a ball-park estimate of the flows and volumes needed for the slug catcher design.
17.6.2 Startup and Blowdown Slugs
When a pipeline is shut down, the liquid will drain to the low points in the line. When
the line is restarted, this liquid may exit the line in the form of slugs. To determine
whether slugging will occur, and to estimate the magnitude of the slugs, a transient
simulator must be used.
If the pipeline is depressured at shutdown, slugs may also form, due to high gas velocities
during the blowdown period. Transient simulation is needed to model these slugs.
17.6.3 Rate Change Slugs
When the flowrate is increased, the liquid holdup in the line decreases. This change in
holdup can either exit the line as a steady flow with increased liquid production, or it can
come out in the form of a slug, depending on the flowrate change.
Please note that the rate change slugs can occur in gas/condensate lines when the rates are
increased. The line may be in a steady flow pattern, such as stratified flow, at both the
H-0806.35
17-39
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
initial and final flowrates but will slug during the transition period until the line reequilibrates at the higher rate.
As with startup slugs, it is impossible to predict whether slugs will occur when rates are
changed using steady state or hand methods. The line must be dynamically simulated
using a transient flow program.
17.6.4 Downstream Equipment Design for Slug Flow
The design of slug-catchers, separators, and control systems downstream of pipelines
must comprehend the presence and severity of slug flow. Estimates of parameters such
as slug volumes, liquid and gas rates exiting the pipeline as a function of time, etc. must
be factored into the design of this equipment. These variables should be calculated for
the design operation and for a series of off-design cases: turndown rates, pigging,
shutdown and startup, rate changes, etc.
As mentioned, transient modeling gives the best estimates of slug flow behavior. Some
of the transient simulators also allow the user to simulate separators and control systems
as part of the run, allowing the user to fine tune the design.
Off-design cases should be estimated as well as the design point. In general, the size of
slug catching equipment for gas-condensate pipelines will be governed by pigging
considerations. For oil dominated systems, the size of the slug catcher is usually
governed by the maximum slug length due to either hydrodynamic or terrain slugs.
Because slug catching equipment can be a substantial cost item, it is possible to minimize
the cost of the equipment by considering alternative operating scenarios. Some of these
include:
a) Does the line need to be pigged routinely or is pigging only needed for maintenance?
If pigging is a maintenance item done once per year, it is possible to run the pig at a
rate low enough to keep a small slug catcher from overflowing. It is also possible to
send the liquid from the slug catcher to low pressure separation at high rates for short
periods, if the occurrence of pigging is infrequent. This, too, minimizes the high
pressure slug catcher sizing.
b) Pigging of the line after steady state conditions are reached may result in a very large
slug catcher. If a high pigging frequency is chosen, so that the line never achieves
steady state operation, the slug catcher size can be minimized.
H-0806.35
17-40
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
c) It is possible to design the line for frequent pigging at low rates and steady state
operation at higher rates, thereby minimizing slug catcher size while eliminating the
need for frequent pigging when the rate is high.
d) If pigging isnt necessary for a gas-condensate line, the sizing of the slug catcher
usually becomes dependent on rate changes. Limiting the turndown on the line and
limiting the amount that the rate is cha nged at one time can be beneficial in
minimizing slug catcher sizes.
e) The use of parallel pipelines should be considered as a way of limiting the turndown
for a line. When rates are low, all the production can be fed to one of the lines,
thereby keeping ve locities high, minimizing liquid holdup.
f) If terrain slugging is shown to be a problem, there are several remedial steps which
have been employed to decrease the severity of the slugging or eliminate it
completely. One approach would be to reroute the pipeline to reduce or eliminate
dips in the pipeline profile. Two other methods are: choking of the flow at the tope of
the riser; and gas lifting the riser.
g) Because the slug length for hydrodynamic slug flow is a function of the diameter of
the line, the use of parallel pipelines instead of one pipeline can decrease the slug
length and volume going to the slug catcher/separator.
h) The use of multiphase pumps or subsea separators at well clusters can decrease slug
catcher sizes significantly.
i) Pigs have been developed with a variety of proprietary internals that limit the velocity
at which the pig moves through the pipeline. It may be possible to limit the slug
catcher size by restricting the pig velocity, which, in turn, limits the rate of liquid
exiting the line during the pigging operation.
17.7
Slugging Summary
H-0806.35
The Brill method is very inaccurate. It gives poor predictions for almost every data
set that was not included in the original correlation.
17-41
1-Dec-00
17.8
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Rule of thumb (based on limited amount of data available): the maximum slug length
is approximately 6 times the mean slug.
If a correlation based model is used for slug length prediction, the Hill & Wood
model is probably the best available method.
Pipelines, which are in the terrain slugging regime, will usually be identified by the
steady state simulator as being in stratified flow. If no further analysis is done, the
line may be designed in the belief that it is in a steady flow regime. On startup, the
line may experience slugs that may be thousands of feet long..
There are alternative operating scenarios which can be considered to minimize slug
catcher size
References
"Two-Phase Flow in Pipes" Course Notes by J.P. Brill and H.D. Beggs
The Multiphase flow Database "Comparison of Multiphase Correlations with Pipeline
Data" Harwell (23-3-91).
Analysis of Two-Phase Tests in Large Diameter Flow Lines in Prudhoe Bay Field, Brill,
J P et al, SPEJ June 1981, 363-378
A Model for Predicting Flow Regime Transitions in Horizontal and Near-Horizontal GasLiquid Flow, Taitel, Y, and Dukler, A E, AIChEJ, 22, 47-55, 1976.
Correlation of the Liquid Volume Fraction in the Slug for Horizontal Gas-Liquid Slug
Flow, Gregory, G A, et al, Int J Multiphase Flow, 4, 33-39, 1978.
A Model for Gas-Liquid Slug Flow in Horizontal and Near Horizontal Tubes, Dukler, A
E, and Hubbard, M G, Ind Eng Chem Fundam, 14, 4, 337-346, 1975.
State of the Art Report on Multiphase Methods for Oil and Gas Pipelines, Crowley, C J,
Creare Report TN-409 to AGA, 1986.
Slug Flow - Occurrence, Consequences and Prediction, Hill, T J, and Wood, D G, SPE
27960, 1994.
H-0806.35
17-42
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Norris, L., Correlation of Prudhoe Bay Liquid Slug Lengths and Hold- up including 1981
large diameter Flowline Tests, Exxon Production Research Co., 1982
Scott, S.L., Shoham, O., Brill, J.P., Prediction of slug length in horizontal, large diameter
pipes. SPE Production Engineering, August, 1989, P.335.
McNulty, J.G. and Fairhurst, C.P., Transporting Multi-phase flow requires modeling
procedure. Offshore, August 1988, P.26.
Gregory, G.A., and Scott, D.S., Correlation of Liquid Slug Velocity and Frequency in
Horizontal Concurrent Gas-Liquid Slug Flow, AIChE J., 15(6), 933-935, (1969)
Marcano, R., Slug Characteristics for two-phase horizontal flow. University of Tulsa,
TUFFP ADVISORY BOARD MEETING, Tulsa, May 1996.
Gregory, G.A., et al, Correlation of Liquid Volume Fraction in the Slufg for Horizontal
Gas-Liquid Slug Flow, Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 4,33-39, (1978)
Yang, J., Investigation of Downward Intermittent Flow in Inclined Pipes, University of
Tulsa, TUFFP Advisory Board Meeting, Tulsa, November, 1995.
Nicklin, D.J. et al, Two-phase Flow in Vertical Tubes, Trans. Inst. Chem. Eng.,
40,61,(1962)
Wood, D., The Effect of Inclination on Flow Regime Boundaries and Slug Flow
Characteristics, Trans. ASME, J. Energy Resources Technology, 111, 181, (1989)
Molyneux, P.D., The Measurement of Multiphase Flow in a Pipe Dip and Comparisons
of the Results with PLAC Predictions, GRC report R1360, April 1996,
Boe, A., Severe Slugging Characteristics, NTH, Trondheim, Norway, 1981
Pots, B.F.M, et al, Severe Slug Flow in Offshore Flowline/Riser Systems, SPE
Production Engineering, Nove mber 1987.
Taitel, Y., et al, Modelling Flow Pattern Transitions for steady upward Gas-Liquid Flow
in Vertical Tubes, AIChE J. 26(3), 345-354,(1980)
Hollenberg, J.F., et al, A Method to Suppress Severe Slugging in Flow Line Riser
Systems, 7th International Conference on Multi-phase Production, Cannes, June 1995.
H-0806.35
17-43
1-Dec-00
18.0
SLUGCATCHER DESIGN
18.1
Introduction
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
and deliver an even supply of gas and liquid to the rest of the production facilities,
minimizing process and operation upsets.
18.2.3.2 Phase Separation
Another main function of the slug catcher is to provide a means for separating
multiphase production fluids into separate gas and liquid streams in order to
reduce liquid carryover in the gas stream and gas re-entrainment in the liquid
stream. When a slug catcher is provided upstream of a production separator, the
slug catcher is designed primarily for process stabilization. Gas/liquid separation
also occurs, but the efficiency of separation is usually not sufficient to meet oil
and gas product specifications. The gas stream may need additional treating to
remove entrained liquids prior to treating, compression, or flaring. The liquid
may need additional treating for gas/oil/water separation and crude stabilization.
In some cases, the gas and liquid streams from the slug catcher are recombined
prior to further processing.
When a separate slug catcher is not provided, the production separator is designed
for both process stabilization and efficient gas/liquid (two-phase) separation.
Production separators, which also function as slug catchers, are generally not
designed for gas/oil/water (three-phase) separation. This is because the level
surges due to slugging make it difficult to control the oil/water interface. Sizing
slug catchers for oil/water separation is beyond the scope of this guide.
18.2.3.3 Storage
Slugs due to pigging can often be significantly larger than terrain-induced slugs or
slugs formed while operating in the slug-flow regime, particularly for
gas/condensate systems with long flow lines or pipelines. In these situations, the
condensate processing and handling systems may not be sized to quickly process
the large slug volume that results from pigging. The slug catcher then acts as a
storage vessel to hold the condensate until it can gradually be metered into the
process or transported to another location.
18.2.4 Slug Catcher Locations
Slug catchers are located on both offshore and onshore facilities. The slug catcher
location influences the type of slug catcher selected.
H-0806.35
18-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
18.2.4.1 Offshore
Slug catchers are located on offshore production facilities to handle slugs from
subsea well flow lines or pipelines from satellite production facilities. Slug
catchers have typically been located on the deck with the topsides facilities.
Other configurations may be evaluated in order to reduce topsides weight and
space. For example, a slug catcher may be installed in a spare conductor slot or
subsea at the base of the platform. If located subsea, the external pressure due to
water depth must be considered in the slug catcher design. Alternative methods
for dealing with slugging in offshore production systems such as compact slug
catchers and slug mitigation devices are currently being researched in an effort to
reduce weight, space, and costs.
18.2.4.2 Onshore
Onshore slug catchers handle slugs from subsea or land flow lines and pipelines.
Typically, onshore slug catchers have fewer weight and space restrictions than
those located offshore.
H-0806.35
18-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
18.3
H-0806.35
18-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The operating pressure of the vessel is typically controlled with a pressure control
valve located on the gas outlet line. The liquid level is typically controlled with a
level control valve on the liquid outlet line. Sometimes an emergency liquid
dump valve or pump is provided to rapidly dispose of the accumulated liquid
when it cannot be processed in the downstream liquid handling facilities.
A horizontal pressure vessel is often used when efficient phase separation is a
functional requirement of the slug catcher. A horizontal vessel usually has a
smaller diameter than a vertical vessel for a given gas capacity, but takes up more
space. A horizontal vessel is usually more economical when a large liquid storage
capacity is required.
18.3.2 Vertical Pressure Vessel
A typical vertical pressure vessel slug catcher is shown in Figure 18.3-2. The
design and operation are similar to that of a horizontal pressure vessel. Compared
to a horizontal vessel, a vertical vessel has less tendency to re-vaporize the liquid
into the gas phase because of a smaller gas/liquid surface area and a greater
vertical distance between the liquid level and the gas outlet. Level control is often
easier since there is more vertical height per liquid volume unit, allowing more
response time for the level instrumentation.
18.3.3 Double or Multiple Horizontal Pressure Vessel
The double horizontal pressure vessel configuration consists of one horizontal
vessel mounted on top of a second horizontal vessel. Multiple configurations may
include three or more stacked horizontal vessels. Gas/liquid separation occurs in
the upper vessel; the lower vessel provides volume for liquid residence time and
storage. Piping can be used in place of pressure vessels for appropriate diameters.
Figure 18.3-3 illustrates a multiple horizontal slug catcher installed by Texaco in
a subsea application. The slug catcher is located at the base of the Tartan
Platform, where it handles multiphase production fluid from the Highlander field.
The liquid from the slug catcher is routed to a dummy well from which it is
pumped to the Tartan production separator facilities. The gas is transported to the
topsides through the outer annulus of the dummy well.
18.3.4 Finger
The finger slug catcher (also known as a harp or multi-pipe) is a manifold of
parallel pipes (also called bottles) installed at an incline. A few typical
H-0806.35
18-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
configurations are discussed in this guide; many variations are in operation. The
slug catcher illustrated in Figure 18.3-4 contains an inlet section for gas/liquid
separation and a set of parallel pipes for liquid storage. The slug flows through a
flow splitter into an inlet header, then proceeds through downcomers into the
sloping pipe segments. The slug displaces gas in the pipes up into the risers and
out through the gas outlet header. The liquids are typically routed through a
liquid header to a production separator. In the slug catcher illustrated in Figure
18.3-5, a specialized tee is used for inlet gas/liquid separation; the liquid
continues through the tee straight run and the gas flows through the branch. The
slug catcher shown in Figure 18.3-6 employs different slopes for the separation
section and storage section, as well as multiple gas headers.
Even fluid flow distribution into the pipe segments is a concern for this type of
slug catcher. Excessive liquid carryover in the gas may occur if some of the pipe
segments are overloaded with liquid. In addition, high gas velocity may make the
liquid/gas interface unstable, again resulting in excessive liquid carryover. This
tendency is influenced by the inclination angle of the pipe segments.
A typical application for finger slug catchers is handling slugs from subsea
pipelines or flow lines routed to shore. It is often used when large slugs (such as
those from pigging operations) are expected, particularly in gas/condensate
systems for both onshore and offshore pipelines. In this situation it may not be
feasible to fabricate, transport, and install a pressure vessel large enough to handle
the expected slug volume. The thickness of the walls for a pressure vessel may be
excessive, making a finger-type slug catcher the only feasible alternative. Piping
segments are simpler to fabricate, transport, and install, and can be expanded
more easily if additional slug capacity is needed.
Because the finger slug catcher takes up a lot of plot area, it generally is not
suitable for offshore platforms. Compact versions of the finger slug catcher may
be installed subsea, upstream of the platform riser. Finger slug catchers installed
onshore are typically buried, with the headers above grade and the bottles below
grade.
18.3.5 Pipe Loop
A pipe loop slug catcher consists of a length of pipe either in parallel with the
main pipeline (Figure 18.3-7) or as an extension of the pipeline, which then loops
H-0806.35
18-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
back (Figure 18.3-8). The pipe loop slug catcher is typically the same diameter as
the pipeline.
The pipe loop slug catcher is used for slugs due to pigging in gas/condensate
pipelines. Valves are used to divert the pigged slug into the pipe loop, which
stores the slug until it is disposed of at a controlled rate. It is typical to also install
some sort of secondary vessel-type slug catcher to handle slugs that may occur
during non-pigging operations, when the pipe loop slug catcher is bypassed.
The amount of pipe volumetric capacity for a pipe loop slug catcher is typically
greater than that for a finger slug catcher. The finger slug catcher also acts as a
separator, so gas coming in with the slug is continuously leaving the slug catcher.
The pipe loop slug catcher stores both the liquid slug and the gas trapped with the
slug, so additional volume for the accumulated gas is required.
18.3.6 Vertical Caisson
Vertical caisson slug catchers are located in spare conductor slots on an offshore
platform (see Figure 18.3-9). The fluid enters the slug catcher at the inlet section,
located at seabed level. Phase separation occurs in the annulus. The liquid drops
to the base of the slug catcher, located below the seabed. An electric submersible
pump is used to transport the fluid up the central tubing to the platform facilities.
The gas flows up the annulus to the platform facilities.
The fluid capacity of the vertical caisson slug catcher is limited by the diameter of
the caisson and the depth to which it can be installed. Phase separation is a key
function of the vertical caisson separator, since gas entrainment in the liquid
stream can negatively affect the performance of the electric submersible pump.
18.3.7 Combinations
The different types of slug catchers can be combined in other configurations. For
example, Chevrons Gaviota Gas Plant in California uses both vertical and
horizontal pressure vessels for slug handling (Figure 18.3-10). Gas/condensate
from a subsea pipeline first enters a large vertical intake separator, which
separates the gas and liquid phases. The liquid drains from the intake separator
into two large horizontal condensate storage vessels that hold the condensate as it
is metered to the condensate stabilizer system.
H-0806.35
18-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The ISOS system (Kaasa, 1990) consists of a vertical tee segment in a subsea
pipeline, which acts as both a separator and a gas riser, delivering the gas
phase to the platform separately from the liquid, which flows through the
conventional riser in a bubble flow regime.
mitigate slugs that form in the platform riser and is only suitable when the
pipeline operates in the stratified flow regime, to allow for easier separation of
gas in the tee. Experimental investigations of two-phase slug flow splitting
using tees have also been conducted at the University of Tulsa (Arirachakaran,
1990).
H-0806.35
18-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Choking or controlling the flow at the top of the riser pipe (Schmidt, 1979;
van Blylandtlaan, 1990) has been shown to eliminate slugging over a limited
range of conditions in experimental tests, by changing the flow regime of the
fluid to bubble flow.
The slug trap (Carstensen, 1989) consists of a vortex separating device in the
flow line, and a buffer tank, which holds the separated liquid until it flows
back into the flow line.
A downward inclined pipe before the inlet to the production facility can be
used to achieve stratified flow.
18.3.9 Comparison of Slug Catcher Types
All of the slug catcher types shown in the previous sections have application
areas, but none of them is the best selection for all systems. The best selection
depends on several factors, primarily the slug catcher capacity and the slug
catcher location.
If the slug catcher were to be installed on the platform topsides for offshore
applications, a horizontal or vertical separator type slug catcher would be the
appropriate choice. The other slug catcher types would require too much space.
For offshore installations, however, it may be more advantageous to install a slug
catcher that does not have the bulk of the storage capacity on the platform
topsides. Slug catchers such as the Highlander multiple separator, a pipe loop, or
a Texas Eastern separator/pipe loop may be attractive options.
For onshore applications, separators, finger slug catchers, pipe loops and the
Texas Eastern separator/pipe loop merit consideration.
Some factors to consider when selecting the proper type of slug catcher are:
H-0806.35
18-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
number of suppliers and raising the cost of the vessel. For a vertical vessel on
offshore platforms, the height of the vessel may be a problem. The wet
weight of the separator may be excessive for offshore slug catchers. When
these factors are considered, the maximum practical slug catcher capacity for
a separator type slug catcher is about 1,000 barrels.
Pipe loop and Texas Eastern design - Both of these units usually run their
storage pipeline alongside the incoming gathering line. As a result, the plot
area requirements are much less than the finger slug catcher. There is no
limitation on the capacity of the slug catcher for either of these designs. The
Texas Eastern design has several sequenced valves, and is a much more
elaborate design than the other slug catcher types. As a result, it would
probably require more maintenance and have more operating problems than
the simpler designs.
H-0806.35
18-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Slug catcher sizing optimization - Frequently, the initial design of the pipeline
and the slug catcher will result in a slug catcher size that is inordinately large.
As a result, the slug catcher size and cost may make a development option
look infeasible. There are alternative operations that can be considered to
reduce the slug catcher size. Some of these methods are frequent pigging,
limited operating ranges, use of parallel lines, etc.
H-0806.35
18-12
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-14
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-15
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-16
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-17
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-18
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-19
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-20
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-21
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-22
1-Dec-00
18.4
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-23
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
devices also help to reduce foaming, a frothy mixture of liquid drops and gas
bubbles. Typical internals used for turbulence flow are shown in Figure 18.4-2.
18.4.3 Settling Aids
Liquid droplets must settle out of the gas stream into the liquid pool before
reaching the vessel exit. Plates installed in the flow path provide a surface such
that falling liquid droplets will impinge on the device, and then flow downward
along the surface into the liquid pool. The same devices can often be used for
both turbulence control and settling aids.
Wire mesh pads and vane packs are other devices used to separate liquid droplets
from gas. In addition to providing an impingement surface, they also promote
coalescence of smaller drops into larger ones, which are more likely to drop into
the liquid pool. They are usually installed before the gas exit nozzle. Alternatives
to mesh pads such as plates or tubes should be used to minimize the likelihood of
plugging if the crude is viscous or has the tendency to form paraffins.
Typical internals used for settling aids are shown in Figure 18.4-3.
18.4.4 Vortex Breaking
Vortex breakers are used to prevent vortexing of liquids as they exit the separator.
During vortexing, gas previously separated from the liquid gets pulled back into
the liquid due to the localized low pressure formed in the center of the vortex.
Slotted pipes or plates installed over the liquid outlet nozzle can minimize the
formation of vortexes. Typical vortex breakers are illustrated in Figure 18.4-4.
H-0806.35
18-24
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-25
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-26
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-27
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-28
1-Dec-00
18.5
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
18-29
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
such as maximum allowable gas velocity and liquid retention time are strongly
influenced by operating pressure and/or temperature.
18.6
H-0806.35
18-30
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
1-2
2-5
In general, warm fluids (greater than 100 F) require less retention time than cold
fluids. Viscous crudes and foamy crudes may require a longer retention time than
the times listed above.
18.6.4 Controllable Volume
Some slug catchers are operated empty; that is, no liquid is contained in the slug
catcher during steady state operations. Slug catchers may also be operated such
that a liquid level is always present in the slug catcher. In this case, the slug
catcher needs to provide a liquid level sufficient for level control. In either case,
some system of level control, alarms, and shutdowns is typically provided.
If the function of the slug catcher is primarily process stabilization, the normal
liquid level is usually set low to provide maximum available capacity for the slug
surge volume. (However, the liquid level should be high enough to prevent gas
from exiting the vessel through the liquid outlet for the case where some liquid
H-0806.35
18-31
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
level is maintained in the slug catcher). The liquid retention time only needs to be
sufficient to provide enough time for level instrumentation response during
normal flow rate operation. Additional retention time for gas/liquid separation is
provided in downstream production separator systems.
If the function of the slug catcher is to provide gas/liquid separation in addition to
process stabilization, the normal liquid level is usually set higher to provide the
liquid retention time required for separation. Since surge volume for slugs also
must be provided, the vessel needs to be larger if phase separation is required.
In general, the following liquid levels should be established:
High liquid level during slugging conditions: This is the operating level
reached when a slug enters the vessel, before the control system has a chance
to react to reduce the level back down to the normal liquid level. Since
slugging is an expected part of the operation of a slug catcher, this liquid level
should be taken into account when sizing the gas handling portion of the slug
catcher. That is, there still should be sufficient space for removing entrained
liquids from the gas and sufficient clearance between the liquid level and
internals such as demister pads in the gas outlet section.
High level alarm: The high level alarm should be located at a position which
allows the operator sufficient time to take appropriate action prior to a high
level shutdown. Retention time between the high level alarm and high level
shutdown is typically 1 to 2 minutes based on maximum design flow rate.
High level shutdown: High liquid level shutdown switches should be located a
sufficient distance below outlet mist eliminators to minimize liquid carryover
in the gas system.
Low level alarm: The low level alarm should be located at a position which
allows the operator sufficient time to take appropriate action prior to a low
H-0806.35
18-32
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
level shutdown. Retention time between the low level alarm and low level
shutdown is typically 1 to 2 minutes based on maximum design flow rate.
Low level shutdown: Low liquid level shutdown switches should be located at
a sufficient height (6" minimum) above the liquid vortex breaker to prevent
gas entrainment with the exiting liquid. This does not apply when the slug
catcher normally operates empty.
The actual level alarm and shutdown switch locations will be a function of the
slug catcher configuration (i.e., vertical pressure vessel, horizontal pressure
vessel), geometry (diameter and length or height), and operation mode (empty or
not). Guides for setting liquid levels are shown in Figures 18.6-1 and 18.6-2.
18.6.5 Entrainment
All slug catchers provide some degree of separation of liquid droplets from the
gas stream. Entrainment criteria establish the limit on liquid carryover in the gas
stream exiting pressure vessel-type slug catchers and are used in sizing these
types of slug catchers for the required gas capacity. The velocity of the gas in the
slug catcher must be low enough such that the liquid droplets will settle out of the
gas. The internal diameter of the slug catcher must therefore be sized to achieve
the required settling velocity. In addition, sufficient vertical distance must be
maintained between the liquid level and the gas exit to prevent re-entraining
liquid in the gas due to liquid turbulence.
An entrainment criterion for pressure vessel-type slug catchers based on droplet
size is often used, such that droplets greater than or equal to the specified droplet
size are removed through settling. The specified droplet size is set based on the
additional processing requirements for the gas:
Flare: If the gas goes directly to a flare, API RP 521 recommends sizing the
vessel to separate droplets in the 300 to 600 micron range. The flare vendor
should also be consulted to determine the allowable droplet size for a
particular flare.
Vent: If the gas is vented directly to the atmosphere, the droplet criterion
should be set such that droplets not removed in the slug catcher become
H-0806.35
18-33
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
dispersed in the atmosphere and do not settle out on the facilities, which could
cause a safety problem for personnel or environmental problems. The slug
catcher should be sized to separate droplets in the 400 to 500 micron range
when venting directly to atmosphere.
Additional Processing: If the gas will be further processed, the slug catcher
will typically have some sort of mist elimination device in the gas outlet
section. In order for that device to operate properly, the vessel is sized to
remove droplets in the 140 to 200 micron range before the mist eliminator.
18.6.6 Length/Diameter Ratio
A typical horizontal or vertical production separator vessel may have a
length/diameter (L/D) ratio in the range of 2 to 5. Horizontal vessel slug catchers
may have L/D ratios as high as 15 to 20. This is because of the large surge
volumes required and the fabrication limitations on vessel diameters. Increased
L/D also reduces the wall thickness of the vessel.
Finger and pipe loop slug catchers may have much larger L/D ratios, since they
are fabricated from standard piping lengths.
H-0806.35
18-34
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-35
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-36
1-Dec-00
18.7
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Slug Volume =
Liquid holdup in the slug can be estimated using the methods described in Section
17 of this guide. If the slug is due to pigging, the liquid holdup is typically
assumed to be between 0.8 and 1.0.
18.7.2 Slug Duration
Slug duration is the total time it takes the entire slug volume to enter the slug
catcher. The slug duration can be calculated if the slug velocity and the slug
length are known:
Slug Length
Slug Duration =
Slug Velocity
H-0806.35
Slug Volume
Slug Duration
18-37
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
18-38
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
in less retention time available. This is compensated for by not taking credit for
the liquid volume available in the vessel heads. This simplification is acceptable
for the preliminary sizing methods illustrated in this guide; however, final detailed
design practices should evaluate the amount of liquid dead zone and the liquid
volume available in the heads.
18.7.6 Terminal Settling Velocity
As a droplet falls due to gravity, its velocity will accelerate until drag forces
acting on the droplet balance gravitational forces. At this point, the droplet falls
at a constant velocity known as the terminal settling velocity. The following
equation for terminal settling velocity is for spherical liquid droplets settling out
of a gas stream:
rl - rg d m
vt = 0.0119
rg C
0.5
where:
vt
rl
rg
dm
H-0806.35
18-39
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
API RP 521 - Guide for Pressure Relieving and Depressuring Systems includes a
graph of drag coefficient for spherical particles as a function of a modified
Reynolds number parameter:
C ( Re)
mg
where:
C(Re)2
rl
rg
mg
centipoise
The graph included in API 521 is illustrated in Figure 18.7-1. The drag coefficient
C may be read from the graph after calculating the drag coefficient function
C(Re)2.
In this method, drag coefficient is independent of terminal settling velocity;
therefore, the drag coefficient can be estimated directly from physical properties.
This method is illustrated in several examples.
Reynolds Number Correlation
Several correlations for estimating drag coefficient as a function of Reynolds
number are available in the literature. One such method is a correlation
referenced in the IHRDC Two-Phase Separators Manual based on Reynolds
Number:
C=
24
3
+
+ 0 .34
Re ( Re) 0 .5
where:
H-0806.35
Drag Coefficient
Re
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
r g d m vt
Re = 0.0049
mg
where:
Re
Reynolds Number
rg
dm
vt
mg
centipoise
18.7.9 Maximum Allowable Gas Velocity
In order to allow settling of liquid droplets from the gas phase and to minimize reentrainment of separated liquid, the gas must be limited to a maximum velocity;
that is, the maximum gas velocity is calculated such that liquid droplets will settle
out of the bulk gas phase and into the bulk liquid phase. Maximum allowable gas
velocity can be estimated by using droplet settling theory or empirical
correlations.
If droplet settling theory is used to establish entrainment criteria, then the
maximum allowable gas velocity for vertical vessels is assumed to be equal to the
H-0806.35
18-41
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
terminal settling velocity (see Figure 18.7-2). The smaller the diameter of liquid
droplets to be removed, the lower the terminal settling velocity, and therefore the
lower the maximum allowable gas velocity. For horizontal vessels, the terminal
settling velocity is used to determine the time it takes for droplets to reach the
bulk liquid (see Figure 18.7-3). Droplet settling time is described in Section
18.7.13.
Empirical correlations may also be used to estimate maximum gas velocity for
both vertical and horizontal vessels. The maximum gas velocity using empirical
methods can be calculated using the following equation:
vm = K
rl - r
r
0.5
where:
vm
rl
rg
H-0806.35
Horizontal Vessels
Without Demister
With Demister
0.15 - 0.20
0.35 - 0.45
Vertical Vessels
Without Demister
With Demister
0.10 - 0.15
0.25 - 0.30
18-42
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
In general, K increases with increasing vessel length and increasing L/D ratios.
Proprietary vendor internals may result in K values as high as 0.7 for horizontal
pressure vessels. K values in Table 18.7-1 are for non-foamy fluids. K values for
foamy fluids are lower.
18.7.10Minimum Gas Cross-sectional Area
The minimum gas cross-sectional area is the minimum area in the gas section of
the slug catcher required to ensure that the gas velocity does not exceed the
maximum allowable gas velocity:
Minimum Gas Cross - sectional Area =
The gas flow rate is the design volumetric flow rate at actual operating pressure
and temperature. For a pipeline in slug flow, the design gas flow rate corresponds
to the gas velocity when the gas bubble following the slug exits the pipeline.
Flow rates at standard temperature and pressure conditions (e.g. MMSCFD) must
be converted to flow rates at actual conditions in order to be used in the above
formula:
Actual psia
where Z is the gas compressibility factor.
The actual gas cross-sectional area provided by the slug catcher should equal or
exceed the minimum gas cross-sectional area. The geometry of the gas crosssectional area depends on the type of slug catcher. For vertical pressure vessels,
the direction of gas flow is upward through the vessel towards the outlet (see
Figure 18.7-4). The cross-sectional area through which the gas flows is the total
cross-sectional area of the vessel based on the vessel inside diameter. For
horizontal pressure vessels and pipe, the direction of flow is generally horizontal
from the inlet end of the vessel to the outlet end (see Figure 18.7-5). The crosssectional area through which the gas flows is the fraction of the total crosssectional area of vessel or pipe not occupied by liquid. The horizontal slug
catcher should be designed such that the minimum cross-sectional area is
H-0806.35
18-43
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
available when the vessel is at its highest liquid level (usually the high level
shutdown level).
18.7.11Minimum Vertical Vessel Internal Diameter
The minimum internal diameter for a vertical vessel can be calculated directly
from the minimum gas cross-sectional area, since the entire area is available for
gas flow (refer to Figure 18.7-4):
4 (Minimum Gas Cross - sectional Area)
Minimum Internal Diameter =
0 .5
Fp
0 .5
H-0806.35
18-44
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Vc =
H-0806.35
L D2
[( ) - sin a cos a ]
a
57 .3
18-45
1-Dec-00
H=D
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(1 - cos a )
2
where:
Vc
Vessel Diameter
Vessel Length
Volume =
p ( Diameter)2 ( Length)
4
p ( Diameter)3
4
( DL )
( p )( Length)
0 .5
4 (Volume) 3
Diameter =
( p ) ( DL )
18.7.19Cylindrical Vessel Length
The general equation for cylindrical vessel length (ignoring heads) is:
Length =
H-0806.35
4 (Volume)
p ( Diameter)2
18-46
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-47
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-48
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-49
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-50
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-51
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-52
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-53
1-Dec-00
18.8
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Slug surge capacity - sufficient liquid volume capacity to handle the design
slug size
Liquid capacity - sufficient liquid volume capacity for level control and to
permit gas bubble separation from the bulk liquid stream
H-0806.35
18-54
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-55
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
18-56
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-57
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-58
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
4( Volume
3
1- F )
Diameter =
L
p( D )
where:
Volume
Note that the vapor space cross-sectional area fraction is equal to the vapor space
volume fraction. Therefore, the liquid volume fraction equals 1-F.
An initial L/D ratio in the range of L/D = 4 to L/D = 8 should be assumed.
Step 8 - Determine minimum vessel internal diameter that satisfies both gas and
liquid capacity criteria.
For each L/D ratio considered, Steps 6 and 7 are repeated in an iterative procedure
in which the value of F is adjusted until the internal diameters calculated in Steps
6 and 7 are equal. This estimated initial internal diameter represents a starting
point; the diameter estimated using this procedure can be adjusted upward and
downward in 6 increments so that a range of vessels may be evaluated.
H-0806.35
18-59
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-60
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
This procedure is
4( Volume
3
1- F )
Diameter =
p ( DL )
where:
Volume
H-0806.35
18-61
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
L
4
where:
D
Vessel Length
The total required liquid volume, estimated in Step 3, is identical for all
diameter/length combinations.
Step 7 - Calculate the vertical liquid height
The vertical liquid height is calculated for each diameter/length combination
using the iterative formulas in Section 18.7.16.
Step 8 - Calculate the vertical gas height
The vertical gas height for each diameter/length combination is equal to the vessel
diameter minus the vertical liquid height.
Step 9 - Calculate the terminal settling velocity
The terminal settling velocity is calculated using the equations described in
Sections 18.7.6 through 18.7.8.
Step 10 - Calculate Droplet Settling Time
The droplet settling time is calculated using the formula in Section 18.7.13.
H-0806.35
18-62
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-63
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
18-64
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-65
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
EXAMPLES
Solution
Step 1 - Calculate the slug surge volume
The general equation for slug surge volume is:
Slug Surge Volume = (Slug Flow Rate - Flow Rate from Slug Catcher) x (Slug
Duration)
For this problem, only the slug volume is known. A conservative assumption for
preliminary sizing is to assume that the flow rate from the slug catcher equals
zero. Also recall that the general equation for slug flow rate is:
18-66
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The general equation for slug surge volume can then be written as:
The slug surge volume is therefore equal to the estimated slug volume of 1,000
barrels.
Step 2 - Calculate the slug catcher volume
The slug catcher volume is calculated directly from the slug surge volume by
applying an allowance factor to account for gas and liquid capacity requirements.
An allowance of 25% was selected for the finger and pipe loop slug catchers and
50% for the pressure vessel slug catchers.
For vessels
The slug catcher will be sized assuming the total volume is 1,250 barrels for the
finger and pipe loop and 1,500 barrels for the vessels.
Step 3 - Calculate the slug catcher dimensions
Many combinations of diameters and lengths can satisfy the volumetric
requirement. For pressure vessels, the general approach is to estimate diameter
and length for a range of L/D ratios. For finger slug catchers, the general
approach is to set an initial pipe segment length, assume that each pipe segment is
the same diameter as the pipeline, and calculate the number of segments needed.
For pipe loop slug catchers, the general approach is to assume the loop diameter is
the same as the pipeline diameter and calculate the length required.
The desired units for the slug catcher diameter and length are feet. The slug
catcher volume is converted from barrels to cubic feet:
H-0806.35
18-67
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Slug Catcher Volume, ft3 = Slug Catcher Volume, Bbls x 42 gal/bbl x 1 ft3/
7.481 gal
For finger and pipe loop = 1, 250 x 42 / 7.481
= 7,018 ft3
For vessels
= 1, 500 x 42 / 7.481
= 8,421 ft3
4 xVolume 3
Diameter =
p ( DL )
For an L/D ratio of 2:
Diameter,
Length
= Diameter x (L/D)
= 17.50 ft x 2
= 35 ft
Finger Dimensions
The pipe segment internal diameter is assumed to be equal to the pipeline internal
diameter of 35. A range of segment lengths from 250 feet to 1000 feet will be
evaluated. An example calculation is illustrated below.
The general equation for cylindrical vessel volume (ignoring heads) is:
p ( Diameter )2 ( Length )
Volume =
4
18-68
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Volume
= 1,670 ft3
The number of pipe segments is equal to:
Number of Segments
4 (Volume )
p ( Diameter )2
H-0806.35
18-69
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Both the finger slug catcher and pipe loop slug catcher are feasible for
preliminary sizing purposes. The actual configuration (number and length of
finger segments, parallel or extended loop) depends on available plot space and
economic analysis.
EXAMPLE 18.9-1: SURGE VOLUME METHOD
Data
Slug Surge Volume, Bbls
1,000
1.25
1.50
.35
.35
Results
Slug Catcher Volume, Bbls
3
Pressure Vessel
Finger/Loop
Vessels
1,250
1,500
7,018
8,421
Finger
Pipe Loop
L/D Ratio
Vessel
Vessel
Diameter, Length,
Ft
Ft
Pipe
Segment
Segment Volume,
3
Length, Ft Ft
Number
Pipe
of
Segment
Segments Length, Ft
17.5
35
250
1,670
4.2
15.3
45.9
500
3,341
2.1
13.9
55.6
1,000
6,681
1.1
12.9
64.5
10
10.2
102.4
15
8.9
134.1
20
8.1
162.5
1,050
Notes
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Slug Surge Volume, Ft = Slug Surge Volume, Bbls x 42 gal/bbl x 1 ft3/7.481 gal
Vessel Diameter = [(4 x Volume/(Pi x (L/D)]^(1/3)
Vessel Length - Vessel Diameter x (L/D)
Segment Volume = Pi x (Segment Diameter)^2 x Segment Length/4
Number of Segments = Slug Catcher Volume/Segment Volume
H-0806.35
18-70
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
A slug catcher for a new offshore gas processing facility is to be sized. Gas from
a subsea well cluster will be transported to the platform in a common flow line.
No pigging facilities will be required for the flow line. In order to save platform
space, a vertical pressure vessel will be used as both the slug catcher and the
primary separator. The gas from the separator will go to a gas dehydration
system. The following information is based on preliminary well tests:
150 MMSCFD
2000 Bbl/day
0.65
46
800 psig
115 F
0.011 centipoise
1.0
Slug Volume
Slug Duration
Goal:
50 Bbl
1 minute
Solution
Slug Surge Volume = (Slug Flow Rate - Flow Rate from Slug Catcher) x Slug
Duration
The slug flow rate is calculated based on the pipeline simulation results:
H-0806.35
18-71
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
72,000 bbl/day
The flow rate from the slug catcher is assumed to be equal to the normal
condensate flow rate of 2,000 bbl/day. Therefore,
Slug Surge Volume = [(72000 bbl/day-2000 bbl/day) x 1 min]x 1 hr/60 min x
1 day/24 hr
= 48.6 bbl
Since this is so close to the expected slug volume, it was decided to use 50 bbls as
the slug surge volume.
Step 2 - Calculate the liquid capacity
Three minute retention time was thought to be adequate for gas/liquid separation.
An additional two minutes of retention time will be allowed for high level
response time. Therefore,
Liquid Capacity
Response Time)
hr
= 6.9 bbl
Step 3 - Calculate the total required liquid volume
The minimum total amount of required liquid volume is the sum of the slug surge
capacity volume and the liquid capacity volume:
Note that most of the liquid volume requirement is due to the slug.
H-0806.35
18-72
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The desired units for the slug catcher diameter and length are feet. The total
liquid volume is converted from barrels to cubic feet:
v m = K
rg
0.5
where:
vm
rl
rg
H-0806.35
18-73
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
v m = K
rg
0.5
0.25[(49.7-2.48)/2.48]0.5
1.09 ft/sec
Actual Gas Flow Rate= Standard Gas Flow Rate x (14.7 psia/Actual Psia) x
(Actual R/520 R) x Z
= 150 MMSCFD x (14.7/814.7) x (575/520) x 1 x 1
day/24 hr x 1 hr/3600 sec
= 34.6 ft3/sec
The minimum gas cross-sectional area can now be calculated:
H-0806.35
18-74
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Therefore, in order to meet the entrainment criteria, the slug catcher internal
diameter must not be less than 6.4 feet. The minimum internal diameter may be
rounded up to the nearest half-foot, such as 6.5 feet for this case. If the diameter
is adjusted, the revised cross-sectional area should be used in determining vertical
liquid height requirements. In this example, the remaining calculations are based
on the minimum diameter of 6.4 feet.
Step 7 - Calculate the vertical liquid height
The vertical liquid height required for a given liquid capacity can be calculated
from the total liquid capacity calculated in Step 3 and the cross-sectional area
calculated in Step 5:
10 ft
H-0806.35
18-75
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
150
QI
2000
SGg
0.65
API
46
800
Operating Temperature, F
115
Cp
Gas Viscosity, cp
0.011
Gas Compressibility
Empirical Coefficient
0.25
Vslug
50
tret
thi
H-0806.35
Lslug
8.83
Lhi
0.49
Lret
0.74
Lreq
10.06
18-76
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
Pressure, PSIA
Gas Molecular Weight
3
Liquid Density, lb/ft
3
Gas Density, lb/ft
Liquid Flow Rate, lb/hr
Gas Flow Rate, lb/hr
Mass Flow Rate, lb/hr
Slug Surge Volume, gal
3
Actual Vapor Rate, ft /sec
Maximum Allowable Gas Velocity, ft/sec
Slug Surge Volume, ft^3
High Level Control Volume, ft^3
Liquid Retention Volume, ft^3
Required Liquid Volume, ft^3
Minimum Cross-sectional Area, ft^2
Minimum Drum Diameter, ft
Liquid Slug Control Height, ft
High Level Control Height, ft
Liquid Retention Height, ft
Liquid Height Required, ft
18-77
814.70
18.83
49.74
2.49
23272.93
310064.17
333337.09
2100.00
34.64
1.09
280.71
15.60
23.39
319.70
31.78
6.36
8.83
0.49
0.74
10.06
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
EXAMPLE 18.9-2:
H-0806.35
18-78
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
18.9.3 Vertical Two-Phase Separator Using Droplet Settling Equations - Example 18.9-3
Problem
A slug catcher for a new offshore gas processing facility is to be sized. Gas from
a subsea well cluster will be transported to the platform in a common flow line.
No pigging facilities will be required for the flow line. In order to save platform
space, a vertical pressure vessel will be used as both the slug catcher and the
primary separator. The gas from the separator will go to a gas dehydration
system. To minimize liquid carryover to the dehydration system filter, the
separator will have a mist eliminator, and will be sized to remove droplets greater
than or equal to 200 microns ahead of the mist eliminator. The following
information is based on preliminary well tests:
150 MMSCFD
2000 Bbl/day
0.65
46
800 psig
115 F
0.011 centipoise
1.0
50 Bbl
1 minute
NOTE: This example is identical to the one presented in Example 18.9-2, except
that a criterion based on the size of droplet entrained in the gas is specified. This
is reflected in the method used in Step 4 to calculate the maximum allowable gas
velocity.
Solution
H-0806.35
18-79
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Slug Surge Volume = (Slug Flow Rate - Flow Rate from Slug Catcher) x (Slug
Duration)
The slug flow rate is calculated based on the pipeline simulation results:
72,000 bbl/day
The flow rate from the slug catcher is assumed to be equal to the normal
condensate flow rate of 2,000 bbl/day. Therefore,
Slug Surge Volume
min x 1 day/24 hr
Since this is so close to the expected slug volume, it was decided to use 50 bbls as
the slug surge volume.
Step 2 - Calculate the liquid capacity
Three minute retention time was thought to be adequate for gas/liquid separation.
An additional two minutes of retention time will be allowed for high level
response time. Therefore,
Liquid Capacity
Level Response Time)
H-0806.35
18-80
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
C(Re) =
where:
C(Re)2
rl
rg
mg
The liquid and gas densities and the droplet size must be converted to the
appropriate units:
H-0806.35
18-81
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Operating R x Z)
= (28.964 x 0.65) x (800 + 14.7)/[10.73 x (115 + 460) x
1]
= 2.48 lb/ft3
Droplet diameter, ft
Note that the units for droplet diameter are feet for the drag coefficient
calculation and microns for the terminal settling velocity equation.
The Drag coefficient function can now be calculated:
2
C(Re) =
[(0.95 x 108)(2.48)(0.0006563)(49.7-2.48)]/.0112
26,000
0.5
where:
H-0806.35
vt
rl
rg
dm
18-82
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Drag Coefficient
vt
0.0119{[(49.7-2.48)/2.48][200/0.78]}0.5
0.83 ft/sec
(Actual R/520 R) x Z
= 150 MMSCFD x (14.7/814.7) x (575/520) x 1 x 1 day/24 hr x 1
hr/3600 sec
= 34.6 ft3/sec
The minimum gas cross-sectional area can now be calculated:
Gas
Flow
Rate/Maximum
Allowable Gas Velocity
0 .5
= (4 x 42 ft2/p)0.5
= 7.3 ft
H-0806.35
18-83
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Therefore, in order to meet the entrainment criteria, the slug catcher internal
diameter must not be less than 7.3 feet. The minimum internal diameter may be
rounded up to the nearest half-foot, such as 7.5 feet for this case. If the diameter
is adjusted, the revised cross-sectional area should be used in determining vertical
liquid height requirements. In this example, the remaining calculations are based
on the minimum diameter of 7.3 feet.
Step 7 - Calculate the vertical liquid height
The vertical liquid height required for a given liquid capacity can be calculated
from the total liquid capacity calculated in Step 3 and the cross-sectional area
calculated in Step 5:
7.6 ft
H-0806.35
18-84
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Note that the results in Example 18.9-3 are different from those of Example 18.92, even though the problem is identical. This illustrates some of the difficulty in
trying to determine the correct vessel size. The maximum allowable gas
velocity, which determines the vessel minimum internal diameter, is based on the
selection of K in the empirical correlations method and the droplet size in the
droplet settling equations method. In reality, the actual performance of the vessel
may be different from that predicted by either of the two methods.
EXAMPLE 18.9-2: VERTICAL TWO-PHASE SEPARATOR USING DROPLET
SETTLING EQUATIONS
150
QI
2000
SGg
0.65
API
46
800
Operating Temperature, F
115
Cp
Gas Viscosity, cp
0.011
Gas Compressibility
dd
200
Vslug
50
tret
thi
Step 2. Input the Drag Coefficient from API 521 Fig 9 based on the Drag Function.
C(Re)
C
H-0806.35
Drag Function
26039.2912
0.78
18-85
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
Pressure, PSIA
Gas Molecular Weight
3
Liquid Density, lb/ft
3
Gas Density, lb/ft
Liquid Flow Rate, lb/hr
Gas Flow Rate, lb/hr
Mass Flow Rate, lb/hr
Minimum Drum Liquid Volume, gal
Droplet Diameter, ft
Drag Function
3
Actual Vapor Rate, ft /sec
Dropout Velocity, ft/sec
3
Slug Surge Volume, ft
3
High Level Control Volume, ft
3
Liquid Retention Volume, ft
3
Required Liquid Volume, ft
2
Minimum Cross-sectional Area, ft
Minimum Drum Diameter, ft
Liquid Slug Control Height, ft
High Level Control Height, ft
Liquid Retention Height, ft
Liquid Height Required, ft
814.70
18.83
49.74
2.49
23272.93
310064.17
333337.09
2100.00
0.000656
26039.29
34.64
0.82
280.71
15.60
23.39
319.70
42.11
7.32
6.67
0.37
0.56
7.59
18-86
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
EXAMPLE 18.9-3
A slug catcher for a new offshore gas processing facility is to be sized. Gas from
a subsea well cluster will be transported to the platform in a common flow line.
No pigging facilities will be required for the flow line. A horizontal pressure
vessel will be used as both the slug catcher and the primary separator. The gas
from the separator will go to a gas dehydration system. The following information
is based on preliminary well tests:
H-0806.35
18-87
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
150 MMSCFD
2000 Bbl/day
0.65
46
800 psig
115 F
0.011 centipoise
1.0
Slug Volume
Slug Duration
Goal:
50 Bbl
1 minute
NOTE: This example is identical to the one presented in Example 18.9-2, except
that the vessel is horizontal instead of vertical.
Solution
Slug Surge Volume = (Slug Flow Rate - Flow Rate from Slug Catcher) x (Slug
Duration)
The slug flow rate is calculated based on the pipeline simulation results:
The flow rate from the slug catcher is assumed to be equal to the normal
condensate flow rate of 2,000 bbl/day. Therefore,
H-0806.35
18-88
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Liquid Capacity
Note that most of the liquid volume requirement is due to the slug.
The desired units for the slug catcher diameter and length are feet. The total
liquid volume is converted from barrels to cubic feet:
Total Liquid Volume, ft3
H-0806.35
18-89
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
v m = K
rg
0. 5
where:
vm
rl
rg
v m = K
rg
0. 5
=0.35[(49.7-2.48)/2.48]0.5
=1.53 ft/sec
Step 5 - Calculate the minimum gas cross-sectional area
H-0806.35
18-90
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The minimum gas cross-sectional area is calculated from the maximum allowable
gas velocity calculated in Step 4 and the gas flow rate. The gas flow rate is the
design volumetric flow rate at actual operating pressure and temperature:
Fxp
0.5
= 4.9 ft
Step 7 - Estimate the minimum vessel internal diameter based on liquid capacity
The minimum internal diameter based on liquid capacity is calculated from the
total required liquid volume calculated in Step 3 and the vapor space crosssectional area fraction assumed in Step 6:
H-0806.35
18-91
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
1
Volume 3
4
1- F
L
p
Step 8 - Determine minimum vessel internal diameter that satisfies both gas and
liquid capacity criteria
For each L/D ratio considered, Steps 6 and 7 are repeated in an iterative procedure
in which the value of F is adjusted until the internal diameters are equal. For this
example, it has been determined that an F of approximately 0.7 results in a
diameter that satisfies both the gas and liquid capacity criteria:
Gas:
Fp
0 .5
Volume 3
4
1- F
L
p
= {4 x [319/(1-0.7)]/[p x
(5)]}1/3
= 6.5 ft
H-0806.35
18-92
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Vc = LD
H=
[( ) - sina cosa]
a
57 .3
D(1- cosa )
2
where:
Vc
Vessel Diameter
Vessel Length
For this example, different values of a are guessed until the calculated volume Vc
equals the total liquid volume of 319 ft3 from Step 3. It has been determined that
an angle of 71.8 degrees will result in the required liquid volume:
H-0806.35
18-93
1-Dec-00
Vc = LD
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
[( ) - sin acosa ] =
a
57 .3
32.5
ft
(6.5)2[(71.8/57.3
sin(71.8)cos(71.8)]/4
=
328 ft3
D(1- cosa )
2
=
6.5 x (1-cos71.8)/2
2.2 feet
H-0806.35
18-94
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
150
QI
2000
SGg
0.65
API
46
800
Operating Temperature, F
115
Cp
Gas Viscosity, cp
0.011
Gas Compressibility
Empirical Coefficient
0.35
Vslug
50
thi
Step 2. Input an assumed vapor space cross-sectional area fraction and L/D ratio
0.70
LD
Length/Diameter Ratio
5.00
Example 18.9-4
Step 3. Click Goal Seek in the Tools Menu..
Input the following into the Goal Seek Menu:
Set Cell: =Acalc
To Value: Type in the number shown for Amin
By Changing Cell: =F
Click the OK Button to run the iteration routine
F is calculated such that the calculated gas cross-sectional area equals the
minimum gas cross-sectional area. F should be between 0 and 1.
H-0806.35
18-95
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
0.70
22.70
22.70
71.77
319.70
319.70
6.4
32.2
0.34
H-0806.35
Pressure, PSIA
Gas Molecular Weight
3
Liquid Density, lb/ft
3
Gas Density, lb/ft
Liquid Flow Rate, lb/hr
Gas Flow Rate, lb/hr
814.70
18.83
49.74
2.49
23272.93
310064.17
18-96
1-Dec-00
G
Vslug
Rv
ud
Vslug
Vhi
Vret
Vreq
Amin
Dg
Dl
Acalc
Li
Ai
Al
Av
Ang
Vcalc
Hl
Hv
hv
Hl/D
Uv
H-0806.35
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
18-97
333337.09
2100.00
34.64
1.53
280.71
15.60
23.39
319.70
22.70
6.44
6.45
22.70
32.23
32.62
9.92
22.70
1.25
319.70
2.21
4.23
50.77
0.34
1.53
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
EXAMPLE 18.9-4
H-0806.35
18-98
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
18.9.4 Horizontal Two-Phase Separator using Droplet Settling Equations Example 18.95
Problem
A slug catcher for a new offshore gas processing facility is to be sized. Gas from
a subsea well cluster will be transported to the platform in a common flow line.
No pigging facilities will be required for the flow line. A horizontal pressure
vessel will be used as both the slug catcher and the primary separator. The gas
from the separator will go to a gas dehydration system. To minimize liquid
carryover to the dehydration system filter, the separator will have a mist
eliminator, and will be sized to remove droplets greater than or equal to 200
microns ahead of the mist eliminator. The following information is based on
preliminary well tests:
150 MMSCFD
2000 Bbl/day
0.65
46
800 psig
115 F
0.011 centipoise
1.0
50 Bbl
1 minute
NOTE: This example is identical to the one presented in Example 18.9-4, except
that a criterion based on the size of droplet entrained in the gas is specified.
Solution
H-0806.35
18-99
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Slug Surge Volume = (Slug Flow Rate - Flow Rate from Slug Catcher) x Slug
Duration
The slug flow rate is calculated based on the pipeline simulation results:
72,000 bbl/day
The flow rate from the slug catcher is assumed to be equal to the normal
condensate flow rate of 2,000 bbl/day. Therefore,
Slug Surge Volume = [(72000 bbl/day-2000 bbl/day) x 1 min]x 1 hr/60 min x
1 day/24 hr
= 48.6 bbl
Since this is so close to the expected slug volume, it was decided to use 50 bbls as
the slug surge volume.
Step 2 - Calculate the liquid capacity.
Three minute retention time was thought to be adequate for gas/liquid separation.
An additional two minutes of retention time will be allowed for high level
response time. Therefore,
H-0806.35
18-100
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Note that most of the liquid volume requirement is due to the slug.
The desired units for the slug catcher diameter and length are feet. The total
liquid volume is converted from barrels to cubic feet:
4( Volume
3
1- F )
Diameter =
p ( DL )
where:
Volume
A gas space cross-sectional area fraction of 0.3 was used, based on the guidelines
in Section 18.7.12. An initial L/D ratio of 5 was selected.
The initial diameter can now be calculated:
1
4( Volume ) 3
Diameter = 1-LF
p (D)
= {4 x [319/(1-0.3)]/[p x (5)]}1/3
= 4.9 ft
H-0806.35
18-101
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Length
=Diameter x (L/D)
= 4.9 x (5)
=24.5 ft
where:
D
Vessel Length
Therefore,
Gas Cross-sectional Area
Vc = LD
H-0806.35
[( ) - sina cosa ]
a
57 .3
18-102
1-Dec-00
H=
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
D(1 - cosa )
where:
2
Vc
Vessel Diameter
Vessel Length
For this example, different values of a are guessed until the calculated volume Vc
equals the total liquid volume of 319 ft3 from Step 3. It has been determined that
an angle of 108.6 degrees will result in the required liquid volume:
Vc = LD
[( ) - sina cosa ]
a
57 .3
H=
D(1 - cosa )
2
=
4.9 x (1-cos108.6)/2
3.2 feet
H-0806.35
18-103
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
C(Re) =
(0.95x10 8 )( rg )(d 3 )( rl - rg )
mg 2
where:
C(Re)2
rl
rg
mg
The liquid and gas densities and the droplet size must be converted to the
appropriate units:
H-0806.35
18-104
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
C(Re) =
= [(0.95 x 108)(2.48)(0.0006563)(49.7-2.48)]/.0112
= 26,000
From Figure 18.7-1, the drag coefficient C is approximately 0.78.
The terminal settling velocity can now be calculated:
0 .5
rl - rg d
m
vt = 0 .0119
r
C
g
where:
vt
rl
rg
dm
Drag Coefficient
vt
0.0119{[(49.7-2.48)/2.48][200/0.78]}0.5
0.83 ft/sec
H-0806.35
2 seconds
18-105
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Note that the terminal settling velocity is the vertical component of the droplet
velocity.
Step 11 - Calculate the minimum effective horizontal length
The vessel length must be long enough so that the droplet can reach the bulk
liquid phase in the time it takes to fall the vertical height distance:
Actual Gas Flow Rate = Standard Gas Flow Rate x (14.7 psia/Actual Psia) x
(Actual R/520 R) x Z
= 150 MMSCFD x (14.7 /814.7) x (575 /520) x 1 x 1
day/24 hr x 1 hr/3600 sec
= 34.6 ft3/sec
The gas cross-sectional area calculated in Step 6 is 5.8 ft2. Therefore, the gas
velocity can be calculated:
Gas Velocity
6.2 ft/sec
18-106
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-107
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
150
QI
2000
SGg
0.65
API
46
800
Operating Temperature, F
115
Cp
Gas Viscosity, cp
0.011
Gas Compressibility
dd
200
Vslug
50
thi
Step 2a. Input the Drag Coefficient from API 521 Fig 9 based on the Drag Function.
C(Re)
C
Drag Function
26039.291
2
0.78
Step 2b. Input an assumed vapor space cross-sectional area fraction and L/D ratio.
H-0806.35
0.30
LD
Length/Diameter Ratio
5.00
18-108
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
108.64
319.67
319.70
H-0806.35
18-109
4.88
24.41
12.46
0.66
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Pressure, PSIA
Gas Molecular Weight
3
Liquid Density, lb/ft
3
Gas Density, lb/ft
Liquid Flow Rate, lb/hr
814.70
18.83
49.74
2.49
23272.93
GV
G
Vslug
Dd
2
C(Re)
Rv
ud
Vslug
Vhi
Vret
Vreq
Dl
Li
Ai
Al
Av
Ang
Vcalc
Hl
Hv
hv
Hl/D
td
Uv
Lmin
310064.17
333337.09
2100.00
0.000656
26039.29
34.64
0.82
280.71
15.60
23.39
319.70
4.88
24.41
18.71
13.10
5.61
1.90
319.67
3.22
1.66
19.93
0.66
2.02
6.17
12.46
H-0806.35
18-110
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
EXAMPLE 18.9-5
H-0806.35
18-111
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
150 MMSCFD
2000 Bbl/day
0.65
46
800 psig
115 F
0.011 centipoise
1.0
Slug Volume
Slug Duration
Goal:
50 Bbl
1 minute
NOTE: This example is identical to the one presented in Example 18.9-3, except
that the IHRDC Two-Phase Separator program is used.
Solution
H-0806.35
18-112
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Slug Surge Volume = (Slug Flow Rate - Flow Rate from Slug Catcher) x Slug
Duration
The slug flow rate is calculated based on the pipeline simulation results:
The flow rate from the slug catcher is assumed to be equal to the normal
condensate flow rate of 2,000 bbl/day. Therefore,
Slug Surge Volume = [(72000 bbl/day-2000 bbl/day) x 1 min]x 1 hr/60 min x
1 day/24 hr
= 48.6 bbl
Since this is so close to the expected slug volume, it was decided to use 50 bbls as
the slug surge volume.
Step 2 - Calculate the liquid capacity volume.
Three minute retention time was thought to be adequate for gas/liquid separation.
An additional two minutes of retention time will be allowed for high level
response time. Therefore,
H-0806.35
18-113
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Note that most of the liquid volume requirement is due to the slug.
Step 4 - Calculate the effective liquid rate.
The effective liquid rate is calculated as follows:
H-0806.35
18-114
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
OPERATING PRESSURE
= 800. PSIG
OPERATING TEMPERATURE = 115.
DEG F.
DESIGN PRESSURE
= 900. PSIG
GAS VISCOSITY
= 0.0110 CP
PARTICLE DIAMETER = 200. MICRONS
COEFFICIENT OF DRAG
= 0.660
MOL FRAC OF H2S GAS
= 0.000
MOL FRAC OF CO2 GAS
= 0.000
UPPER L/D RATIO
= 5.000
LOWER L/D RATIO
= 2.000
GAS COMPRESSIBILITY
= 0.8942
GAS DENSITY = 2.780 LB/FT3
JOINT EFFICIENCY
= 1.000
ALLOW. MATERIAL STRESS = 17500. PSI
CORROSION ALLOWANCE
= 0.125 INCHES
REQUIRED LIQUID RETENTION TIME = 5.0 MINUTE(S)
GAS CAPACITY EQUATION : MINIMUM INTERNAL DIAMETER = 81.66 INCHES
STD
O.D.
(IN)
ACT
LIQ
HT.
(IN)
ACTUAL
LIQUID
RETENTION
TIME
(MIN)
90.0
20.0
2.67 18.0
94.5
WALL THICKNESS = 2.500 IN.
118.3
6.3
20519.
162.5
66300.
96.0
18.0
2.25 17.0
82.9
WALL THICKNESS = 2.625 IN.
94.3
5.7
18646.
185.2
70200.
102.0 18.0
2.12 16.2
73.3
WALL THICKNESS = 2.750 IN.
94.3
6.4
21083.
209.5
79600.
H-0806.35
STD
S-S
LEN
(FT)
L/D
REQD
S-S
LEN
(FT)
REQD
LIQ
HT.
(IN)
----CAPACITY---LIQUID GAS
(BPD)
(MMSC
FD)
18-115
1-Dec-00
BARE
VESSEL
WT
(LBS)
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
A slug catcher for a new offshore gas processing facility is to be sized. Gas from
a subsea well cluster will be transported to the platform in a common flow line.
No pigging facilities will be required for the flow line. A horizontal pressure
vessel will be used as both the slug catcher and the primary separator. The gas
from the separator will go to a gas dehydration system. To minimize liquid
carryover to the dehydration system filter, the separator will have a mist
eliminator, and will be sized to remove droplets greater than or equal to 200
microns ahead of the mist eliminator. The following information is based on
preliminary well tests:
150 MMSCFD
2000 Bbl/day
0.65
46
800 psig
115 F
0.011 centipoise
1.0
50 Bbl
1 minute
NOTE: This example is identical to the one presented in Example 18.9-5, except
that the IHRDC program is used.
Solution
H-0806.35
18-116
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Slug Surge Volume = (Slug Flow Rate - Flow Rate from Slug Catcher) x Slug
Duration
The slug flow rate is calculated based on the pipeline simulation results:
The flow rate from the slug catcher is assumed to be equal to the normal
condensate flow rate of 2,000 bbl/day. Therefore,
Slug Surge Volume = [(72000 bbl/day-2000 bbl/day) x 1 min]x 1 hr/60 min x
1 day/24 hr
= 48.6 bbl
Since this is so close to the expected slug volume, it was decided to use 50 bbls as
the slug surge volume.
Step 2 - Calculate the liquid capacity volume.
Three minute retention time was thought to be adequate for gas/liquid separation.
An additional two minutes of retention time will be allowed for high level
response time. Therefore,
H-0806.35
18-117
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
= 56.9 bbl
Note that most of the liquid volume requirement is due to the slug.
Step 4 - Calculate the effective liquid rate.
The effective liquid rate is calculated as follows:
H-0806.35
18-118
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
f
HORIZONTAL 2 PHASE SEPARATOR DESIGN PROGRAM
by PARAGON ENGINEERING SERVICES INC. of HOUSTON, TX.
VESSEL TAG NO. = Horizontal Slug Catcher
PROJECT ID = Example 18.9-7
DATE =
USERS INITIALS =
LIQUID FLOW RATE
GAS FLOW RATE
MW
OPERATING PRESSURE
= 800. PSIG
OPERATING TEMPERATURE = 115.
DEG F.
DESIGN PRESSURE
= 900. PSIG
GAS VISCOSITY
= 0.0110 CP
PARTICLE DIAMETER = 200. MICRONS
COEFFICIENT OF DRAG
= 0.660
MOL FRAC OF H2S GAS
= 0.000
MOL FRAC OF CO2 GAS
= 0.000
UPPER L/D RATIO
= 6.000
LOWER L/D RATIO
= 2.000
FRACTIONAL LIQ AREA
= 0.7477
FRACTIONAL LIQUID HT.
= 0.7000
3
GAS COMPRESSIBILITY
= 0.8942
GAS DENSITY = 2.780 LB/FT
JOINT EFFICIENCY
= 1.000
ALLOW. MATERIAL STRESS = 17500. PSI
CORROSION ALLOWANCE
= 0.125 INCHES
REQUIRED LIQUID RETENTION TIME = 5.0 MINUTE(S)
RETENTION TIME EQUATION : (I.D.) ^2 x L(EFF) = 78275.00 IN2-FT
GAS CAPACITY EQUATION
: (I.D.) X L(EFF)
= 660.78 IN-FT
STD
O.D.
(IN)
STD
S-S
LEN
(FT)
L/D
60.0
30.0
6.00
WALL THICKNESS =
66.0
26.0
4.73
WALL THICKNESS =
72.0
22.0
3.67
WALL THICKNESS =
78.0
18.0
2.77
WALL THICKNESS =
84.0
15.0
2.14
WALL THICKNESS =
90.0
15.0
2.00
WALL THICKNESS =
H-0806.35
REQD
EFF
LEN
GAS
(FT)
11.7
1.750
10.6
1.875
9.7
2.000
9.0
2.125
8.3
2.250
7.8
2.500
REQD
EFF
LEN
LIQ
(FT)
24.5
REQD
S-S
LEN
(FT)
----CAPACITY---LIQUID GAS
(BPD)
(MMSCFD)
BARE
VESSEL
WT
(LBS)
29.4
ACTUAL
LIQUID
RETENTION
TIME
(MIN)
5.1
16708
288.6
39400
20.2
24.2
5.4
17577
275.6
41800
16.9
20.3
5.4
17747
252.1
42300
14.4
17.3
5.2
17080
198.5
43500
12.4
14.9
5.0
16539
151.1
44500
10.8
14.9
5.8
18907
152.8
54200
18-119
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
18.10 REFERENCES
Industry
API Recommended Practice 521 - Guide for Pressure Relieving and Depressuring
Systems.
Arirachakaran, S. Two-phase Slug Flow Splitting Phenomenon at a Regular
Horizontal Side-arm Tee (Dissertation), University of Tulsa, 1990.
Bos, A. et al. Simulation of Gas/Liquid Flow in Slug Catchers, Society of
Petroleum Engineers Proceedings, SPE 13724, March 1985.
Carstensen, C. Suppression of Slug Flow with the Aid of New Equipment,
Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 6100, May 1989
Conner, T. Pipeline Two-Phase Flow Analysis, 1983.
Cowie, D. Vertical Caisson Slugcatcher Performance, Institution of Chemical
Engineers, January 1992.
Highlander Gets First Subsea Slug Catcher for Marginal Field Development,
Oil and Gas Journal, November 1985.
Jepson, W. Slug Flow Eliminator and Separator, United States Patent Number
5,232,475. August 1993.
Kaasa, O. A Subsea Slug Catcher to Prevent Severe Slugging, 6th Underwater
Technology Foundation International Conference (Bergen, Norway), 1990.
Lingelem, M.N. TOGI: Multiphase Flow from Troll to Oseberg, Offshore
Technology Conference, OTC 6670, May 1991.
Martin, R.E. Handling Liquids in Offshore Gas Lines Gets New Approach, Oil
and Gas Journal, April 1981.
Miyoshi, M. et al. Slug-Catcher Design for Dynamic Slugging in an Offshore
Production Facility, SPE Production Engineering, November 1988.
H-0806.35
18-120
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
18-121
1-Dec-00
19.0
PIGGING
19.1
Introduction
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
This section of the design guide serves to provide guidance in the design and operation of
pigging systems that assure hydrocarbon deliverability in an economical manner. This
section covers industry status, flow assurance pigging requirements, typical system
configurations and operating modes, pig types and selection, basic system components
and design considerations, and system operating requirements.
19.2
Industry Status
During this decade there has been a rapid expansion in exploration and field development
in ever-deeper water. With this approach, the flow assurance issues that relate to pipeline
hydraulics, hydrate formation and paraffin deposition have been magnified because of the
longer tiebacks and colder subsea environment.
There is plenty of pigging experience available with land pipelines and shallow water
developments, especially when pigging from platform to platform. However, pigging
experience in deepwater is limited and has been confined mainly to the Gulf of Mexico
and Brazil. A summary of some deepwater pigging experience is found in Table 19.1.
Because of the potential show stoppers associated with deepwater production, greater
interest has been given to considering the deployment of pigs as an integral part of the
flow assurance and pipeline maintenance program. Several operators have recently
performed field specific studies to determine the feasibility of pigging as the principal
means to control wax. Other studies have focused on performing trade offs between
dual flowline pigging and single flowline pigging using subsea pig launcher or receiver.
As more fields are developed, it is envisaged that greater emphasis will be given to the
subject of pigging with the result of producing more cost effective flow assurance
systems.
19.3
Pigging Requirements
From the perspective of flow assurance, pigging is required to maintain the original
design integrity and flow performance of pipelines, flowlines and risers for the duration
of their intended operational life. Specific requirements are as follows:
H-0806.35
19-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Location
GOM
MC 674
Exxon/Mica
GOM
MC 211
Texaco/Gemini
GOM
MC 292
Conoco/Joliet
GOM
GC 184
Shell/Tahoe II
GOM
VK 783
Shell/Popeye
GOM
GC 116
H-0806.35
Pigging
Configuration
Field
Status
8-inch single, 32
miles
Planned
8-inch dual, 2 x 28
miles
Planned
Producing
Producing
Producing
Producing
19-1
Pigging
Operations
Wax deposition expected during early life. If required, intend to run
foam disc pigs that are driven using well production.
Wax deposition is expected and will vary depending upon the type of
wells produced. During early production, the intention is to adopt a
conservative pigging approach where bi-directional disc pigs are run
on a frequent basis using oil produced from platform wells. When
pigging frequency is established, a decision will be made whether to
use gas instead of oil as drive medium.
No wax deposition is expected. If any pig is run, it is for liquid
displacement. Intend to use foam pig propelled by buyback gas.
Existing host compressor will be used.
Oil line pigged twice per month using foam and dual diameter pigs to
remove wax deposition.
Gas line is pigged every two months.
The gas producing flowlines were pigged once using foam pig. No
other pigging operations performed.
Foam pig with gauging plate was run shortly after start-up. Both pig
and plate were damaged during transit. Suspect pigging isolation valve
on manifold is partially closed. Wax deposition is expected.
1-Dec-00
BP/Pompano
GOM
MC 28
BP/Troika
GOM
GC 244
Exxon/Zinc
GOM
MC 355
Petrobras/
Albacora,
Marlim,
Barracuda
H-0806.35
Campos
Basin
Region
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Producing
8-inch flowlines are pigged every six months to remove wax deposits
using solid-cast bi-directional disc pigs (K-Disc). Drive medium used
is dead oil from storage tank (900 barrels) supplemented by production
from platform wells. Negligible wax returns have been observed.
10-inch dual
flowline, 2 x 14 miles
Producing
Regular wax removal being performed using solid cast bi-directional disc pigs.
from flowline operating conditions. Adopted progressive pigging program when
pigged.
Producing
Producing
19-2
Foam, dual diameter mandrel and cup/disc mandrel pigs are run on a
regular basis to remove wax and liquid.
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
To prevent excessive build- up of solids (wax, scale, sand, etc.) by scraping the
pipe interior and removing solids from the line.
H-0806.35
19-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
They can be
H-0806.35
19-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 19-1
H-0806.35
19-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 19-2
H-0806.35
19-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASAE DESIGN GUIDELINE
overcome the static and fluid friction losses. This may not be the case in late
field life, when reservoir pressure has declined. Also, there is no direct
method for controlling the progress of the return pig except for manipulating
the surface choke and possibly the subsea choke.
H-0806.35
19-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 19-3
H-0806.35
19-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
19.5.1 Mandrel
These pigs are assembled from a number of component parts (plastic and metal),
which are mounted on a shaft so that they can be replaced or reconfigured as
required. The conventional mandrel pig will comprise sealing elements that are
H-0806.35
19-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figure 19-5
H-0806.35
19-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-14
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-15
1-Dec-00
DEEPS TAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
used to drive the pig and also cleaning elements, if the intended application is to
clean the line. Refer to Figure 19-6.
The sealing elements are normally made from polyurethane and can be divided
into piston-type cup, conical cup and flat disc. Refer to Figure 19-7. The pistontype cups have a pressure-energized shape that provides a good seal and some
compensation for wear. They are normally mounted on large diameter flanges,
which increase the risk of metal-to- metal contact in the line. Because of the mall
amount of contact material, this limits their ability to conform to ovality.
Therefore, they are susceptible to losing their seal when traveling through lines
that have significant out-of-roundness.
Conical cups are more accommodating in sealing within pipes of irregular
circularity or roundness. Also, the geometry of the cup enables a greater radial
load and hence tighter seal to be produced when differential pressure is applied.
This results in swabbing operations being more efficient. Although a higher wear
rate might be expected because of the tighter seal, this is compensated for by the
exceptionally wide wear surface that the conical cup provides. Also, because of
the tighter seal, conical cups have been known to smear soft deposits against the
inside wall. This process makes the cleaning operation ineffective.
Solid discs have been used where bi-directional pigging has been required.
Usually four discs sized to be an interference fit are mounted on the pig body.
Since they have little or no capability to compensate for wear, they need frequent
replacement.
The cleaning elements are components designed to remove solid or semi-solid
deposits and can either be wire brushes, blades, discs or a combination. The wire
brushes are generally mounted on springs to force them into contact with the pipe
wall and compensate for wear. For smaller diameter pigs, the wire brush
element(s) are usually a continuous wire wheel. Wire brushes tend to be suitable
for removing only hard deposits. Based upon BP Amocos experience in pigging
various main oil lines (Beatrice, Ninian, Wytch Farm) they recommend that wire
brushes be avoided in soft waxy lines since they quickly become clogged up.
Blades are suitable for removing both hard and soft deposits. The blades can be
made from steel for extreme situations, but normally they are molded from
polyurethane that is of slightly harder grade than the sealing elements. Various
H-0806.35
19-16
1-Dec-00
DEEPS TAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
shapes are available with the most common being the 3-Rib blade. Apart from
its basic simplicity that keeps tooling costs low, it has the added advantage of
imparting a slow rotation to the pig that contributes to reducing effective wear
rates.
Cleaning discs are similar to the sealing discs except that they are sized below the
nominal pipe ID and are made harder. Independent studies performed by Shell
and Petrobras, verified that discs were the most effective cleaning element in
removing solids of various hardness. Bi-directional disc pigs have been
successfully used in a number of recent deepwater cleaning applications (i.e. BPAmoco Troika, BP-Amoco Pompano, etc.). There is also intention to use the
same pigs on other upcoming field developments (i.e. Shell Macaroni, Exxon
Mica, etc.). Lastly, disc pigs have also performed well in removing condensate
when combined with solid drive discs.
19.5.2 Solid Cast
Solid cast pigs are similar to mandrel pigs except they are molded in one piece,
generally from polyurethane, whereby the body, sealing and scraping elements are
an integral unit. Refer to Figure 19-8. They are as effective as the mandrel type
pigs in removing liquids and soft to medium deposits. Solid cast pigs are
normally only available in the smaller sizes (12 inch and below). Their
development was a result of labor costs for assembling and replacing parts on
small pigs being significantly higher than the cost of a new pig.
The lighter and more flexible design mitigates the risk of damaging the flowline
and helps to negotiate tight bends and other irregularities. However, field repairs
are not possible and complete replacement is usually necessary in the event of one
part becoming damaged.
19.5.3 Foam
Foam pigs are widely used in the pipeline industry. Petrobras has extensively
used them to remove soft to medium wax deposits. They are particularly suitable
when developing a pigging program for a line that has not been regularly pigged
and which may contain unexpected restrictions. Foam pigs are manufactured in
many designs and sizes. They are manufactured from polyurethane foam of
various densities ranging from low (2-4 lb/ft3 ), medium (5-7 lb/ft3 ), and high (810 lb/ft 3 ). Each of the density ranges offers a different flexibility and wear
resistance, the lower density being more flexible and subject to wear than the
H-0806.35
19-17
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-18
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
higher density. Although normally found in bullet shape form, they can have
concave, flat, or bullet noses on each end. An elastomeric coating is normally
H-0806.35
19-19
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
applied to the base to provide for maximum seal against the propelling force.
Some eve n have coating on the surface to enhance the sealing and wiping
capability of the pig, and to increase its wear resistance. Normally, the overall
length of the pig is 1.75-2 times the pipe diameter, with the base to shoulder (the
point where the surface bearing area begins to taper towards the nose) dimension
measuring 1.5 times the diameter. Foam pigs are currently manufactured in
diameters from 0.25- inch to 108-inch, with increments of 0.125- inch available in
diameters under 12-inch.
There are numerous designs of foam pigs available, but the most frequently used
are swabs, bare squeegees, crisscross, silicon carbide and wire-brush. Refer to
Figure 19-9. The swabs are a low-density design with base coated for a seal and
are used for the removal of soft materials, drying and absorption of liquids (a
swab can absorb up to 75 percent of its volume in liquids). The bare squeegees
range from medium to high-density foam with coated base and are used for liquid
removal and light cleaning. Crisscross foam pigs are made from either medium or
high-density foam with coating on the surface bearing area. They are used for
dewatering, batching, cleaning and removal of solids (soft to medium hardness).
Silicon carbide is similar in make-up to the crisscross, except the bearing area is
covered with silicon carbide/aluminum oxide grit or straps. Mostly employed for
scraping or cracking hard deposits such as oxides or carbonates (normally for
short runs). Finally, the wire brush is made from medium to high-density foam
where bristle straps (steel, brass or plastic) cover the total bearing area or are
incorporated into a crisscross pattern. This wire brush pig is used for maximum
scraping of hard deposits such as mill scale.
19.5.4 Sphere
Spheres have been mostly used for sweeping liquids from lines and have some
limited success in solids removal. Conventional spheres are simply hollow balls,
fitted with flush or recessed valves to enable them to be filled and inflated with
glycol-water mixture to achieve the desired diameter. For small pipe diameters,
spheres are normally made solid. They are generally molded from polyurethane
in either one piece (requires rotational mold technique) or from two halves, which
are subsequently bonded together. The latter method is usually the least
expensive and is understood to have been developed to the point where
homogeneity can be guaranteed.
H-0806.35
19-20
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-21
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-22
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
substantial volume of fluid or gas to flow through the pig body. This results in
the debris being jetted or blown away from the front of the pig, after which time
the differential required to run the pig will drop, the by-pass valve will close, and
the pig will move on.
A more sophisticated version of this pig type has been developed for the purpose
of controlling the velocity and hence the performance of the pig. The variable
speed pig was originally developed by Apache Industries of Edmonton, Canada,
and was designed to run independent of the normal product flow and speed within
a pipeline where high velocities were present (i.e. gas transmission and export
lines). By regulating the amount of by-pass through the body, the speed of the pig
can be controlled within a pre-set range. The variable speed pig senses its
velocity, compares this to a pre-set value, then controls the volume of by-pass to
maintain the required speed. Although, this pig would be ideal for removing
solids and liquids (i.e. limit slug rate) when gas driven, it would be difficult to
justify because of its relative high cost.
Shunting Pig
This three-section pig has been specifically developed to recover stuck or lost pigs
from pipelines. It is generally accepted that running a second pig of similar or
identical design to the one that is stuck or lost is futile, since there is a high
probability that it will succumb to the same misfortune as the original. The
second pig normally becomes damaged as a result of too much load being applied
to push a stuck or lost pig. Using a three section shunting pig, it has been
recognized that the leading section will probably be damaged as it pushes the
debris ahead of it, but drive can be maintained because of the second and third
sections not coming into contact with the debris being pushed. Additionally, to
further assist the recovery of a stuck or lost pig, the shunting pig can be
deliberately made heavy to increase momentum.
Gel Pig
Gel pigs have been successfully used in a number of applications involving solids
removal, liquid displacement, recovery of stuck pigs, product separation, and
application of in-situ coatings (i.e. inhibitor, biocides, solvents etc.). They are
based upon combining a base fluid (water, diesel, crude, solvent etc.) with a
H-0806.35
19-23
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Pros
Cons
Mandrel
pressure.
Mandrel pigs have sealing and scraping elements generally sized close
to the line bore. To avoid the pig from becoming stuck or damaged, a
constant bore and minimum bend radius of 3-5D is required.
SolidCast
Sphere
Can drop into branches off main lines unless they are fitted with
barred tees or oversized tees with a downward slope.
H-0806.35
19-24
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-25
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Line contents - liquid or solids, volumes, solid consistency (i.e. soft, medium
or hard), thickness, location, chemical compatibility, etc.
System design - pigging path profile (i.e. line diameters, length, elevation, size
and position of valves, tees, bends, wyes, etc.), capacity of receiving facilities,
propulsion media (gas or liquid), available drive pressure, etc.
As a rough guide to pig selection for solids removal, a simple decision tree has
been developed. Refer to Figure 19-10. From the decision tree, it is evident that
pig types fall into the general categories of disc (mandrel or solid-cast) or foam
discs. For liquid removal and batching, the most suitable pig types are either cup
disc (mandrel or solid-cast), foam pigs or spheres. Cup disc pigs would provide
the greatest efficiency if the pigging path was deemed compatible, otherwise soft
to medium density foam pigs would be used instead. Spheres as discussed
previously, would be applicable if some form of pigging automation was required
(i.e. high pigging frequency).
19.6
H-0806.35
19-26
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
Line Pipe To ensure smooth passage of pig during transit, a constant bore is
recommended. Maximum deviation of internal diameter from the nominal
should be kept to below the figures given in Table 19.3. Any internal
diameter change should be made within a transition piece of 1:5 slope.
19-27
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-28
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
8-12
10
14-20
20-36
14
16
36 and above
20
Valves All valves should be full bore, have concentric inlet and outlet bores,
no internal producing features and be specified by internal diameter. Valves
should guarantee 100% opening and have limited or zero by-pass.
Tees/Offtakes Branch connections with outlets above 50% of nominal line
size should be barred. At least three diameters of straight pipe should be
installed between any two tees. To prevent solids from being pushed into
manifold branches, the branches should be positioned above the pipe
centerline. Also, branch isolation valves should be located as close to the
manifold header as practically possible to minimize the amount of solids that
could compact into the branch/valve gap
Bends The minimum radius for bends is detailed in Table 19.4 below.
Besides the minimum radius, the ovality (out-of-roundness) of any bend
should be limited to 3%. For 30 and 45 bends, there should be a minimum
straight length of 6 feet for pipe diameters to 24- inch, and 3D for diameters of
24-inch and above.
Table 19-4: Minimum Bend Radius
4 and below
10D
6 - 12
14 and above
5D
3D
Wyes The angle between the branches of a wye should be set at 30. The
bore in the section where the branches merge should be enlarged to 105-110%
of the pipeline diameter. This enables pigs to contact surfaces and expand out
to their unrestrained diameter, hence reducing the friction experienced as it
passes through the wye. The web between the incoming branches should be
made as long as possible to maintain the separation between the bores.
H-0806.35
19-29
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-30
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-31
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The pressure rating of the launcher and receiver should match the pressure rating
of the incoming pip ing and valves and therefore should meet the design code of
ASME B31.4 for liquid pipelines or ASME B31.8 for gas pipelines or other
applicable code.
The kicker line on the launcher and the bypass line on the receiver should be sized
generously. This ensures that pigs can be launched even when they are not
effecting a good seal within the reducer. Also, a generously sized bypass
connection will ensure the smooth arrival of pigs into the receiver under various
flow conditions.
To prevent inadvertent movement of pig within launcher (forward movement into
isolating valve or backward movement resulting in seal loss) and dangerous
pressure traps between pig and valve, a pressure balance line should be run
between the two extreme ends of all pig traps.
To verify the launch and receipt of a pig, all traps require to be fitted with some
type of pig passage indicator. The indicator can either be a mechanical or
electrical (magnetic field) type providing that it satisfies the criteria of being bidirectional, flush with the internal pipe wall and can be safely replaced under
pressure using standard methods
To avoid the potential problems as a result of too much wax arriving at the
receiver (i.e. failure to open/close isolation valves, etc.), arrangements should be
made to heat trace or provide a means to inject solvent into the receiver or
surrounding pipework. The internals should be designed so that they are as free
draining as possible to minimize wax deposition. The injection point should also
provide the means to introduce chemicals or gels during batching operations.
To ensure safety, the launcher and receiver should have vent and drain ports,
reliable pressure gages and seals, and appropriate interlocks to prevent the pig
trap from being opened while pressure remains inside.
19.6.3 Subsea Launcher/Receiver
Subsea pig launchers and receivers (SPL/SPR) have similar functions to
conventional surface launchers and receivers except they are engineered
specifically for subsea deployment and therefore rely upon surface vessel support.
They are normally installed onto a flowline hub profile that incorporates an
H-0806.35
19-32
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
A positive pig release and retaining mechanism is required that can be reliably
operated by ROV. The preferred system should prevent the possibility of pig
hang up and slipping.
H-0806.35
19-33
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Rough alignment systems are required for initial location on the flowline hub
profile. Depending on depth, this could be a minimum of two API guideposts
that have guidewires connected back to the surface or guide funnels that are
incorporated on SPL/SPR or flowline hub.
A simple soft landing system is required that minimizes the likelihood of
damaging sealing mechanisms during installation.
For SPL/SPR that employ dual connections that permit the flow of kicker or
bypass fluid, a fine alignment system will be required to orient the seal
mechanisms of each connector prior to engagement.
A pressure cap sho uld be provided that blanks off the flowline hubs when the
SPL/SPR is not installed. This will be in line with dual barrier philosophy.
Identical arrangements as used by the SPL/SPR for installation and alignment
on the flowline hub(s) will be used by the pressure cap. To ensure safe
operation, the pressure cap should have a ROV operated vent arrangement that
enables pressure to be bled down prior to its removal.
A test and transportation stump should be provided to serve both the pressure
cap and SPL/SPR. The test and transportation skid must allow function and
pressure testing and facilitate the transferring from the horizontal to vertical
and vice versa.
H-0806.35
19-34
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
19.6.4 Propulsion
Liquid or Gas
Most configurations require some pressure source to launch and propel pigs
through the pipeline system. Since the effectiveness of a pigging operation is
dependent upon controlling the speed of the pig, selection of the correct method
of propulsion is critical.
The arrangements for pigging multi-phase production flowlines are different than
those for gas and oil export lines. In oil export or water injection lines, propulsion
and speed control is relatively straightforward since it involves controlling the
output of the final separator stage or the booster pumps. For gas export lines,
although speed control can be more involved because of potential liquid hold-up
and steep riser sections, the speed of the pig again is essentially determined by the
on-stream flow conditions set by the separator or compressor.
When an operator requires pigging of multi-phase production flowlines, a
decision must be made whether to use liquid or gas propulsion. The decision will
depend upon many factors (i.e. flowline conditions, configuration, operating
strategy, fluid availability, process capacity, etc.).
H-0806.35
19-35
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
60000
50000
40000
6 Inch ID
8 Inch ID
30000
10 Inch ID
12 Inch ID
20000
10000
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
H-0806.35
19-36
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-37
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-38
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-39
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The minimum flowrate capacity of the pump should be rated to ensure that the pig
travels at above 3 ft/s. If the pig is used in a cleaning application, then pig bypass
(refer to section 19.7.3) requires to be considered. For wax cleaning a bypass of 5
percent is proposed.
Qd = 1.05 x Vp x Af
where:
Qd = pump discharge flowrate, ft3 /s
Vp = pig velocity, ft/s
Af = flow area, ft2
Assuming the pump has an efficiency of 70 percent, the pumping power
requirements can be calculated as follows:
Wp = Qd x Pd x .262
where:
Wp = pump power, hp
= pump efficiency
To enable the possible remediation of a stuck pig or wax blockage through
pressurization, it would be prudent to consider rating the pigging pump to match
the maximum allowable operating pressure of the flowline.
Compressor Rating
The rating of a compressor for multi-phase flowlines is best determined from
transient modeling. The drive pressure and flow is mainly dependent on the
liquid hold- up within the flowlines and back pressures that may exist for a
particular pig operating mode (i.e. driving against well production or separator).
As an alternative to transient modeling, a simple approach to approximating
compressor rating is outlined below. This approach considers a round trip
pigging configuration for wax removal, where the host is located in shallow water
H-0806.35
19-40
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
and the subsea facility (i.e. subsea manifold and trees) is located in deepwater.
Although well production may be used to return pig once it has traversed the
manifold pigging loop, it is considered prudent to size the compressor based upon
propelling the pig completely around the circuit. Production during this operation
is shut in and flowlines are set at separator pressure. Assuming production
involves wet gas, the flowlines will contain X barrels of liquid hold-up that
accumulates at the lowest point in the system (i.e. subsea manifold).
Approximate values for liquid hold- up can be taken from steady state or transient
calculations.
Because of the gas, liquid, wax and pig drive pressure components, and the
configuration of the system, the compressor load will vary during the pigging
cycle. A typical pressure profile against round trip pigging distance is shown in
Figure 19-14.
The liquid friction component can be estimated using Darcy-Weisbachs equation.
The length component is equivalent to the length of line that the liquid hold-up
represents and the flowrate is equivalent to a pig speed of 3 ft/s. The gas friction
component can be estimated from general equations found in the Engineering
Data Book compiled by the Gas Processors Supplier Associatio n (GPSA). The
pig drive pressure can similarly be estimated as outlined previously. If wax is
present, it is proposed that the wax friction component be equivalent to 25-75
percent of the liquid friction component. Without calculating the total pressure
profile per pigging distance, a conservative approach to determining compressor
rating is proposed, that combines the maximum value of all components.
Pd = Pfl + Pfg + Psl + Pp + P w+ Ps
where:
Pd = compressor discharge pressure, psia
Pfl = liquid friction pressure, psia
Pfg = gas friction pressure, psia
Psl = static liquid pressure, psia
Pp = pig drive pressure, psia
Pw = wax friction pressure, psia
H-0806.35
19-41
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Wc = 0.0857
[Z av ]
k 1
Q
T
k
d k
s
E k 1 P 1
s
Where:
Wc = Compressor brake horsepower, bhp
Q = Compressor flowrate, mmscf
Ts = Suction Temperature, R
Zd = Discharge Compressibility factor
H-0806.35
19-42
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
E = Efficiency
High-speed reciprocating units use 0.82
Low-speed reciprocating units use 0.85
Centrifugal units use 0.72
= Polytropic efficiency
2000
1800
1600
1400
Pig Drive
1200
Liquid Friction
Gas Friction
1000
Wax Friction
Liquid Static
Separator
800
Total Pressure
600
400
200
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Figure 19-13: Typical Pressure Profile for Round Trip Pigging Multiphase
Flowlines
H-0806.35
19-43
1-Dec-00
19.7
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Line conditions during each pig run, including problems and unusual pressure
fluctuations
Conditions at the receiver after the pig run, such as the quantity and type of
debris, conditions of the pig, and resulting pressure drop
H-0806.35
19-44
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
A map and schematic of the pipeline showing its route along with key features
such as valves, bends, branch connections, and diameter changes
19-45
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
predominantly of the gas phase with minimum liquid hold-up, the operator could
still implement the latter speed control method by introducing a slug of liquid into
the flowline prior to the launch of the pig. Another method for controlling speed
under gas propulsion is to operate at higher pressures and maintain a reasonable
level of backpressure on the pig. If the pig should stick during operation, then
instead of packing the flowline and increasing the pressure via the compressor,
the backpressure could steadily be reduced to initiate controlled pig movement.
This procedure should help mitigate the high-speed pig excursions that are
normally associated with gas propulsion. Also, higher backpressures would be
advantageous when pigs are launched from deepwater hosts. The greater
backpressure would limit the differential across the pig and hence the speed
during transit down and up the steep risers.
19.7.3 Bypass
To improve the performance of cleaning pigs some form of pig bypass is
recommended. Bypass involves using the differential pressure across the pig to
create fluid flow from rear to the front of the pig. The stream of fluid that flows
through the pig not only washes the cleaning elements but creates a region of
turbulence ahead of the pig. This region of turbulence is conducive in maintaining
removed solids in suspension. If the removed solid is not held in suspension then
it can settle and accumulate as a plug in front of the pig. Bypass provides
lubrication and enables the pig to slip in the fluid drive stream so that the deposits
removed can float away in the faster flowing stream in front of the pig.
Mandrel cleaning pigs have the bypass designed such that flow enters the pig
from rear via ports, flows past the cleaning elements, and then exits the front via
other ports. For foam pigs and mandrel pigs without ports, bypass is between the
surface bearing area and the pipe wall.
The amount of bypass is specified as a percentage of actual bypass area to the
equivalent area of the flowline internal diameter. Pig vendors have recommended
a range of 3 to 5 percent. If bypass exceeds 5 percent then there is a risk the pig
may install, especially if gas propelled
19.7.4 Solids Handling
Providing removed solids remain in suspension in front of the pig, then the solids
when it arrives at the host should travel through the process equipment trouble
free. However, there may be occasion where the solids could compact within
H-0806.35
19-46
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
reduced bore sections (i.e. shell and tube line heaters). If this blockage is not
timely alleviated then it could possibly extend upstream beyond the host
shutdown valve, and therefore affect the operation of this valve and compromise
system safety.
To mitigate this condition, the contents of the pigged flowline could be diverted
into a dedicated test separator. This would leave the host separator (solids free) to
handle well production. The test separator would also provide the means of
directly assessing the type and quantity of solids being removed per pigging
operation. This would provide valuable information for optimizing the pigging
strategy. To minimize cost, the test separator should only be employed when there
is high uncertainty associated with the contents of the line (i.e. early or infrequent
pig runs, change of production conditions, etc.). Another possible method to
handle solids and avoid blockages would be to incorporate injection points for
introducing chemicals or compressed air at strategic locations on the host
receiving facility.
19.7.5 Operator Training and Manual
An essential part of successful pigging is the training of operator personnel.
Without the correct training, there is a high risk that inappropriate action may be
taken that not only compromises the pigging operation but system production and
the safety of personnel. Simple but detailed operating procedures that cover every
aspect of the pigging operation are required.
19.7.6 Tracking & Location
To ensure pigging operations are conducted in a safe and effective manner, some
method of tracking pig passage is required. In its simplest form, this comprises
mechanical indicators permanently installed on the launcher and receiver.
Verification that a pig has left the launcher or arrived at the receiver will enable
for the loading or removal operations to be safely performed.
When pigging lines for the first time or lines that have been pigged infrequently,
there is a high risk that pigs may become stuck. Therefore, pig tracking in these
situations becomes more critical, especially in deepwater lines, if the time and
expense associated with locating a stuck pig is to be minimized. More
sophisticated tracking methods other than mechanical indicators are required.
The following briefly outlines some of the offshore methods available:
H-0806.35
19-47
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Magnetic
This involves inserting a permanent magnet inside a stainless steel or
polyurethane pig. A sensor mounted on the flowline detects a change in magnetic
field as the pig traverses past. To track a pig the method relies on several sensors
to be located sub sea permanently or positioned temporarily by ROV. When the
sensor is activated it can be communicated to surface via an umbilical, strobe light
monitored by ROV or diver, or acoustic pinger/transponder on sensor. The
accuracy of pig location will depend upon the distance between monitoring
points. Either way, the practicalities and cost associated with deploying
numerous sensors will probably prove to be prohibitively high.
Petrobras use this method to detect the passage of pigs through the pigging loop.
A magnetic sensor mounted on the pigging loop transmits a signal to surface via
the subsea control pod.
Electromagnetic
The electromagnetic method is currently the most widely used in surface gas
pipelines. The pig is installed with an electromagnetic transmitter. The
transmitter when energized radiates an alternating field that penetrates the
flowline and surroundings and is detected by a receiver. Depending on the size of
the flowline, the transmitter may have to be mounted inside a foam pig and be
towed behind the cleaning pig. The same method of tracking the pig as outlined
above for the permanent magnet would apply.
Because of the electrical conductivity of the seawater, the signal is rapidly
attenuated. To detect the signal and precisely locate the pig, an ROV would have
to fly with a receiver and remain relatively close to the flowline. Based on
feedback from vendor, the approximate signal range is affected by the size, wall
thickness and medium within the line. Through simple tests the actual
transmission range can be determined.
BP Troika recently used the electromagnetic method successfully during the
recent repair of a leaking flowline. An electromagnetic transmitter was fitted
inside an extra long foam pig. The pig driven by seawater was used to displace
production from the leaking flowline. An ROV located at the subsea pigging loop
verified the pigs arrival followed by sending signal to stop driving the pig. Once
the line was repaired, the pig was returned by pumping dead crude from the
platform.
H-0806.35
19-48
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Radioactive
This method is similar to the electromagnetic method except that a radioactive
source is used to label the pig. The gamma radiation emitted through the pipe
wall can be used to track and detect the location of the pig. This type of method
requires special personnel trained in handling, transporting, and deploying the
radioactive source. Since this method suffers from significant signal attenuation
because of the seawater, it requires that the ROV remain in close proximity to the
flowline to locate the pigs exact position.
Acoustic Vibration
This system is designed to respond to low energy pulses on the pipe wall and to
amplify the signal to produce a usable audio or visual output. The acoustic
vibrational pulses are generated when the discs or cups of the moving pig make
contact with the weld beads on the flowline. The method is only suitable for gas
lines.
The method relies on the continuous tracking of the pig using several sensors.
Using information from acoustic detectors and correlating this against flowline
information (distance to valves, weld joints, bends, etc.), the distance that the pig
has traveled and its location can be estimated.
Acoustic
The method is based on emitting a low frequency acoustic signal. The signa l can
be transmitted from either a pinger or transponder incorporated into the cleaning
pig or a foam pig towed behind it. Both systems operate more effectively in a line
containing liquid rather than gas. Liquid is a better acoustic conductor than gas.
The pinger emits an acoustic signal at regular intervals and can be tracked by a
surface vessel with hydrophone and directional antenna. To locate a stuck pig,
the same surface vessel and method is used to determine general location,
followed by deploying an ROV equipped with a ping pointer for precise
location. Because the pinger is battery powered and therefore has a finite life,
tracking and locating operations must be performed in a timely manner.
The transponder system is a receiver-transmitter beacon that transmits an acoustic
pulse (reply) on a preset frequency only after receiving a recognized interrogation
pulse from a surface vessel. The transponder will only emit a reply when an
interrogation pulse from the surface vessel is received, thus conserving power and
H-0806.35
19-49
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
19-50
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Single Wall
Pipe-in-Pipe
Gas
Liquid
Multi-Phase
Gas
Liquid
Multi-Phase
**
**
**
**
**
**
****
**
****
Radioactive
**
Acoustic Vibration
***
****
**
Radio
**
**
**
**
**
**
Magnetic
Electromagnetic
Acoustic (Pinger/Transponder)
In addition to verifying the launch and receipt of pigs and their location if they
become stuck, pig tracking provides the operator with other benefits as described
below:
H-0806.35
19-51
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Verify that the pig has left the launcher. Isolate and depressurize the launcher
before performing visual inspection.
If verified as being in the pipeline, check that all pigging path valves are in the
open position. Partially closed valves can stick or damage pigs.
Examine the pig pressure chart or SCADA system for clues where the pig
may have stopped.
becoming stuck. The time of this occurrence can be compared against the pig
launch time and flowrates to determine approximate position. Because of
possible pig by-pass and slippage this could produce large discrepancies.
If return flow is evident the n this suggests that the pig seals could be
damaged. Increase flow rate in the attempt that the higher momentum will
recover the pig. If this fails, consider launching a foam pig or gel train to
effect a seal behind the pig.
If return flow is not evident then this suggests that the pigs seals are still
intact. Increase or rapidly vary the drive pressure to overcome the retaining
force. If this is unsuccessful, then pressure can be reversed providing the
stuck pig had bi-directional sealing capability.
If the above methods fail to locate or recover the stuck pig, then a second pig
complete with tracking device should be run. In this situation the use of the
shunting pig (described previously in section 19.5.6) should be considered
over running a pig that is identical or similar to the one that is stuck. When
the stuck pig can still not be fully recovered, then it is imperative that all
attempts be made to push the stuck pig into a section of line that is in
shallower water. This will significantly reduce the time and cost if the line is
to be cut and repaired.
19.8
References
1. Azevodo, L.F.A, Braga, A.M.B., Naccache, M.F. and Gomes, M.G.F.M.,
Petrobras S.A. (1996), Simple Hydrodynamic Models of the Prediction of Pig
H-0806.35
19-52
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
19-53
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
15. Slater, J. Petrocorp Exploration Ltd. (New Zealand), (1990), Handling New
Zealand Waxy Crude Oil, (OSEA 90138). Offshore Southeast Asia
Conference, Singapore (Dec).
16. Smith, G. L., Knapp Polly Pig Inc., (1996), Pigging Velocities and The
Variable-Speed Pig. Pipes and Pipelines International, Houston, Texas (Feb).
17. Stewart, M and Arnold, K. (1993), Surface Production Operations Volume
2, Design of Gas-Handling Systems and Facilities.
18. Tiratsoo, J. N. H. (1992), Pipeline Pigging Technology.
H-0806.35
19-54
1-Dec-00
20.0
OTHER OPERATIONS
20.1
Flow Monitoring
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
This section of the guideline will first describe the requirements for instrumentation of
multiphase flowlines. The context of this is of data acquisition above and beyond the
normal measurements of pressures, temperatures, and single phase flow rates after
gas/oil/water separation.
In the later half of this section brief descriptions of available techniques are given. Some
are non- intrusive, and may be fitted temporarily to systems. Other measurement
techniques will require a spoolpiece or tapping in the line.
For monitoring of phase flow rates in multiphase flow, please refer to Section 20.2.
20.1.1 Instrumentation Requirements
Flow Regime Identification
The original requirement for flow regime identification in oilfield multiphase flowlines
arose from the R&D activities set up to develop and verify flow regime prediction
techniques. The design of processing facilities is affected by flow regime, in that slug
flow may cause unacceptable gas and liquid flowrate variations in the plant. Therefore,
reliable prediction of flow regime over a wide range of gas and liquid flow rates,
pressures, temperatures, fluid compositions, and line topographies are very important.
Refer to Section 20.3.2 for information on the different measurement techniques
available for this activity.
Line Holdup Estimation
The next step beyond identification of flow regime is to be able to determine the hold-up
of liquid in the pipeline. This is required in the assessment of pigged liquid volumes, and
in the prediction of slug volumes generated by flowrate or topography changes. Some
pressure loss prediction methods also rely on predictions of liquid hold- up.
As with flow regime identification this activity is largely R&D based, to verify holdup
prediction methods for future design requirements, rather than for a current or future
oilfield operation. For this activity the techniques described in Section 20.3.2 may be
appropriate.
H-0806.35
20-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
20-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Reservoir Management
Knowledge of the volumes of fluids produced from different wells in a field is generally
required in order to be able to manage depletion of the reservoir. Water breakthrough
needs to be identified, as does gas coning. The current industry standard is to flow wells
one at a time to a test separator via a dedicated test line. The flowrates of gas, oil, and
water are measured after separation. Wells are tested typically once a month. Desired
accuracy is of the order of +/-5 to 10 percent on each phase (though 10 to 15 percent is
more typical).
In an increasing number of satellite tiebacks to existing installations, the requirement to
have a local test separator, or a second pipeline back to a test separator at the host
facilities, can add an appreciable cost to the basic development. Using a multiphase
metering system that is more compact and cheaper than the test separator system could
reduce the cost of metering for reservoir management. Details of possible systems are
contained in Section 20.2, Multiphase Meter Systems.
Production Allocation
In some developments with multiple fields the cost of installation of separate processing
trains for each field may be prohibitively expensive. Subject to the agreement of all
partners and regulatory authorities, it may be acceptable to allocate production back to
the individual fields (to determine royalties and taxes) using methods that do not require
full processing trains with fiscal metering.
In some cases a remote test separator will be used with adjustments made to ensure that
the sum of well allocations from all contributing fields equals the fiscally metered export
rates from the central processing facility.
In other cases a further cost saving may be obtained by using multiphase metering
systems either remotely or just upstream of where the production from one field is comingled with that from other fields (e.g. under consideration for ETAP). The multiphase
metering methods currently available for this activity are described in Section 20.2,
Multiphase Meter Systems.
H-0806.35
20-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Fiscal Measurement
A further, even more difficult requirement is to measure the phase flowrates in a pipeline
sufficiently accurately to allow for custody transfer to the same level of accuracy as
current single phase standards.
As yet no multiphase measurement technique or product is sufficiently accurate to
achieve this to single phase flow standards. Such accuracy requirements can be less than
+/-1 percent.
In parallel to developments aimed at improving the accuracy of multiphase metering
systems will be negotiations as to what is an acceptable accuracy for partners and
governments associated with an oilfield development. These two aspects (technology
advancement and relaxation of accuracy) will probably both have to progress for fiscal
metering of multiphase flow to become a reality. Some precedent is already found on the
North Slope of Alaska, where small fields have their production allocated on the basis of
well tests.
20.1.2 Techniques Available
Pressure
The analysis of a pressure measurement made by a relatively fast pressure transducer
may yield some information. Differential pressure across two transducers has even more
value.
It is possible to obtain an indication of flow regime from a pressure measurement.
Simple observation shows the passage of slugs past a measurement location as a
significant and potentially prolonged rise in pressure. Pattern recognition can be used to
analyze the signal further to differentiate between stratified smooth, stratified wavy and
annular flow. Such an analysis may be supplemented by flowrate or pressure loss
information, which will significantly reduce the uncertainty in the deduction. However,
it is not possible to get information on liquid content in a cross-section from pressure
only.
H-0806.35
20-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
20-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
20-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
transmit through the pipe horizontally. The existence of liquid at the mid pipe location
will define whether the flow is wavy or annular.
Setting two gauges on the pipe separated by a distance allows cross-correlation of the
signals to determine the velocity of the slugs and waves between the measurement
locations. Coupled with the measured time taken for a slug to pass a gauge will yield a
slug length.
Figure 20.1-3: 0-15 Minute Period and Slug Flow, 15-30 Minute Period and Wavy Flow.
X-ray
The expense and size of X-ray systems has prevented their widespread use in the oilfield
environment. However, there have been isolated tests in which an X-ray system has been
used to identify flow pattern. Real-time displays are possible of the fluids in a pipe.
The principle of operation is the same as the gamma ray densitometer in that the fluids in
the pipe (gas, oil, and water) absorb X-rays to different degrees. By directing an X-ray
beam across the pipe and mounting a detector on the opposite side of the pipe to the
source, it is possible to see the flow behavior in the pipe.
H-0806.35
20-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
20-8
1-Dec-00
20.2
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
20.2.1 Introduction
In general, oil industry effort to develop multiphase flow metering techniques has been in
progress since the mid 1980s with one or two exceptions, such as various approaches by
Texaco, which commenced a few years earlier. As a result of this industry-wide effort,
key physical measurement techniques investigated are now emerging as commercially
available field test hardware.
By comparison, relatively little attention has been paid to the problem of calibrating
multiphase flow meters. Some of the development projects have resulted in the
construction of oil/water/gas flow loop facilities for test purposes but little thought seems
to have been given to the problem of calibration of multiphase flow meters for field
service.
This section of the MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE presents a review of
multiphase metering systems. This encompasses what are believed to be the most
advanced and soundly based technologies, though some discrepancies may exist due to
old information and evolving technology. The review is structured to give a background
perspective to the preceding statements concerning calibration. This section also includes
information on current capabilities and costs as well as describing the different
measurement concepts.
The following section of the manual, Section 20.3, concerns calibration philosophy of
multiphase flow meters. The purpose of this is to highlight the key aspects and challenges
faced in establishing a calibration methodology for multiphase flow meters. Thoughts on
the problem are presented with reference to calibration for single-phase flow.
20.2.2 Multiphase Meter Development Review
Standard terms are used in quoting accuracy or error percentages. Specifically, relative
error means error or deviation expressed as a percentage of actual flow rate. Absolute
error refers to an error or deviation expressed as a percentage of full scale.
All of the metering approaches described below is targeted with accuracy for well test
duty and the possibility of allocation of production between wells. The high accuracy
levels associated with custody transfer and the term fiscal metering in single phase
flow metering have not been addressed. On the basis of research and development
experience to date, this level of accuracy is not likely to be realized by multiphase
metering techniques in the foreseeable future.
H-0806.35
20-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
20-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The K-factor curve to enable this in multiphase flow can be determined on the basis of a
calibration in a single-phase water flow loop.
The flow driven elements of the screw meter generate a pressure drop that depends on
flow rate, gas volume fraction, and flow regime. For high liquid loading, pressure drops
of up to 2.2 bar (32 psi) have been observed during tests when the meter has been run at
the top of its range.
The meter incorporates a commercially available gamma densitometer to measure
mixture density. This may be factory calibrated on fluids of known density (such as air
and tap water). A densitometer of this type has been in use subsea, in order to monitor
multiphase flow behavior at the foot of the Forties Echo-Alpha 12-inch riser, since May
1988. This densitometer has required no subsequent intervention and is still functioning.
The principle behind the screw meter concept is that the positive displacement elements
constrain the phases to move at a single velocity. The densitometer beam passes through
a cavity between the screws mid-way along the meter axis. In principle, if slip between
the phases were fully eliminated between the screws, the densitometer reading would
equate to the true mixture density relating to the overall proportions of oil, water, and gas
flowing in the pipeline. Coupled with the water cut reading from a second instrument,
the mixture density and total swept volume readings can then be used to solve out the
flow rates of oil, water and gas at line conditions. (This assumes that the individual phase
densities are known as a function of pressure and temperature, which are also measured
at the multiphase metering section).
All the test data to date have shown a tendency for the mixture density (or total mass flow
measurement of the stream) to exhibit a bias error which is a function of gas void
fraction, GVF. Above 40 percent GVF, this bias depends on the installation site i.e. it is
specific to the site. Currently, in order to achieve relative errors in actual flow rate of
each phase of 5 to 10 percent, this bias in mixture density or total mass flow rate must be
calibrated out by reference to a measurement of total mass throughput at the site
installation. This is not a regular calibration requirement but would be necessary initially
and subsequently following any change of operations that significantly influenced the
nature (GVF) of the flow stream. Future development and design improvements are
expected to reduce this requirement for a site calibration on total mass.
Test data to date indicate that relative error uncertainty increases with GVF. With the
bias correction, the scatter of relative error in phase flow rate increases from 5 to 10
H-0806.35
20-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
percent at a maximum GVF of 95 percent. If the mixture density or mass bias error is not
site calibrated then the meter exhibits a general uncertainty in total mass flow rate
increasing with GVF to +/-15 percent at 80 percent GVF. Without a total mass bias
correction, the phase flow rate measurement errors can become large at high gas void
fractions. The meter has not been field tested at the highest GVFs above 95 percent.
Further experience would be required to confirm the GVF range of the meter at the
highest levels.
The above uncertainty levels relate to relative errors in total flow rate and individual
phase flow rates. They have been determined on the basis of the scatter of measurement
errors observed from all the test data (different sites and wells). It is possible that site
specific calibration on total mass flow rate on an individual well basis could exhibit a
superior repeatability, thus reducing the uncertainty from the above levels.
The bias error in mixture density is believed (on the basis of analysis of all the test data)
to be attributable to flow pattern regime effects between the screws which do not fully
homogenize the flow and eliminate slip in the idealized manner. Further design
modifications could be investigated to address this, which might eliminate the current
need for a site-specific calibration.
The BP meter based system, including any of the separate devices being developed which
will measure water cut, essentially, can be factory calibrated using single phase fluids in
relatively straightforward factory test cells.
Framo Multiphase Metering System
The Framo system comprises a mixer or flow conditioner which can be designed to mix
slugs and gas pockets and produce a steady exit stream from intermittent regimes (phases
segregated axially along the pipe can be mixed). The flow conditioner vessel is compact
relative to a separator and its functioning is entirely passive (no moving parts, valves, or
level controls).
Total flow
A venturi is being tested, however information indicates questionable accuracy. It is
currently unclear to what extent this is attributable to the challenge of measuring pressure
differential accurately over a wide turndown (the measurement data are particularly
erroneous at high gas fraction). It may also be that, in spite of the mixing of the flow
stream, localized phase slip effects still persist through the measurement section.
H-0806.35
20-12
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Phase fractions
Dual energy gamma ray attenuation measurements are used to determine the ratios of oil,
water and gas. As for the total flow measurement, accuracy is currently subject to an
unacceptable degree of uncertainty. Again, the extent to which phase slip is responsible
is unknown. Certainly, the current basic dual energy gamma ray detection system is
subject to fundamental limitations. However, new techno logy and steps within the JIP to
improve the system could yet move the system forward.
The most recent test results show relative measurement errors in phase flow rates and
total flow of 20 to 30 percent.
The mixing unit could ultimately be used with other measurement devices. Dielectric
composition measurement techniques being developed elsewhere might do better than the
dual energy gamma system. It is possible that the mixer could assist cross-correlation
velocity methods to achieve a degree of consistent and reproducible measurement.
The current JIP is developing this multiphase metering package as an offshore module.
Framo Engineerings expertise lies principally in this area. The cost to supply a Framo
mixer based system, either as an offshore package or in terms of the off- shelf elements of
the multiphase metering system, is unknown. The field prototype designed for a nominal
3-inch or 4- inch line, is in a barrel approximately 4 m long by 0.5 m diameter. Its
component parts, engineering and manufacture resulted in a total cost of approximately
$900,000. Total weight is 2.5 tons. This unit is built for topsides use only, but some of
the key subsea design of component parts (such as subsea housing of sensors and
electronics processing and data trans mission, barrier fluid system, electric coupler etc.)
have been accommodated in the prototype.
The complete prototype system has exhibited pressure drops reaching 2.6 bar during the
flow loop test program. This was realized at flow rates comparable to the top of the range
of the prototype BP multiphase flow meter.
Calibration of the Framo system would rest with the type of measurement used. For the
venturi meter, it is primarily a matter of subjecting the pressure sensors to accurately
known fluid pressure. This does assume that a universal or repeatable and predictable
venturi discharge coefficient can be established for well mixed multiphase flow.
The dual energy gamma system requires calibration on fluids of known density and
attenuation coefficient. Once installed, some checking should be possible using a barrier
H-0806.35
20-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
fluid (pumped via umbilical) system which Framo have incorporated into the test
prototype design for various functions such as sealing and pressure leg flushing.
However, variations in phase properties, such as water salinity or attenuation coefficients
of the phases with any change in phase composition, would result in the need for some
means of re-calibration in-situ. This could result in a need to take fluid samples unless
some means of separating and isolating individual phases in the measurement section can
be developed.
The question then remains as to how calibration will change with any service degradation
of, for example, the critical venturi throat and gamma beam path cross-stream
dimensions. Here, as for the BP meter, the desirability for regular re-calibration, possibly
in- line using some means of proving, must be addressed.
A further question arises as to whether the Framo mixer can be designed in any
application to accommodate the full range of flow regimes, flow rates and phase fractions
expected over the life of the well pad. (The same question applies to the venturi). Framo
have developed a design basis for the mixer. For example, it can be sized and
dimensioned to suit a certain range of slug and bubble lengths. Framo claim, but have yet
to prove, that it can be designed to cover the full range of regimes including annular.
Whilst this may in principle be correct, it remains to be seen in practice whether
universality can be achieved without excessive bulk and multistage configuration of the
mixer.
CMR (Christian Michelsen Research)/Fluenta Capacitance Cell
This full-bore non-intrusive phase fraction sensor has been developed alongside the BP
multiphase flow meter. It measures in-situ phase fractions within a pipe cross-section
where the phases are uniformly distributed. The test program for gas void fractions
(GVFs) of up to 50 percent has demonstrated absolute errors of +/- 2 percent phase
fraction.
The existing cell will operate on oil-continuous liquid phase only. Water continuous
liquid (or a water film around the sensor lining wall) results in a short circuit and
meaningless reading. CMR (formerly CMI) are developing an additional sensor for the
system which uses an inductance principle to measure phase fractions with watercontinuous emulsions. Both types of sensor rely on a simultaneous gamma ray
attenuation measurement of cross-section mixture density in order to resolve the three
phase fractions.
H-0806.35
20-14
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The water cut may be derived from the phase fraction measurements. A class 1500
version of this device was tested downstream of the BP multiphase meter at Prudhoe Bay
in 1992. These tests indicated that, by dynamically tracking the varying cross-sectional
phase fractions in the multiphase stream, the cell could give accurate readings of water
cut (within 1 percent absolute) for GVFs close to 90 percent. The limitation on achieving
this in all cases was imposed by annular flowing well streams and flows where slugs of
significant duration and liquid hold-up (instantaneous GVF well below the stream overall
average level) were not in evidence.
Calibration of the phase fraction cell for the field trial was completed at the CMR
laboratory. Samples of dead crude and formation water were shipped from Prudhoe Bay
to enable calibration in a laboratory dielectric measurement cell. This is used to
pressurize the sample oil and force into solution methane gas under varying pressures.
As well as requiring as input constants the dielectric properties of the individual
production fluid phases, the CMR/Fluenta system also relies on knowledge of the
densities of the phases as a function of line pressure and temperature.
CMR and Fluenta have adapted the capacitance sensing section into a multi-electrode
axial array in order to yield velocity measurements by cross-correlation processing of the
electrode signals. The continuing project is now attempting the measurement of dual
velocities by using combinations of different length electrodes in order to make some
allowance for slip between the gas and liquid phases. All the drawbacks highlighted in
the earlier comments, concerning the uncertainties associated with cross-correlation flow
velocity measurement, apply. An accuracy figure for phase flow rates measured using
the combined phase fraction and cross-correlation measurements cannot, at present, be
quoted with any meaning.
The 1992 test program, including the BP field trial and quite separate test programs by
two other operators, exposed a hitherto not experienced fundamental flaw with the use of
the ceramic insulating liner material (development of a ceramic liner was pushed hard by
CMR during earlier development of the cell and was a significant part of it). It has been
discovered that the ceramic has a surface affinity to water under certain flowing
conditions, which results in a completely erroneous sensor response signal. Fluenta is
investigating alternative liner materials. Further extended field testing will be required to
establish the suitability of any new candidate insulating materials.
H-0806.35
20-15
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Typically, Fluenta has quoted on the order of $300,000 for one of their multiphase
metering systems in the past. The sensor is a compact spool, approximately 0.5 m in
length and weighing one ton in the case of the cell tested at Prudhoe Bay.
Roxar (formerly MFI) Microwave System
A competitor of the CMR/Fluenta system, this microwave instrument also measures
mixture dielectric constant and gamma ray attenuation (mixture density) to resolve the insitu cross-sectional phase fractions of oil, water and gas.
In one configuration, the instruments microwave transmission and sensing section
(which measures the phase shift of the microwave energy caused by the multiphase
mixture, related to the phase proportions) functions in water continuous as well as oil
continuous emulsions. This version of the Roxar instrument, known as the full range
meter is still undergoing laboratory level development of a field prototype.
A lower price version (so called LP versio n, not to be confused with low pressure) lent
itself to faster track development and was offshore on Statoils Gullfaks B platform in
late 1992. This configuration of the microwave sensing spool permits measurement with
oil continuous emulsions only, but is more sensitive (and expected, therefore, to be more
accurate) than the full range variant.
Roxar quotes the low price oil-continuous instrument at an estimated price of $200,000.
This includes a twin sensor arrangement which permits a single velocity measurement by
cross-correlation. A price for the more expensive full range device has not yet been
quoted.
The sensors are intrusive, using antennae probes that protrude into the flow. The LP
sensor comprises a resonant cavity, bounded by a grid of metal strips across the flow
stream at each end of the sensing spool section.
The sensor spools of the prototypes built to date are 3- inch bore. The two parts of the
meter incorporating cross-correlation measurement of velocity result in a measurement
spool approximately 1 m in length. One flow composition measurement spool accounts
for half this length. A further spool housing pressure and temperature transmitters is
necessary (this also applies to the Fluenta/CMR system).
The Gullfaks B trials of the LP meter have resulted in only a few tens of hours exposure
to production fluids so far. The phase fraction data agreed well with test separator
H-0806.35
20-16
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
measurements for the limited number of test cases. The GVF at the Gullfaks B test site is
below 40 percent and the evidence suggests that the multiphase stream is well mixed and
steady in nature.
Thus, these tests represent the easy end of the multiphase spectrum. Phase fraction
results were within the +/-2 percent absolute errors seen in laboratory flow loop tests.
The few cross-correlation measurement data, in terms of both mixture velocity and phase
flow rates, were more erratic. Relative errors of +/-10 to 20 percent were reported.
The steady and relatively uniform nature of the low GVF multiphase stream of these field
trials should have provided a flow structure and velocity profile of minimal complexity
and least removed from that of the flow loop testing by Roxar. This should have favored
the cross-correlation technique. However, such a flow stream also exhibits relatively
weak perturbations in mixture dielectric properties on which to cross-correlate. This
would tend to give a broad and relatively ill-defined correlation peak from which to
deduce time of flight (to calculate velocity).
As for the CMR/Fluenta cell, calibration of the Roxar phase fraction system, in principle,
should rely primarily on factory or laboratory set-up prior to installation. Both systems
use commercially available Cs137 gamma ray densitometers, as used for the BP
multiphase meter, which can be calibrated on fluids such as air and tap water. The
microwave unit requires data including density of the dead crude, produced water density
and conductivity. The Roxar system then relies on application specific prediction
equations of the variation of these quantities and gas density as a function of line pressure
and temperature.
Roxar can configure their flow composition software to derive the flow stream as a split
of total mass proportion of hydrocarbons and water, as opposed to volume fractions of
oil, water and gas. These output readings are far less sensitive to uncertainties in the
individual phase densities than the outputs of the phase fractions.
This split of output data would, of course, need to be related to total flow throughput to
derive the total hydrocarbon and water mass flow rates. This could only be achieved if it
could always be ensured that the phases are well mixed and flowing all at one velocity
through the measurement spool (zero slip).
The question needs to be answered as to whether output of total hydrocarbon mass and
water throughput is a more useful operating measure than in-situ volume flow rates of oil,
water and gas. The latter usually require the application of correlations to account for
H-0806.35
20-17
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
shrinkage and solution gas factors in order to convert to flow rate units expressed at
standard pressure and temperature.
Like the phase fraction cell developed by CMR, the fraction part of the Roxar microwave
technique could be used to supply a water cut reading to the BP multiphase meter system.
It would be used to dynamically track the phase fractions and should yield water cut in
high GVF flows as well as covering the lower part of the GVF range. Such an off-shelf
option should presumably cost less than the estimate given above for the Roxar LP flow
meter, which includes an extra sensor and software to allow cross-correlation
measurement of velocity.
It should be noted that Roxar have already successfully commercialized a water cut
sensor using the same microwave hardware configuration as the LP meter. This
instrument is for gas- free emulsions and should not be confused with the multiphase flow
meter technology described above, which incorporates a gamma densitometer and
additional sophistication in order to measure oil- water-gas flows.
Neural Networks by EDS-Scicon and CALtec Ltd (JIP)
The aim of the project is to develop a multiphase metering technique which uses
advanced parallel processing (neural networks) to apply pattern recognition to the
dynamic signals from relatively simple, low cost instrumentation such as gamma ray
densitometers and pressure transmitters.
Neural networks have the capability to train themselves to recognize features from
complex phenomena. The idea is to train the neural network to relate recognized features
to the flow rates of oil, water, and gas.
Activity, so far, has involved training different structures of neural network on flow loop
multiphase flow data and some gamma ray densitometer field data supplied by BP. The
object was to give EDS-Scicon the opportunity to work the networks on multiphase flow
and demonstrate the technique. Typically, this has involved using a data set of 40 flow
rates and predicting each data point (oil, water, and gas flow rates) by training on the
other 39.
Flow rate relative error data produced by this exercise exhibit uncertainties broadly in the
range of 10 to 30 percent. However, the work is at an early stage. One of the difficulties
facing the approach is the general lack of abundant, reliable and accurate field data
H-0806.35
20-18
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
containing oil, water and gas flow rates and corresponding signals from sensors such as
pressure transmitters.
The program will need to address which types of sensor are most suitable in detecting
characteristic features, and where on the pipeline they should be installed to pick these
out.
The method requires expertise to adapt and set- up the neural network software to the
application. The cost of this and of the computing capability has not yet determined.
The system works best where there is an abundance of data on which to train the neural
network and when interpolating between these data but not extrapolating. Given the
general non-reproducibility of multiphase flow this may make calibration of the system
as a universal or stand-alone metering solution impossible in practice.
If the neural network approach can be provided at low cost, it could lend itself to
applications where the system would be trained against other expensive equipment (other
multiphase meters or test separator systems) where this has limited availability and
therefore impedes the well testing and reservoir management capability.
Texaco Starcut Meter
This meter (now licensed and manufactured by Jiskoot Autocontrol) uses measurements
of the phase shift and attenuation of 10 GHz microwaves caused by the flow stream to
determine water cut. The instrument will measure water cut of emulsions containing
little or no free gas. It works with oil-continuous and water-continuous emulsions, i.e.
water cut from 0 to 100 percent. Jiskoot Autocontrol can quote a number of oil industry
site applications and states that gas volume fractions of up to 25 percent can be handled.
The instrument is already developing a field track record ahead of the other phase
fraction/water cut devices described above, although these instruments have, of course,
already demonstrated a measurement capability on gas fractions significantly higher than
25 percent.
Texacos development effort has concentrated on accumulating a vast database of
mixing curves fo r a wide range of oils and water chemistries. This is stored in the
systems microprocessor, packaged with the sensor in a compact unit. The unit can
continuously perform an auto-calibration in field service to ensure the correct mixing
curve (the curve traces oil/water ratios from the microwave phase shift and attenuation
measurements).
H-0806.35
20-19
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The detection speed of the device is quoted as >300 samples/second. It is claimed that it
can cope with variations in fluid properties such as salinity. This could give it a
significant advantage over the CMR/Fluenta and Roxar systems, which rely on operator
input of salinity and equations to allow for its variation with temperature.
The Starcut meter determines phase properties such as crude oil SG or density and water
salinity and provides output signals which track these properties. The ability to track
salinity is an attractive option for reservoir management. It could provide an indication
of water flood progress or potential problems with premature breakthrough of injection
fluids, for example.
Texaco claims the Starcut device can tolerate up to 25 percent GVF in the flow stream
though no data have been published to substantiate this. They state that development
work continues in order to increase the free gas content acceptable and the capability to
measure the gas fraction.
The sensing flow path is of rectangular cross-section of approximately 10 mm by 5 mm
normal to the flow path. This limits the device to rely on a slip stream sample
arrangement in the majority of applications since it clearly imposes a throughput
limitation (quoted at 200 bpd liquid).
The present Jiskoot pricing for the off- shelf unit, of approximately $70,000, would also
make the Starcut unit a preferable option for the BP meter relative to the Roxar and
Fluenta measurement systems.
The throughput limitation of the Starcut monitor and its consequent limitation as a slip
stream device could be viewed as disadvantageous relative to the Fluenta and Roxar full
bore measurement cells. Once the factory has calibrated the meter, no further
adjustments are required as the meter performs its own auto-calibration once in service.
Kongsberg Offshore AS Capacitor Cross-Correlation Multiphase Flow Meter
In 1992, Kongsberg Offshore commercialized a multi-capacitor multiphase meter
developed by the Shell Exploration and Production laboratory (KSEPL) in the
Netherlands.
The measurement spool comprises two closely spaced (10 mm apart) parallel plates
mounted across the center of the pipe. The spool is mounted in horizontal pipeline with
the plates vertical and in the plane of minimum resistance to the flow stream (i.e. aligned
H-0806.35
20-20
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
in the direction of flow). The plates support a column of small rectangular electrode pairs
which spans the diameter of the pipe. Two more electrodes are positioned further
downstream on the plate, one near the top and one close to the bottom of the pipe.
The meter has been designed to measure flow rate of oil, water, and gas in slug flow.
Electrodes can sense the gas- liquid interface. The flow perturbations sensed at the upper
and lower downstream electrodes are cross-correlated with the corresponding signals of
the upstream electrodes.
Simultaneously, the capacitor outputs are used to determine the cross-sectional area
occupied by ga s and liquid in the pipe by measuring the liquid hold- up. This information
is combined with the cross-correlation velocity measurements to determine gas and liquid
flow rate. The technique processes the electrode signals in such a way as to make some
allowance for the proportion of gas entrained in the main body of the liquid.
The modeling assumes a slug velocity equal to the gas pocket bulk velocity. Water cut is
determined from capacitance sensed by the lower electrodes immersed in the liquid film
of the slug flow. Currently, the unit only works for oil-continuous emulsions.
Shell states that units have been undergoing field trials in Oman and Gabon with
consistent results compared to test separator equipment although exhibiting some bias
error. They intend to continue funding development to extend the capability of the
system to operate in non-intermittent flows and water-continuous emulsions. Low
pressure flow loop results published show gross errors in flow rate measurement outside
of a cluster of points lying within the intermittent region of the flow regime map.
Shells intention has been to target this type of meter at remote land-based sites with
significant pipeline between wellhead and manifold where well defined slug flow occurs.
They cla im to have a number of such applications and state that, in these cases, the level
of accuracy achievable with the unit (quoted at between 10 percent to 20 percent of flow
rate) is acceptable.
In sacrificing accuracy by the nature of the technique, Shell has attempted to evolve a
relatively low cost unit, which could allow one meter per well. (Less than $100,000 per
unit has been quoted with a target for Kongsberg to reduce this to $50,000). Also, Shell
wished to avoid deployment of nucleonic sources (common to most of the other
techniques) at remote locations on land.
H-0806.35
20-21
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Currently, the units are available in 3- inch and 4 line sizes to ANSI class 600 rating. The
4 sensor spool weighs 90 kg and is 556 mm in length. The Kongsberg data sheets do
not include a sour service specification at present.
In principle, the cross-correlation measurements to measure velocity should not rely on
flow calibration. However, as noted above, Shell have reported some systematic errors
during field testing. The compositional calibration of the capacitors relies on readings
with the separate phases present. In this respect, the method has similar setup
requirements to the Fluenta/CMR system, which also, in effect, relies on knowledge of
the capacitance reading on single phase fluid.
20.2.3 Summary
The main techniques for multiphase metering which have emerged can be broadly
classified into two categories. One type of approach employs flow control or conditioning
in order to establish reproducible conditions at the measurement section. Other
techniques have adopted the principle of cross-correlation velocity measurement in
combination with phase fraction measurements to establish the phase flow rates. This
latter approach is highly susceptible to the complex and generally non-reproducible
nature of multiphase flows.
The general recommendation of the philosophy is that the multiphase metering
techniques employing flow pattern- independent principles will most readily facilitate a
calibration methodology. For certain types of these technologies, such as the BP screw
meter based system, test experience is demonstrating a way forward using relatively
straightforward and low cost factory calibration methods utilizing single phase fluids. All
measurement techniques are likely to require wide test experience to evaluate and evolve
standards. The level of accuracy and its qualification required within the oil industry will
dictate the extent of the testing effort. See Section 20.3 for further discussion of the
calibration of multiphase metering systems.
20.3
Meter Calibration
20.3.1 Introduction
In this section, the basic aspects associated with calibration of multiphase flow meters are
listed. The special challenges posed by multiphase flow (such as the difficulty of ensuring
reproducibility, without which a calibration cannot exist) are then highlighted. In the face
of these challenges, some theories based on test experience of metering multiphase flows
to date are presented as to how multiphase flow meter calibration philosophy might
develop in practice.
H-0806.35
20-22
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
20-23
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
such that flow calibration is not needed. The accuracy of the orifice plate can then be
traceable by metrology.
20.3.3 Multiphase Flow and Calibration
Multiphase flows are more complex and less well understood than single phase flows.
They are generally not predictable in the same way as single phase pipe flows. For
example, multiphase flow behavior cannot be guaranteed in terms of a steady and defined
velocity profile even if certain rules regarding pipe length are obeyed. In general, the
multiphase flow behavior depends on the entire history of the flow path from the source
and influences from a significant distance downstream. Experience has shown that the
nature of the multiphase flow patterns is unique and therefore not necessarily repeatable
or reproducible between one installation and another. Therefore, a multiphase flow loop
calibration would not necessarily represent the field installation. Even for the case of a
proving system, the change in flow path in bringing on line the prover could alter the
multiphase flow behavior at the flow meter and, therefore, its response characteristic.
In addition to the installation dependency of the multiphase flow behavior, the nature of
flow pattern can drastically change through the service life of the flowline. For example,
a multiphase flow meter might be subjected to a stream of oil flow containing dispersed
gas bubbles in the initial stages of service. As gas content increases with the depletion of
the reservoir, the meter could be subjected to intermittent flow behavior, such as plug or
slug flow. Finally, in the extreme case, the meter could have to cope with annular flows
of high gas content and significantly higher total fluid volume throughput than in earlier
service life. Additionally, the latter stages of reservoir depletion and any associated
secondary and tertiary recovery schemes could result in an increasing portion of water in
the flow stream.
The above discusses calibration for multiphase flow meters by relating to the case of
single phase flow. It has highlighted the difficulty in realizing reproducibility in
multiphase flows to determine measurement response. Measurement response in
multiphase flow relates to more than one signal, which must be related to oil, water, and
gas flow rates. Therefore, the calibration process in multiphase flow can be even more
involved than for existing single phase methods.
The multiphase meter measurement can involve several simultaneous sensor responses.
The combined influence of the errors in all these signals will determine the overall
accuracy of the multiphase meter in measuring the phase flow rates and this must be
determined by the calibration procedure.
H-0806.35
20-24
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
20-25
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
to accept argument based on sound theoretical principles with only limited flow loop and
field test evidence of proof of theory. Given its physical complexity and comparative
youth as a branch of fluid dynamics tackled by engineering science, multiphase flow will
not readily lend itself to the latter approach.
Other multiphase metering approaches have addressed measurement using sensors which
primarily respond to the composition of the fluid stream. These development programs
have concentrated on ways of measuring the phase fractions or ratios but some have
adapted the sensing elements to yield additional cross-correlation measurements of fluid
velocity.
The calibration of such sensors to measure mixture composition is a relatively
straightforward proposition where it can be ensured that the phases will be well mixed or
uniformly distributed within the sensing volume in service. Typically, the techniques for
measuring phase fractions, described in Section 20.2, apply mixing models relating
sensor response to mixture composition. The calibration curves by these models are
fixed by measuring the response signal on the single phase fluids.
The tendency of multiphase flow to form segregated patterns of the phases in the pipe can
invalidate calibrations by this approach. Where the sensors have a fast response, it is
possible for these devices to track fluctuating flow stream composition provided the
phases are distributed uniformly in the cross-sectional plane. This can be achieved by
mounting the composition sensor in a vertical spool, although some form of flow
conditioner may still be required to break up annular flow (or intermittent annular flow
pattern) upstream of the sensor.
Some highly sophisticated types of multi-sensor compositional devices are being
investigated. These systems are being developed to have a rapid response, which
accounts for phase distribution within the sensing zone. The complexity of these
approaches may make them difficult to prove in practice.
If composition can be accurately dynamically tracked, it must be combined with
simultaneous total flow rate or velocity measurement to provide phase flow rates. Even
in dispersed or uniformly distributed flow patterns, slip (the difference in velocity
between the phases) can be significant. Thus, either some form of flow conditioning to
eliminate (or minimize) slip is required or else the individual in-situ phase velocities must
be measured.
H-0806.35
20-26
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
20-27
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
loops. For example, one particular multiphase flow meter test loop built in Europe cost
on the order of $1.6 million to build in the mid 1980s. It is a low pressure 4 nominal
bore loop using gas-oil, tap water, and air which are metered to traceable standards. This
requires regular primary calibration of the multi- spool reference metering and monthly
checking of the proving system by the national standards authority. Additionally, fulltime maintenance backup is employed. This degree of rigor is necessary in order to
qualify multiphase metering to +/-5 percent relative errors (a target usually quoted for
multiphase flow meters).
After initial set-up, calibration, and installation, there remains the question of subsequent
calibration or proving in service. Further thought on this is prompted in the review of
multiphase metering techniques in Section 20.2.2. Ultimately, the proving requirement
of the flow pattern- independent techniques could evolve to a basic requirement where
simple static, dimensional, or self diagnostic checks will ensure measurement to within
specified uncertainty bands.
In summary of the above, two key approaches to multiphase metering have emerged.
One approach involves conditioning or controlling the flow stream to ensure reproducible
flow conditions at the measurement section. The second approach uses the crosscorrelation technique in combination with flow composition sensors to derive the phase
flow rates but is highly susceptible to the complex and generally non-reproducible nature
of multiphase flows. It could be argued that multiphase metering systems based on flow
pattern- independent principles (the first of the above approaches) would most lend
themselves to calibration. Ultimately, these techniques could rely on only simple
methods of field calibration checking, which do not necessitate comparisons against flow
measurements by another master meter or proving system. All measurement
techniques are likely to require extensive test experience to evaluate and evolve
standards. The level of accuracy and its qualification required within the oil industry will
dictate the extent of the testing effort.
20.3.5 Field Calibration or Proving
All of the emerging multiphase metering techniques is likely to need some level of inservice checking, even if this only involves an initial comparison against a reference
measurement. It is recommended that consideration be given to the implications of the
following approaches to the problem of field calibration for practicality and accuracy.
H-0806.35
20-28
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
20-29
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Multiphase Proving
This might consider adapting existing multiphase (or single phase - such as compact
swept piston devices) metering technology for portable and non-continuous use. Certain
types of multiphase metering technology, designed for prolonged service in extreme
conditions of flow, might be made more cheaply for this purpose. It could also be
manufactured and operated for more accurate performance. This would be possible with a
switch of design emphasis from robustness in favor of accuracy. It would be realizable
with short service exposure intervals, coupled with regular inspection and maintenance
and operational precautions not possible in the running of the installed multiphase
metering system.
20.4
Pressure Boosting
20.4.1 Introduction
If the pressure within the reservoir is inadequate to transport the hydrocarbon fluids at the
required rate to a suitable place for processing them, then some form of pressure boosting
will be required. This may be by enhancing the pressure of the reservoir itself (e.g. by
pressurized aquifer support and/or gas re-injection or by pressurizing the reservoir from
above). An alternative is the use of down- hole single phase pumping, which does not
affect the reservoir itself, but raises the well head flowing pressure. Lastly boosting may
be applied downstream of the well head where the flow is normally multiphase. This
section considers these options and in particular the use of multiphase pumping option.
Pressure enhancement may be required early in the field life or may only be required
towards the end of field life when the reservoir pressure has fallen too low for the
standard methods of transport to be adequate. Therefore, consideration of pressure
boosting should be considered in the conceptual design. There are several forms in
which pressure boosting can be applied. Section 20.4.2 discusses the selection of the
method, including multiphase pumps and gas lift (which is really a means of pressure
drop reduction rather than pressure boosting).
Multiphase pumps generally have higher power requirements than those of single phase
machines (pumps or compressors) performing similar duties. The theoretical power
requirement depends both upon the duty conditions and the theory used in calculation.
As a result, attempts to compare performance in terms of efficiency tend to be misleading
and are best avoided.
H-0806.35
20-30
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Although they are described as pumps it would be more accurate to describe these
multiphase pressure boosters as wet gas compressors, as gas is almost always the
dominant phase (volumetrically). The volumetric throughput, that is the volume of the
feed fluids at the feed conditions, is the most important factor in pump design; in addition
the gas volume fraction (GVF), the feed pressure, and the pressure ratio are required.
Table 20.4-1 outlines the capabilities of the pump types that presently seem to have some
commercial potential.
H-0806.35
20-31
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
20-32
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Positive displacement pumps operate by trapping a pocket of fluid at the pump suction,
carrying it through the pump and forcing it out at the discharge. The differential pressure
achievable is limited by the strength of the pump to withstand pressure and the effect of
the differential pressure on the internal leakage. The characteristic of such a pump is
conventionally shown as in Figure 20.4-2A.
H-0806.35
20-33
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
20-34
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
M
where:
M = Mixture density = (1-)L + G
H =
Head
P =
Absolute pressure
Density
Suffices:
1
Suction
Delivery
G =
Gas
L =
Liquid
M =
Mixture
Analysis of published data shows that for a wide range of GVF a single curve represents
the pump performance at a given speed.
Conversion of performance from one speed to another can be done using the normal
affinity laws:
H-0806.35
20-35
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
20-36
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
maximum depends upon the number of pitches on the screw. A typical curve is shown
in Figure 20.4-5.
Summary
Positive displacement pumps tend to be of lower capacity than rotodynamic but have a
greater differential pressure capability and are less affected by changes in GVF, suction
pressure and differential pressure. They are tolerant of viscous fluids but subject to wear
by sand laden fluids.
Rotodynamic pumps have larger capacity but are much more affected by changes in
GVF, suction pressure and differential pressure. As head is a function of GVF,
differential pressure and pressure ratio, plots of differential pressure performance can
only be prepared for a given set of conditions. Viscous fluids degrade rotodynamic pump
performance.
As they do not depend on close clearances to maintain volumetric efficiency,
rotodynamic pumps should be tolerant of sand- laden fluids. However this has yet to be
demonstrated and experience with other pumps running at similar speeds suggests that
erosion may be a problem. The use of very hard materials may prove necessary.
Rotodynamic Pumps
Helico-Axial
The leading rotodynamic multiphase pump is the helico-axial style of pump. The IFP
designed Poseidon pump and its derivatives have been the most successful. Extensive
testing and production operation has been carried out on versions of this pump supplied
by Framo (Frank Mohn) and Sulzer. It is most appropriate where high volume
throughput is combined with high GVF at low pressure ratios, or where the GVF is lower
and higher pressure ratios are required.
The pump consisted of three basic modules:
(1) The Drive unit; this is generally an electric motor driving through a speed increasing
gearbox; suitable electric motors for subsea application are under development
(1Q96) by Sulzer, the Nautilus Project, and FRAMO, their ELSMUBS Project. The
SMUBS pump has a hydraulic turbine drive.
H-0806.35
20-37
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(2) The Pump consists of a multistage assembly of impellers, which have axial flow and
high solidity. Shaft speed is high, typically in the range 40006000 rpm.
(c) It was found that pump performance was significantly improved if gas and liquid were
well mixed. A homogenizer has been developed and is fitted immediately before the
pump suction.
This form of pump is establishing a good track record of successful operation and is
considered to be commercial in the medium size range (approximately 500m3 /h).
Side Channel
Side channel pumps have high head/low flow characteristics combined with good gas
handling ability. However they are of low efficiency and are used in low flow
applications where the particular characteristics are valuable and the power penalty can
be accepted. They also depend upon close internal clearances to control internal leakage
and are therefore unsuitable for liquids containing abrasives, such as sand. It is expected
that larger size pumps could tolerate larger clearances while maintaining acceptable
efficiency, but no suitable pumps are presently available, and development effort has
ceased. No commercial pump is in prospect.
Contra-Rotating
Two forms of multistage pump having contra-rotating impellers have been considered.
One has stages arranged radially, similar to the Ljungstrm steam turbine, and the other
type has stages arranged axially. The former machine is designated as Contra-Rotating
Disk Compressor (CRD). Performance of a test machine was said to have been good on
gas but poor when liquid was injected and development is either on hold or has been
abandoned. The Contra-Rotating Axial Flow Pump (CRA) has been built by Frank Mohn
and tested by Shell at their De Lier field.
In both cases the purpose of employing contra-rotation is to give very high relative
velocity between the two sets of blading so increasing the head rise per stage and
minimizing the number of stages required. Suitable application might be low/medium
total volume, with high GVF and low/medium pressure ratio boosting.
Centrifugal
Conventional centrifugal pumps lose performance at GVF above about 10 percent. A
modified impeller was developed which allowed effective operation up to about 50
H-0806.35
20-38
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
percent. The modification involves the provision of holes in the shroud and gaps in the
vanes, which allow liquid to sweep gas away from the positions where it tends to
accumulate.
Axial Flow
Some work on axial flow impellers showed promising results in the mid 1980s and
further work has been concentrated on axial flow impellers having a high hub/tip ratio in
order to minimize centrifugal separation. The impeller has been compared to an inducer,
which suggests it is broadly similar to the Poseidon (Helico-Axial) impeller.
Pumps intended for downhole application with gas handling capability in the 30-60
percent GVF range have been designed. A much higher suction pressure is responsible
for the lower GVF and improves pump performance by increasing gas density. It is
probable that the range of application is narrow, but where boosting is required downhole at low (but significant) GVF then modified centrifugal pumping can be considered.
Positive Displacement
Twin Screw
Twin screw pumps were among the first to be applied for pumping multiphase mixtures.
Their positive displacement action gives them an inherent gas handling capability. The
use of purely rotary motion and the absence of valves and sliding components are all
advantages compared to other types of positive displacement pump.
This type of
machine has the highest capacity for a given size, which is attractive for the flow rates
involved in oil production operations.
Twin screw pumps can generally handle up to about 95 percent GVF. Higher GVF can
be handled by injecting liquid into the pump so that the liquid content within the pump is
maintained to provide a sealant and also provide cooling and lubrication. Since the twin
screw machine in its normal form does not have internal compression, the power
consumption is high compared to that of a compressor performing a similar duty. The
difference depends upon the GVF and the pressure ratio. Attempts have been made to
incorporate internal compression but the increased losses have outweighed the benefits.
The twin screw pump format is poorly suited to subsea application because of the
problems of seals and timing gears. The twin screw pump is best suited to low/medium
H-0806.35
20-39
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
throughput applications where the pressure ratio or differential pressure is high and GVF
less than 95 percent.
Internal Twin Screw
This development is a variant of the Mono pump (or Moineau Screw Pump) in which the
stator is allowed to rotate, and known as the idler. In principle this is a twin screw
pump in which one screw rotates inside the other. This has the advantage that all
components run in bearings, which reduces wear by reducing forces between rotor and
idler. This allows much higher speeds to be used than in a conventional Mono pump,
thereby reducing pump size for a given capacity and allowing the efficient use of
hydraulic turbine drive. However during testing it was found that the elastomer of the
idler could not stand the duty and further work has been abandoned.
Reciprocating/Linear Motor
A reciprocating pump driven by a linear electric motor has been tested for subsea
application. The project is known as Multiphase Electric Pump Station (MEPS). The
unit is large and heavy for a relatively low capacity, 130m3/h. This machine is best
suited to low flow rate, high pressure ratio, high differential pressure applications. Initial
works testing was followed by testing at Texacos Humble facility and is said to have
been successful.
Diaphragm
The machine is based on the pumping of hydraulic oil by a conventional pump. The oil is
alternately pumped into and out of two pumping vessels where it acts on an elastomeric
diaphragm to displace the multiphase mixture. During testing, material selection was
satisfactory but problems were experienced in detecting diaphragm position at the end of
stroke. These problems have since been overcome and the pump has been on long term
test. For subsea applications, the hydraulic pump would be immersed in the oil reservoir.
The volumetric capacity is not expected to be large.
Hydrobooster
This system is based on a conventional centrifugal pump. Separated liquid is sequentially
pumped into several vessels to alternately draw in and displace the multiphase mixture.
Thus each vessel acts as the cylinder of a reciprocating compressor in which the liquid
H-0806.35
20-40
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
acts as the piston. A full scale prototype has been successfully tested on hydrocarbon
gas/liquid mixture.
Double-action Piston
Double acting piston pumps would work but have too low capacity for the application. A
large number of pumps would be required to operate in parallel.
Ram Slurry Pump
There is no reason why a slurry pump should perform any better than a conventional
piston pump except for its solids handling capability. The use of rams lowers capacity
compared to piston pumps. Valves are generally leaky compared to those of
conventional pumps.
Other Systems Jet Pump
The jet pump has the potential of being a simple no- moving-part pressure booster in
relatively low flow applications. Because of its very low efficiency it does need a
virtually free source of high pressure driving fluid, suc h as a high pressure well which
would otherwise be choked.
It has the advantage of simplicity, but high fluid velocities render it susceptible to erosion
by sand laden fluids; however by careful design this may be minimized and the
vulnerable parts made easy to replace. The high pressure motive flow should be single
phase, otherwise the already poor efficiency is further degraded. The motive flow can be
gas for a gas-pressure boosting but for the multiphase flow pressure boosting the motive
fluid must be liquid-only for reasonable performance.
Systems with Separation
Strictly speaking these are not multiphase boosting systems but depend on the division
of the flow into separate phases.
Kvaerner Booster Station (KBS)
The Kvaerner Booster Station is a separation/compressor/pump system based on a
compact vertical separator with a centrifugal pump to increase the liquid phase pressure
and a wet gas compressor to increase the vapor phase pressure. Although pilot trials have
been satisfactorily completed and the potential is for a very flexible system of wide
H-0806.35
20-41
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
applicability, the complexity of the system does not bode well for its commercial success.
Further development is currently on hold.
VASPS
The Vertical Annular Separation and Pumping System (VASPS) is a way around the
problem of multiphase pumping by separating the mixture (via cyclone type separation)
and using conventional liquid pumps to handle the liquid while allowing the gas to freeflow under its remaining pressure. Only the liquid phase is pressure boosted so strictly
speaking it is not a multiphase pump system. The separator consists of a vertical length
of conductor some 600 mm in diameter. Multiphase fluid is fed into this conductor and
forced to follow a helical path. This induces accelerations of 3 to 4 g. The high
acceleration combined with the short distance bubbles must travel through the liquid
yields good separation. Gas rises naturally to the top of the conductor and flows away
under its own pressure. Liquid collects at the bottom and is pumped away by a
conventional ESP installed at the bottom of a tube within the conductor.
20.4.3 Known Performance Track Record
Of the many proposed multiphase pumping systems only two have any significant track
record of industrial or (semi- ) commercial operation, i.e. the helico-axial and the twin
screw type pumps. Also the Jet Pump principle has been in use in the WELLCOM
system.
Rotodynamic Helico-axial Pumps
The Poseidon Project was a French (IFP/Total/Statoil) led project to develop remote
subsea production systems by identifying gaps in technology and developing the
necessary techniques and equipment. Subsea multiphase pumping was always regarded
as an essential part of such a system. The project itself was closed out in 1990. A pump
had been tested successfully (3000 running hours) at a land site in Tunisia. A second test
in a Norwegian fjord in 1987 88 in 150 m water depth was also successful (4000 hrs).
Manufacture has been licensed to Sulzer Pumps and to Framo and several further
successful developments have been carried out.
Pecorade Field (Elf)
A pump (Model P 302) built by Sulzer was installed in the Pecorade Field in the
Southwest of France and has been running since June '94, with over 8000 hours by
H-0806.35
20-42
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
February '96. The pump is used in normal production operations but is also the subject of
a test program so that it experiences a wider range of operating conditions than would
otherwise be the case. The maximum throughput has been 365 m3/h, 55 MBD. There is
an active proposal to continue the operation of this pump on a commercial basis.
Gullfaks Field (Statoil)
A pump built by Framo was installed on the Gullfaks A platform and started up in May
1994. It had accumulated over 5000 hours running by mid '95, by which time the
program was considered complete. Operation is satisfactory except that seal leakage is
considered high (seals are manufactured by Burgmann).
Draugen Field (BP/Shell/Statoil)
A SMUBS (Shell Multiphase Underwater Boosting System) pump has been installed on
the Draugen Field in 270 m water depth. In the SMUBS Project, Framo, supported by
Shell, has taken the Guinard pump, which is very similar to the Poseidon Pump, and
packaged it for subsea installation. Pump internals are built into a tubular casing, which
can be installed from the surface into a vertical housing without diver intervention. Drive
is by hydraulic turbine, thus avoiding subsea electrical equipment and the problems of
keeping well fluids away from the motor. There are technical and economic distance
limits for power transmission. With injection water being used as power fluid, the
SMUBS pump has now been running periodically since early November '94. All subsea
operating procedures have been verified and operation is satisfactory. While the use of
the pump has increased oil production by approximately 39 percent, the reasons for its
periods of non-operation are not known for certain. Although they are believed to be due
to platform production limits and the process requirement for maximum water injection
pressure.
Positive Displacement Twin Screw Pumps
Twin screw pumps were among the first to be applied for pumping multiphase mixtures
and several successful trials have been carried out, although the helico-axial pump is now
surpassing it in terms of operational track record.
Bokor B Sarawak
A Multiphase Systems MP 40 pump was tested on the Shell Bokor B Platform, Offshore
Sarawak, at up to 97 percent GVF. Production operation was regarded as successful after
H-0806.35
20-43
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
P1
Delivery Pressure
P2
Q1
Because of its effect upon a and Q1 , P1 has a marked influence on the sizing of the pump
and the power requirement. Other important considerations are the location, i.e. subsea
or surface, the power source, and whether abrasive solids are present.
H-0806.35
20-44
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Note that the term Gas Liquid Ratio (GLR) is often used in connection with multiphase
pumps but refers to volumes at suction conditions, rather than the accepted definition of
GLR with volumes referred to standard conditions; care must be taken to avoid this
confusion. Note also that flow rates for pumps often use the units of BPD, which
includes no t only the liquid rate but also the gas, both at suction conditions.
Additional factors such as design temperature and pressure, and fluid
composition/properties, will be relevant to detail design, pump material selection, and
motive power unit design. The flow regime of the feed flow may dictate a need for the
pre-conditioning of the feed, particularly if sudden changes in GVF or periods of 100
percent GVF are possible.
Furthermore, the change in duty, flow rate, and
suction/discharge conditions during operation may mean that no single pump type, or
even one form of pressure boosting, will be ideal throughout field life.
The first stage is to calculate the maximum total flow at the suction conditions (Q 1 ), the
pressure ratio required (P2 /P1 ), and the GVF. An attempt can now be made to select a
suitable pump type from Table 20.4-2. However no pump type may be completely
appropriate and some accommodation may be necessary between what is ideally required
and what is available.
Type Selection
There is as yet insufficient information or operational experience to be definitive
about the selection of suitable multiphase pumping systems.
Feasibility Design
The feasibility of using a rotodynamic pump can be checked as follows:
(1) Calculate maximum total flow at suction conditions. Figure 20.4-5 shows the range
of pump sizes available. Sulzer Pumps) presently quote the maximum size for a single
pump at about 1200m3 /h (180 MBD = MPP6 in Figure 20.4-5), however a limit of
500m3 /h (75 MBD = MPP3/4) is shown in Table 20.4-1. Above this rate, multiple
pumps in parallel are recommended.
H-0806.35
20-45
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(2) Calculate the pressure ratio required (P2 /P1 ) and verify from Figure 20.4-6 that it is
achievable.
H-0806.35
20-46
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
(3) Assuming that these steps have shown the use of a rotodynamic pump to be feasible
the power requirement can be estimated from Figure 20.4-7.
H-0806.35
20-47
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Where:
B = f(P1 ,GLR) from the upper graph
E = f(P2 /P1 ,GLR) from the lower graph
H-0806.35
20-48
1-Dec-00
Power =
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
ExQL xP1
kw
B
(P2 P1 )xQ1 kw
36 x0.6
Note:
1. In this equation pressures are measured in bars and flow rate in m3 /hr.
2. The 0.6 factor assumes an efficiency of 60 percent
3. Twin screw pump vendors machines vary widely in size and pressure rating.
It would be best to check possible applications with one or more vendors.
It is possible that the power transmission limitations may restrict the available pump
performance and will almost certainly affect the pressure boosting economics. It is
necessary to consult electrical and control engineers on this aspect.
H-0806.35
20-49
1-Dec-00
21.0
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
21-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
22.
requirements and capabilities of the host facilities. The host facilities that are significantly
impacted by the overall subsea system design include:
The arrangement and capacity of receiving equipment such as separators and slug catchers
(if used) determine the steady state and transient volumetric rate of produced fluids that can
be flowed to the facility. The flare/vent systems liquid knockout capacity may place a limit
on the rate at which flowlines can be blown down for unplanned shutdowns. Multiphase
pumps could potentially be used upstream from high-pressure separators to allow wells and
flowlines to be operated at relatively low pressure without increasing platform gas
compression requirements.
Injection chemicals have to be stored on and distribution from the host facility. Particularly in
the case of methanol, host storage and delivery rate limitations can pose an operational limit
on the subsea production system.
Metering systems for well testing, allocation, fiscal/custody, chemical injection, and other
have to be provided.
Power for normal and emergency operations have to be provided. For long-offset subsea
production systems, emergency power requirements may be substantially greater than
normally provided on platforms.
Controls for operating the subsea system have to be provided. The control systems have to
be integrated with the operating strategies and procedures developed to operate and
protect the system.
22.1
For ownership and allocations reasons, each development where a single company is not
100 percent owner, will require dedicated access to an inlet separator on a per well or per
H-0806.35
22-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
field basis (depending on several factors including operator philosophy and platform space).
A dedicated production train is not required provided that the proper permits (MMS) have
been obtained (although a dedicated production train is the simplest method of production
accounting for multiple field developments on one platform). All produced fluids are
allocated back to the proper ownership based on the inlet separator measurements.
For subsea developments where a single company is 100 percent owner, multiple
developments may be produced to a single production train. Metering (e.g., test separator
or multiphase meters) upstream from the production train may be required to measure the
production from each system.
22.1.2 Risers
In general, each flowline will be brought onto the host platform via a dedicated riser. Depending
on the arrival pressure, the riser may have to be gas lifted. This should be looked into during
design and provided for if necessary.
22.1.3 Slug Catchers and Flow Controls
In general, it is preferable to not provide slug catchers on platforms due to size and weight
constraints.
Providing appropriate separator capacity and control systems will accommodate normal
steady state (hydrodynamic) liquid slugs.
Larger intermittent liquid slugs, which will occur primarily on startup, and perhaps shutdown,
will be handled primarily by separator inlet and outlet rate control.
22.1.4 Separators
Inlet separators should be sized for anticipated oil, gas, and water production rates (the term
inlet here refers to the separator that production is received into). When sizing separators, the
following should be considered:
Gas volumes at separator conditions will be lowest for high pressure separators.
Oil volumes at separator conditions will be highest for high pressure separators.
Because of gas volumes, using low pressure separators as inlet separators can require those
separators to be physically large, maximizing gas compression requirements.
H-0806.35
22-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
The size of the separation train can be kept physically small and gas compression
requirements can be minimized, by using multiphase pumps in front of the inlet separator
(preferably a high pressure separator); see Section 22.2.3.
22.1.5 Heaters/Coolers
The need for inlet heaters will be dependent on emulsion characteristics of the produced fluids
and other processing requirements. Because watercut will typically increase late in life, the need
for inlet heaters to treat emulsions can tend to be greatest late in the life of the field. The use of
chemicals to break emulsions should be reviewed prior to installing a heater.
High inlet flow temperatures (above 130-150 F) may require the use of an inlet cooler, as
above these temperatures reclamation of glycol used for gas dehydration becomes problematic.
Additional difficulty is realized in that personnel protection may have to be added to the
platform piping.
Overall, with properly designed and insulated flow systems, the need for inlet heaters or coolers
will be minimized.
22.1.6 Flowline Depressurization for Planned Shutdowns
The subsea production system should be capable of depressurizing the flowlines and risers for
planned shutdowns. This may be a rapid blowdown through the process system to product
export and is intended to release as much liquid (and gas) as possible from the flowlines. When
blowdown begins, production rates and the flowline exit pressure (separator pressure) are at the
normal operating levels. As blowdown continues, production will be moved to successively
lower separator pressure. Final depressurization will be accomplished to the flare/vent system.
The volume removed from the line will be as much of the pre-shut-in volume as is possible.
22.1.7 Flowline Depressurization for Unplanned Shutdowns
The system should be capable of depressurizing flowlines in the event of unplanned shutdowns.
This will probably be a slow blowdown to the flare/vent system, intended to release gas from
the flowlines without flowing significant quantities of liquid onto the platform. If there is not time
to depressurize the flowlines for unplanned shut-ins, they may be vigorously blown down prior
to restart, in which case the objective would be to get as much liquid out as possible.
H-0806.35
22-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
Where/when separators are available (i.e., are able to receive flow), the system can be
depressurized through the process train. Where/when separators are not available, the system
will be depressurized directly to the flare/vent system.
For unplanned shutdowns, the gas blowdown rate will be intentionally low to prevent significant
quantities of liquid from flowing out with the gas. This low rate will be achieved by using a
small-diameter choke upstream from the separator. After the fluids have settled and the
pressure in the flowline has dropped, the choke can be opened to increase the gas efflux rate.
22.2
Production Facilities
The steady state multiphase flow regime exiting the flowlines may typically be slug flow.
This means that liquid and gas flow will enter the separators in liquid and gas packets. This
normal hydrodynamic slug behavior should not be confused with severe slugging,
heading, surging, or other unstable or quasi-stable flow regime. Normal slug length will
range between 1 and 60-100 pipe diameters in length.
The highest steady state oil rate will occur at the beginning of field life (BOL).
The highest steady state water rate will typically occur at the end of field life (EOL).
Intermittent liquid rate can be higher than steady state rate during system startup and
shutdown and, perhaps, late in field life. Separator level and inlet and outlet rate controls
may be needed to control transient conditions.
H-0806.35
22-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
For undersaturated reservoirs (above the bubble point pressure), gas rate will be linear with
oil rate and will therefore be highest at beginning of life. For saturated reservoirs (below the
bubble point pressure), gas rate may increase as reservoir pressure drops.
Gas rate at separator conditions (MMCFD) will increase as separator pressure decreases.
Refer also to Sections 22.1.3 (Slug Catchers and Flow Controls) and 22.1.4 (Separators).
Metering
Several different types of metering systems will have to be provided by the host facility,
depending on the fluid being measured. The majority of the metering requirements will be for
oil, water, and gas production:
Per well, field, facility, and/or operator For normal purposes, meter accuracy of 5 to 10
percent is sufficient.
Well testing
Allocation Allocation meters are likely to require accuracy in the 2 to 5 percent range.
The specific accuracy will be negotiated between the owners (Section 22.3.1).
Fiscal/custody transfer Fiscal meters will require much higher accuracy, usually in the 0.25
to 0.5 percent range (Section 22.3.2).
Chemical injection Chemical injection rates can be measured to determine the amount of
chemical being used and to allocate those chemicals to the appropriate owners/operators
(see Section 22.3.3).
Pigging Fluid
22.3.1 Allocation
H-0806.35
22-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
Allocation meters (to allocate production among the various owners) are likely to require
accuracy in the 2 to 5 percent range. The specific accuracy will be negotiate/agreed between
the owners. Allocation meters may be meter the individual gas and liquid streams or may
measure the combined two/three phase stream using multiphase meters.
22.3.2 Fiscal/Custody Transfer
The required accuracy of fiscal meter will be in the 0.25 to 0.5 percent range. Oil and gas
streams will be measured individually. Water is typically not measured to this accuracy, as it is
not sold as a commodity.
22.3.3 Chemical Injection
Chemical injection metering is needed for several purposes:
General inventory monitoring, although this maybe best accomplished glass sight level
gauges as they are cheaper and do not require maintenance (lower OPEX).
Where multiple owners are involved, meter results can be used for cost allocation (only
required when using the same chemical bulk storage unit).
Subsea metering may also be required to ensure that chemicals are actually being injected
where and when intended.
The volume of liquid delivered to move the pig is a good indication of the location of the pig
in the flowline.
When oil to move the pig is bought back from the export pipeline, the buy back oil has to
be measured for fiscal purposes.
As can be seen, this is a subject that will need to be studied further and will vary with each
development.
22.4
H-0806.35
22-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
field (or fields) will require a large amount of chemical usage as well as storage. If possible,
extensive laboratory studies should be undertaken to determine the best and least costly
chemicals to be used (if any are required).
22.4.1 Methanol Storage Volumes
Basic guidelines in determining the amount of methanol storage for oil production systems is as
follows:
Before starting a subsea production system, the minimum volume of methanol to have in
storage is the volume required to start the system plus the volume required to safely shut it
down. Once the system is in steady state operation, it would be operationally safe to have
only the volume required to shut in the system.
Methanol volumes are calculated based on the operating strategy and the subsea system
design.
The amount of methanol required strongly depends on the produced watercut. The design
watercut should be no higher than necessary to realistically accommodate the expected
water production profiles.
Where practical to do so, methanol storage should be based on startup of systems with at
least one dry well (<1 percent watercut). Starting systems with all wet wells, (generally a
late life condition) will require much higher methanol volumes. The high volumes required for
wet system startup can be supplied by floating methanol storage (a supply vessel), if
needed.
If the host facility has more than one subsea development producing to it, methanol volumes
should be based on starting one system (the worst case) and shutting down all systems.
With multiple systems, the volume of methanol required to start up and shut down all wells
without re-supply could be quite large. However, the volume of methanol required to start
any one system (the one with the highest methanol demand) and to shut in all systems is
much lower and safe operation still results.
H-0806.35
22-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
Each well has two downhole injection lines to provide the high methanol injection rates
required for high watercut startup. One of these downhole lines for each well is fed by a
dedicated well injection pump. The second is fed from a common header that is fed by
another injection pump. Therefore, the number of required methanol injection pumps is one
per well plus one spare (common).
The second downhole line could serve as a backup chemical injection line.
The manifold has two methanol injection points, one per flowline. Each injection point has a
dedicated methanol pump.
Dedicated Methanol Supply - With dedicated methanol supplies, all startup and shutdown
operations for each subsea system can be accomplished independently of the others.
Startup and shutdown can be simultaneous or sequential.
Shared Well and Flowline Methanol Pumps - Using flowline blowdown as the default
shutdown method, if well pumps are shared between subsea systems, all operations except
flooding of manifolds (of all sizes) and startup of all wet well systems can be accomplished
by starting and shutting in shared systems sequentially. By sharing well methanol and flowline
pumps between no more than two systems, all startup and shutdown operations can be
accomplished.
H-0806.35
22-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
When wax and corrosion inhibitors are combined the concentration for both plus carrier will
still range between 200 and 500 ppm.
Storage volume should be based on at least a one week supply at peak field production rate.
22.4.4 Pour Point Depressant
If pour point depressant should be required, the probable injection concentration will be 1000
ppm or less.
22.5
Pigging
Pigging operations are highly dependent on the development (i.e. a dry gas field may never
require pigging). However, if pigging is deemed necessary, the following are some general
guidelines:
Dual flowlines enable round trip pigging no intervention vessel would be required, as
would be the case with a single line, though this could prove to be costly.
Pigging for wax removal purposes is expected to be infrequent (chemical inhibitors should
be used).
System shutdowns using flowline blowdown will require flowline pigging for system restart,
further reducing the need for wax-specific pigging.
H-0806.35
22-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
10" Flowline
8" Flowline
6" Flowline
4" Flowline
0
10
12
14
The pumping duration will depend on the offset and design pig velocity. Figure 22.5-2 shows
the round trip pigging time for various offset distances when using a design speed of 3.5 ft/s.
t = 0.838 L ; where L = offset from host to manifold, miles.
H-0806.35
22-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
Pigging Time
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
15
20
25
Offset, Miles
Vpig = 24618
. d 2 L ; where d = flowline ID, inches, and L = offset, miles.
H-0806.35
22-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
Pigging Volume
18000
16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
4" Flowline
6" Flowlines
8" Flowlines
10" Flowlines
10
15
20
25
Offset, Miles
Smart pigs Can detect corrosion/erosion and do other analysis (such as pipe wall
thickness readings). These pigs are typically over 10 feet in length and can weigh several
hundred pounds.
Spherical pigs Generally used for liquid removal. These pigs are generally made of either
plastic (or some other similar material) or wax. The wax pigs have the advantage of being
able to be dissolved by liquid hydrocarbons (over a period of time).
All pigs listed will most likely have a smaller OD than the flowline ID as to allow some fluid to
pass by the pig in the event that the pig becomes stuck. This can be further enhanced on the
wax pigs by cutting and removing small sections.
22.6
Power
Host facility power systems must provide both the normal operating power for the platform and
the emergency power system required to safely shut-in the system in the event of an emergency
or safety shut-in situation.
H-0806.35
22-12
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
22.6.1 Utilities
Platform utility load requirements are generally a function of the platform production throughput.
Normal loads include power for human systems and for processing equipment, controls, subsea
system operation, and production export.
22.6.2 Emergency
Platform emergency power requirements are generally a function of the number of methanol
pumps simultaneously running during unplanned shutdowns.
The use of shared methanol systems (or sequential shutdown of 1/3 to 1/2 of the wells if
methanol systems are not shared) for unplanned shutdowns will:
For the subsea production systems, extended duration power for methanol pumps and the
PCS will be required.
22.7
Controls
The PCS for all subsea developments producing to a common host facility should be integrated
into a logical whole.
The PCS for all subsea developments producing to a common host facility should send data to
the platform CAO and should accept shutdown signals from the CAO.
22.8
Compression
In some situations, it may be desirable to reduce wellhead (and flowline) pressure so as to lower
reservoir abandonment pressure and/or to increase well production rate.
One option for doing this is to route production to a lower pressure separator, which can
require that the lower pressure separator have high gas handling capacity. Compression of that
higher gas volume would be required. (Full detailed recommendations on the type and size of
compressor needed is beyond the scope of this manual and will not be discussed further).
Another options would be to install multiphase pumps upstream of the HP separator, thereby
greatly simplifying the process system design. Assuming proper planning, such pumps could be
installed if and when needed.
H-0806.35
22-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIFLOW DESIGN GUIDELINE
22.9
Flare/Vent
The flare/vent system should be designed to handle flow system blowdown for both planned
and unplanned system shutdowns. This may require an unusually large flare/vent scrubber.
Likewise, subsea developments tied into existing host facilities have to be designed in view of
the facilitys existing capabilities.
Integrate the PCSs for all developments into a single platform-wide PCS. Successful
operation of the entire system will demand that the entire system be continuously considered
as a whole.
For unplanned shutdowns, shut in system sharing methanol pumps sequentially. Otherwise,
shut in systems simultaneously.
Develop a set of subsea system design guidelines to be applied to all subsea systems to be
operated by and to the host.
H-0806.35
22-14
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
23.
23.1
Introduction
Economic analysis compares decisions on the basis of monetary value. All other factors
being equal, the decision resulting in the highest profit is the superior decision. This
section will only touch on basic economic principals as related to cost/benefit analysis
and risk management and is not intended to be full course on economics as philosophies
and calculation methods can and do vary from project to project as well as company to
company.
The economics of a system is made up of four major elements:
1. Capital investment (CAPEX)
2. Operating expense (OPEX)
3. Government burden (taxes)
4. Gross Revenue
The profit derived is:
Profit = Gross Revenue CAPEX OPEX taxes
The Profit equation suggests two ways to maximize profits:
Increase gross revenue. This can be accomplished by increasing the volume of the
product being produced for sale at a constant price, producing the same volume at a
higher price or increasing both volume and price.
There is no legal way to increase the sales price of oil and gas or of reducing taxes on the
product. Therefore, the items amenable to change are the volume of product produced,
the initial capital investment, and the operating expense.
Efforts to increase production may require greater initial investments. Efforts to decrease
initial investment may result in lower production. Both may result in increased operating
expense. The effort to determine the best balance between production, investment, and
expense is known as cost/benefit analysis.
H-0806.35
23-1
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Complicating cost/benefit analysis of deepwater oil and gas projects is the fact that
conditions are certain to change during the life of the project. An optimum system for
conditions during the early life of a project may cause problems during mid- life and, in
fact, may be incapable of production during late life. Because of this, flow assurance
studies can be of great value and may be the only means of comparing systems on a
cost/benefit basis.
23.2
Cost/Benefit Analysis
As already mentioned, a cost/benefit analysis is used to determine the best balance
between production, investment, and expense. This does not mean that the selected
project or way of approaching a project will be the cheapest or provide the highest
production rates (though it could), but the most efficient way given the individual project
parameters and company philosophies.
Two examples of cost/benefit analysis are line sizing and thermal modeling:
Line Sizing
The system components most frequently chosen using flow assurance is the flow line
size. At first glance it would appear that no cost/benefit analysis should be necessary. If
the ability to handle the peak production volume is the most important consideration in
choosing the line size this might be true.
However, if other factors are introduced the choice may not be so clear. For example,
assume that flow assurance modeling shows that a line of sufficient size to handle peak
production volumes during early life will result in high liquid holdup and severe slugging
during the middle of the projects life as pressures decline and water cuts increase.
Further assume that the model shows that the system will stop producing 20 percent short
of producing all recoverable reserves.
For such an example, it may be more advantageous to size the line to handle a flow rate
below the peak which will not result in slugging later in life and that will continue
producing until a higher percentage of reserves are recovered.
A cost/benefit analysis is the only way to properly decide.
Thermal Modeling and Insulation Requirements
Further, say that a certain insulation type and thickness will maintain the above system at
a temperature above the hydrate formation and wax deposition temperatures, but will also
H-0806.35
23-2
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Risk Management
While a cost/benefit analysis will provide the most bang for the buck solution, it does
not take into account the risk factors associated with each possible solution. Therefore,
risk identification and management needs to be an integral part of finding the best
solution to the problem or project at hand. An example of this is shown below.
Prevention vs. Intervention: Asphaltenes
The current state-of-the-art with respect to prediction of asphaltene deposition is not well
developed. There is a real, and understandable, lack of understanding in the industry as to
the seriousness of the problem because of lack of correlatable data and experience.
Because of this uncertainty, designing systems to deal with asphaltene deposition
currently requires the application of some type of risk weighted probability and good
judgement to prevent either over or under reaction to the presence of asphaltenes.
The mere fact that asphaltenes are present in a particular oil and that these asphaltenes
can form depositions under the conditions of pressure and temperature predicted in a
system is no guarantee that deposition will occur (See Section 11.0).
Should fluid compositional analyses and flow assurance models suggest that asphaltene
deposition would be a problem, the operator faces a choice. They can attempt to inhibit
deposition with a dispersant, plan to use a solvent, either in a continuous or intermittent
(batch) mode to dissolve the asphaltene, plan to mechanically remove the asphaltene by
scraping or cutting, either by pigging or by intervention with a rig or other maintenance
vessel. Or they can plan to do none of the above and see what develops. Each has an
associated cost and risk.
Asphaltene inhibition usually requires that the dispersant chemical be injected deep down
hole in order to be effective in protecting the whole system. Due to the high viscosity of
H-0806.35
23-3
1-Dec-00
INTEC ENGINEERING
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
the most effective dispersants, relatively large ID injection tubing or more than one tube
will be required.
Dissolving asphaltenes will usually require relatively large volumes of aromatic
chemicals such as toluene or one of the xylenes. These chemicals are difficult to handle
in an offshore environment and expensive in the volumes required. In addition large
volumes require either large ID supply lines or large numbers of smaller supply lines to
achieve the desired result.
Mechanical removal by pigging is an option, however, due to the relatively hard
composition of many asphaltenes, this may or may not be effective, and carries its own
costs such as additional equipment and lost production during pigging operations.
Direct intervention with a rig or other vessel to remove asphaltenes is obviously an
expensive proposition, but may be the most effective and indeed only method available in
some circumstances.
With all the uncertainty involved and the multiplicity of choices as how to deal with the
problem if it in fact exists, some consistent method of evaluation is necessary. The best
currently available is a risk weighted cost/benefit analysis.
23.4
Calculation Methods
There are several methods available to determine the best overall solution to a problem.
This is accomplished through economic calculations coupled with risking methods
ranging from complex Monte Carlo simulations to a simple decision tree analysis. There
are many computer programs that can handle these types of calculations and are available
commercially (some operators have also developed these programs in- house).
As assigning a risk factor to each solution for a single problem can be a daunting task, it
is best to consult your company guidelines/philosophies or in- house experts on what
programs/methods are available and what should be used for the given problem/project.
H-0806.35
23-4
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
24.0
24.1
Introduction
A large proportion of future oil production is likely to be provided by deepwater offshore
developments. A DeepStar study estimated that 95% of presently unexplored offshore
acreage is in water depths of 3,000 ft or more. The main areas of activity at present are in
the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) with current leases extending to 9,250 ft. West of Shetland
the water depth is not as great (around 1,600 ft at present with potential developments at
depths up to 4,000 ft). However the environmental conditions are very severe and have
had a large impact on the design of the present and future. The other main deepwater
development areas are offshore Norway, where BP is drilling a well in the Voring basin
at a water depth of 4,200 ft, and West Africa (600-7,000 ft) with present studies of the
4,500 ft WD Girassol development. Although these are the main deepwater provinces for
one operator, there are also other potential future prospects in the Black Sea, Caspian
Sea, and offshore Indonesia, China and Vietnam. Each of these areas have their own
unique combination of conditions relating to the available oil and gas infrastructure,
environmental conditions, and political climate etc. but share in common the deepwater
nature of the province. Figure 24.1-1 illustrates the environmental conditions
characteristic of these areas of activity.
One of the critical issues is whether a tieback to shallower water depths is practical as this
may eliminate the need for ultra-deepwater surface piercing structures. Thus, the
hydraulic limitations on the step out distance need to be investigated. At present the
Troika subsea development requires 14 mile long flowlines from a seabed template in
2,670 ft of water to the existing Bullwinkle platform in 1,350 ft of water. One of the
controlling features of the design is to maintain a high level of insulation on the flowlines
in order to provide high flowing temperatures and to avoid hydrate formation. The GOM
Neptune discovery is in 6,000-7,500 ft of water and could conceivably involve tieback
distances in the range 25 to 30 miles. However this may not represent the ultimate
challenge.
Drilling has already taken place in the GOM at water depths of 7,800 ft (BAJA), and the
deepest lease in the April 1996 GOM Central lease sale was in 9,289 ft of water.
Therefore, a realistic design challenge is 10,000 ft water depth. The Shell Mensa
development is in 5,300 ft of water and involves a 68 mile, 12 tieback to a host platform.
Looking at the existing GOM infrastructure and the potential future plays indicates that a
tieback distance of 100 miles is a reasonable target.
H-0806.35
24-1
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
If we can design for such long tiebacks this may eliminate the need for ultra-deepwater
surface piercing structures. Although there are a large array of potential host platform
configurations ranging from floating tankers, tension leg platforms, spars, compliant
towers, and semi- subs etc. they share in common the need for riser systems to connect the
subsea flowlines to the facilities. These risers can be rigid vertical conventional or hybrid
designs, steel catenaries, or may be constructed of flexible pipe in a variety of
configurations including catenary, S and potentially double S. As the water depth
increases the pressure drop over the riser increases and has a larger impact on the
hydraulic characteristics of the system. However there may be severe limitations in the
ability of present design methods to accurately predict the hydraulic performance of such
deepwater riser systems, and there is no field scale data on which to test and evaluate the
performance of the models. The present limiting size of flexible risers is around 12",
although at increased water depths, sizes of up to 20" may be required. This large
diameter brings into question the accuracy of the hydraulic models, which have
historically been validated on relatively small, bore well tubing.
24.2
24.2.1 Energy
The provision of sufficient pressure to transport the required flowrates of fluids from the
reservoir to the processing facilities.
The system pressure drop increases with water depth and step out distance as illustrated
in Figures 24.2-1 and 24.2-2. This may be a limiting factor if the natural well head
flowing pressure is insufficient. Most of the pressure drop is expected over the deepwater
riser, although the proportion of the total pressure drop over the flowline will increase
with the tieback distance. A true assessment of design limits requires accurate pressure
loss prediction methods for which there are two main concerns. First, the shape of the
flexible and steel risers utilized in deepwater is expected to influence the hydraulic
characteristics. This brings about the need for design tools and guidance on the effect of
the different riser shapes to enable accurate predictions to be made and to assess the
issues and limitations pertaining to the various configurations. One potential problem
lies in the basis of the steady state multiphase design programs, such as Multiflo, which
H-0806.35
24-3
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-5
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-6
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
describe pipelines and risers by a number of discrete segments to capture the features of
the topography. This may require many sections for a true representation of a catenary or
S shaped riser. However each segment is treated in isolation and hence the flow regime
and holdup can change significantly at the segment boundaries. In practice the conditions
in one segment can influence the downstream conditions, for example, slug flow
generated in the flowline may persist in a riser, even though the riser is predicted to
operate in another flow regime.
The second potential inaccuracy is that the hydraulic models developed for vertical and
highly inclined flows have historically been developed from relatively small bore well
tubing data and have not been validated at the increased diameters that may be required
for deepwater developments.
In deepwater developments the reservoir can fail to produce naturally at much higher
pressures than conventional shallow water developments. Hence it is possible that a great
benefit can be obtained by providing some kind of pressure boosting or pressure drop
reduction. Pressure boosting can be obtained by using downhole ESP's, multiphase
pumps or subsea separation and boosting. Pressure drop reduction can be provided by
using gas lift, drag reduction agents (DRA), using foaming agents, or removing the water
at the wellhead. The optimization of these methods requires that many factors be taken
into consideration and can benefit greatly from integration with the reservoir
performance, the flowline and riser hydraulics, and the process equipment performance.
Steady state programs such as Multiflo are ideal for generating the hydraulic data
provided that the accuracy is sufficient when applied to deepwater systems. Future
system integrated models offer promise if the complexity does not hamper the simulation
speed. This may require that a simple description is used for the reservoir. Figure 24.2-3
illustrates the main energy related issues.
Transient considerations may also play a part in the energy related is sues in that
unacceptable conditions may arise due to unstable operation under normal flowing
conditions or during shutdowns, restarts, and flowrate increases. For example sufficient
pressure may not be available to start up wells against the high backpressure generated by
stationary fluids in the flowline and riser. Temporary riser gas lift may be a solution to
unloading the riser and kicking off the wells, which may flow naturally after startup.
H-0806.35
24-7
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-8
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASAE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-9
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASAE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-10
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-11
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
from the facilities to the manifold, with required choke pressure drop inferred from the
difference in pressures between the well head and the manifold.
e) Flowlines and risers
The flow regimes in horizontal and slightly inclined flowlines are analogous to the
vertical flow patterns but are complicated by the asymmetry caused by gravity. These
have also been discussed in Section 2. The pressure drop across the flowline is mainly
due to friction effects and hence usually increases with flowrate, although if the flowline
is inclined uphill hydrostatic effects can be important. Again the mechanistically based
models are thought to provide the best results when applied to real systems.
As the water depth increases the effect of the riser pressure loss becomes more significant
and the shape of the combined flowline and riser characteristic becomes more U shaped
due to the increased hydrostatic effects, similar to a well bore. The largest uncertainties
are expected to be in the possible complex riser geometry as well as the accuracy of the
riser pressure drop prediction because of the potentially large diameter (up to 20")
compared with the small well bore sizes on which the models have been validated. The
larger diameter and inclination effects are expected to lead to increased slip between the
phases, which will increase the liquid holdup and the hydrostatic pressure loss. This is
particularly true for three-phase flows where a much greater proportion of water is
possible than in the homogeneous assumptions used in two-phase flow models.
Another potentially large inaccuracy can arise from the hysterisis nature of multiphase
flow in which the flow regime developed in one section of the geometry may persist for
sometime in downstream sections. This is particularly true for large slugs and is a major
limitation of general steady state two-phase design programs in which the topographical
segments are treated independently.
f) Arrival pressure
Historically a range of arrival pressures may occur during the lifetime of a development
as the oil production rate declines. Delivering to the lower pressure separators can
accommodate this. For example the initial Pompano fluids are produced into the HP
separator at 1250 psig, with the initial FWHP being high enough for the flowlines to run
at a back pressure of 2000 psig at the platform upstream of a choke, giving rise to bubble
flow in the flowlines. As the available pressure subsea declines, the production can be
successively switched to the IP separator operating at 450 psig and finally the LP
separation stage operating at 150 psig. As can be seen, a large variation in the arrival
pressure that can be used to provide for flexibility of operation.
H-0806.35
24-12
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
The arrival pressure is usually fixed by the processing requirements, although there will
inevitably be some tradeoff with the productio n capacity of the whole system if an
integrated approach is used.
H-0806.35
24-13
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-14
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
causing unmanageable transient flowrates and possibly high restart pressures). Using
foams, gas lift, or DRA may reduce tubing and riser pressure losses while boosting may
be provided by using ESPs, multiphase pumping, or seabed separation and pumping.
Flowline pressure drops may be reduced by using DRA or removing the water prior to
transportation. Reducing the arrival pressure may increase compression requirements and
worsen oil- gas separation efficiency. The optimum solution will involve a tradeoff
between the competing economics.
In some cases pressure boosting or pressure drop reduction may provide economic
alternatives to maximize production as a solution to the problems faced by natural flow.
24.2.2 Integrity
Designing to ensure that the fluids are contained and that the flow is not impeded.
One of the biggest potential deepwater problems here is related to cold temperature
operation and the impact on production chemistry issues such as wax, hydrate, and
emulsion formation. Lower ambient temperatures and longer transportation distances are
likely to lead to increased cooling of the fluids, although this may be partly offset by
higher flowing wellhead temperatures which may give rise to material limitations.
Two modes of operation are possible:
Operate in the wax, hydrate, or emulsion formation region but use chemicals to
suppress formation or the occurrence of problematic conditions.
The DeepStar project has recognized the importance of assuring flowing conditions and
has estimated that 10-30% CAPEX reductions could be realized if chemicals could be
developed to avoid flowline blockages. The cost savings are related to moving from
expensive bundle pipeline designs to bare pipe options ($ millions per mile saving),
removing insulation requirements (approximately $150,000 per mile saving), plus $
millions per mile if a pigging loop is avoided, with additional OPEX reduction of $1
million for a 36 hr shutdown at 30 MBOPD.
H-0806.35
24-15
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Figures 24.2-6 and 24.2-7 illustrate flowline temperature profiles for a concrete coated
pipeline and a bundle with a high value of insulation and indicate that high insulation and
flowrates are required to maintain high temperatures over long distances.
Solutions to the thermal problems revolve around developing inhibiting chemicals,
preferably lower cost alternatives to conventional chemicals and insulation or heating.
The higher pressure operation leads to increased hydrate formation tendency and
corrosion. Higher pressure also leads to more expensive pipeline designs and could lead
to the use of High Integrity Pressure Protection Systems (HIPPS) if it is not possible or
economic to design for full shut- in wellhead pressures.
Deepwater flowlines are expected to operate at a higher pressure due to the greater
pressure drop across the riser. To provide acceptable velocities at the riser top within
erosion or corrosion inhibitor shear stripping limits, the velocity in the flowline may be
relatively low, leading to the potential for surging and solids or water deposition, which
can have an impact on the flowing capacity, pigging, and corrosion.
At a first glance the integrity issues related to the topsides plant are not expected to be
any worse than conventional shallow water developments because the arrival pressures
and steady velocities are expected to be similar. Hence, the slug mechanical loads
imposed on the pipe work and the erosional velocities are expected to be similar.
However, there is concern over the potential dynamic effects caused by the large
hydrostatic pressure drops possible at increased water depths, giving rise to the stalling of
large slugs as the gas in the flowline packs to provide the increasing hydrostatic pressure.
When such slugs are produced into the facilities the extra hydrostatic back pressure is no
longer needed and is converted to friction as the slug tail is accelerated giving rise to
potentially high transient velocities and mechanical loads. Figure 24.2-8 illustrates the
acceleration of the slug tail. Other sections of this design guide discuss the estimation of
slug forces in furthe r detail. Figures 24.2-9 and 24.2-10 illustrate the potential integrity
related issues.
a) Low temperature limits and effect on physical chemistry issues
Low operating temperatures occur if the fluid is exposed to a cold environment for a
significant period of time. The greatest effects that deeper water and longer step out
distances will have are on the lower ambient temperature in deeper water and longer
residence time that the fluid will have in the transportation system as well as riser
H-0806.35
24-16
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-17
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-18
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-19
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-20
1-Dec-00
FIGURE 24.2-10:
H-0806.35
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
24-21
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
auto-refrigeration effects. If the pressure drop available is relatively low such that a large
diameter flowline and riser is required, the residence time will increase for the same
production rate, and this will give rise to lower temperatures. It is apparent that for
typical systems the operating temperature may be below 90F even with high levels of
insulation. As rule of thumb, 90F is a minimum arrival temperature for good separation
efficiency.
b) Hydrates
Low temperatures and high pressures typify hydrate formation conditions. Therefore,
deepwater operations with longer tiebacks are expected to increase the likelihood of
hydrate formation which can reduce the flowing capacity, or in the extreme, complete
flowline blockage can occur which can give rise to safety and containment problems as
well as the potential high cost of remediation and production loss.
Hydrates are part of a chemical class of compounds called clathrates and can form at
temperatures as high as 70F in hydrocarbon/water systems operating at high pressures.
Hydrates are solids composed of water and gas and are in some ways similar to ice with a
frost like or ice appearance. The density of hydrates is similar to ice. However, whereas a
pressure increase over water reduces the tendency to form ice as the temperature is
decreased, a pressure increase in a hydrocarbon gas/water system increases the tendency
to form hydrates as temperature is decreased. Figure 24.2-11 shows a typical hydrate
decomposition curve for a oil/water/gas fluid on which is superimposed a pressure and
temperature profile for a 50 mile subsea flowline from deepwater wells to a shallow
water platform. In this case, it is seen that most of the flowline operates in the hydrate
formation region.
The classical approach to avoiding hydrate problems under normal operation is to
insulate the flowlines or to use inhibitors such as methanol or mono ethylene glycol
(MEG). Insulation or heating the flowline is employed to move the operating line to the
right of the hydrate region, whereas chemical inhibition is used to move the hydrate curve
to the left of the operating line. Insulation can significantly add to the CAPEX cost of a
flowline (approximately $150,000 per mile) whereas classical inhibition can require large
quantities (10-40% of the water rate) of relatively expensive chemical which can add
significantly to the OPEX cost. Even if the normal operation remains out of hydrate
forming conditions, shutdown and subsequent cool down can cause hydrate formation. If
depressurization is used to prevent hydrates during extended shutdown periods,
chemicals may still be required during startup since the flowline pressure often increases
faster
than
the
temperature,
taking
the
H-0806.35
24-22
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-23
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
operating line into the hydrate formation region. In this case there can be a tradeoff
between the methanol storage requirements and the startup production profile.
By comparison with Figure 24.2-7 it is seen that the flowing fluids cool to 70F in around
30 miles for a production rate of 5 MBOPD. At higher rates this distance is increased,
thus turndown to low flowrates needs to be considered and the lowest expected
production rate can define the design case, depending on the effects of water cut. Figures
24.2-6 and 24.2-7 indicate that there are significant operating regions where the arrival
temperature can be below 70F. However the pressure may also be lower at the facilities,
thus the determination of hydrate free conditions requires consideration of the flowline
temperature and pressure profile. As illustrated in Figure 24.2-11, it is possible for each
end of the flowline to be free of hydrates, yet they may form part way along the length.
The high cost of classical hydrate inhibitors has recently led to a search for lower cost
alternatives, which are required in smaller quantities. The three main types of low dosage
additives are kinetic inhibitors (THI), growth modifiers (HGI), and emulsion additives.
Each has its own operational implications as discussed below:
Kinetic inhibitors
These are added to suppress the formation of hydrates like classical inhibitors but will not
work at high subcooling (more than 10C) or for extended time periods. This may have
implications for three-phase flow wet gas systems operating at low velocities where the
water phase can have a very long residence time in the transportation system. The active
agents in these inhibitors are polymers, which are typically transported by a carrier
solvent and are thought to be effective for gas, oil, or condensate fluids.
Growth modifiers
Growth modifiers are active in the water phase and are designed to modify the growth of
the hydrate and to encourage the crystals into the hydrocarbon phase. They are effective
up to around 30% water cut and require that the hydrate crystals are transported as solids
in the hydrocarbon liquid.
Emulsion additives
These inhibitors work in the oil phase by creating stable water- in-oil emulsions which do
not have a high viscosity and which can be transported as a slurry, hence a hydrocarbon
liquid phase is required. These are the newest and least tested low dosage inhibitors.
H-0806.35
24-24
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Each of the hydrate inhibitors has specific implications for processing and these are
outlined in Table 24.2-1. The required dosage rate of the new inhibitors can be as low as
0.25 wt% giving treatment costs of around $6/bbl of water compared to MEG and
methanol inhibition costs of approximately $16 and $10 respectively. Given the potential
cost saving of avoiding insulation and possibly of burying subsea flowlines, the new
breed of hydrate inhibitors may have a large impact in the future since it will be likely
that even with the best insulation, transport over long distances will not be possible at
temperatures above those at which hydrate can form.
TABLE 24.2-1: CHARACTERISTICS OF HYDRATE INHIBITORS
TYPE OF
KINETIC
GROWTH
EMULSION
ADDITIVE:
INHIBITOR
INHIBITOR
ADDITIVE
Multiphase
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Gas
Yes
Unlikely
No
Yes
Condensate
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Oil
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Dose rate
0.125-0.25% of
0.25% of water
2%of
10-40%
water rate
rate
water rate
of water rate
METHANOL
APPLICATION
OPERATING
10C
15C
15C
15C
subcooling
subcooling
subcooling
subcooling
Water cut
No limit
30-40% WOR*
30-40% WOR*
No limit
Effectiveness
Not typically
Not known
Probably
Very
against ice
effective
effective
effective
Additional
No
Heating /
Heating /
Recovery
demulsification
demulsification
No
Demulsifiers
Demulsifiers
No
Known
Emulsion
Not
Not
Material
deployment
formation
problems
Regenerable
viscosity of blend
No
Unlikely
No
80% typically
Downstream
None
Possible product
Possible product
Occasional
impact
known
contamination
contamination
product
potential cause of
haze in heavier
haze in heavier
loss of LNG
contamination
fractions
fractions
Temperature
equipment
Additional
chemicals
H-0806.35
compatibility
24-25
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Disposal stream
In water
Typically in oil
In oil
In all phases
Environmental
Water quality
Not known
Not known
Onshore disposal
consideration
hydrocarbon limit
UK regulatory
D/E
limits
A
Unknown
rating for
disposal
For these additives, the amount of hydrate formed and so the effective operating limit
could be a complicated function of flow rate, flow regime, gas amount and water cut. At
this stage in development, practical limits are best determined from field trials, or better,
from loop tests
The hydrate formation can sometimes be detected by a reduction in the produced water
flowrate as water is being absorbed to form hydrate crystals. In other cases an increased
pressure drop may be detected. Complete blockage is usually detected by reduced gas
flowrates and pressure abnormalities. Some systems are being developed to detect
hydrate and wax deposits on pipe walls and are based on ultrasonic techniques. These
may be useful to monitor trouble spots such as uninsulated jumpers for example.
Complete blockages can be difficult to locate precisely and may take sometime to melt
using inhibitors. A preferred method for melting hydrate plugs is to depressurize the
flowline. However this generally requires that the pressure is reduced on both sides of the
blockage simultaneously as high differential pressures can cause the plug to move rapidly
on melting, and can cause structural loads due to impact damage if the flowline changes
direction, such as at the riser base for example. Depressurization of a subsea flowline
blockage on both sides generally requires a flowline loop to the platform, which is a setup
typically used in the GOM as it also assists in turndown and allows for flexibility if
producing different separator pressures. However, the total subsea production is lost
during the depressurization. The Shell Mensa development only has one flowline and
depressurizing from both ends will be facilitated using a surface vessel to tie in to the
subsea manifold and lower the pressure on this side.
Melting hydrates using the application of external heat is possible. However care is
required if localized heating is employed as very large pressures can be generated as the
hydrate vaporizes if it is contained within the plug.
Although hydrate formation problems have been discussed here, it should not be
forgotten that most production operations could suffer from a combination of
H-0806.35
24-26
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-27
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-28
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Potential problems with wax deposition can depend on the amount and type of wax
deposited. Soft wax deposits may be carried along with the fluids and may not cause a
significant problem, whereas hard deposits may require mechanical removal using
pigging, melting by solvents, or by flushing with high temperature fluids. There will
likely be a tradeoff between the lost production due to the reduced capacity resulting
from paraffin deposition and the frequency of remediation, which will incur operating
costs and deferred production.
For example, a certain crude has a wax content of 7.5-8.5 wt%, which begins to deposit at
pipe wall temperatures below 38C (100F). It is expected that 0.5-2 mm of wax could be
deposited in the flowline and 1.5-4 mm in the riser during 1 month of operation. The
increased pressure loss is estimated to reduce the flowing capacity to 97%. Hot oil
flushing requires a temperature of 10C above the wax appearance temperature to be
effective and it is estimated that a flushing period of 12 hours will be required, which if
carried-out once a month would give a average capacity of 98.5%.
In practice, optimized operation is likely to involve careful monitoring of the wax
deposition and the evaluation of gains from wax control procedures. If operating
conditions change rapidly it may be difficult to determine the cause of the reduced system
capacity (such as increased water cut or paraffin deposition).
If pigging is used to remove wax deposits, care must be taken to ensure that the pig does
not become stuck. Some operations have benefited from using soft pigs so that some wax
is left on the wall, which acts as an insulator and reduces wax deposition rates, whereas
complete wax removal could give rise to high deposition rate and high pigging
frequencies, not to mention potential wax handling problems at the facilities.
Deep water operations and longer step out distances are likely to give rise to more severe
paraffin problems where conventional remediation methods may have problems. For
example, it may be difficult to maintain the temperature of flushing fluids over longer
distances and pigging large quantities of wax may not be possible due to plugging. For
these reasons there is considerable interest in the development of wax inhibitors which
modify the wax crystals and prevent deposition on the pipe wall. These chemicals may
not prevent the formation of wax but may make them transportable.
As with hydrates, the interaction with other solids and inhibitors may be significant in
practical operations. For example certain developments have the potential for paraffin
H-0806.35
24-29
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
deposition and relatively high sand production rates of up to 10 lbs per thousand barrels
of oil. The effects of the combined wax and sand production are little understood.
d) High viscosity oils and emulsion formation
The viscosity of oils increases rapidly at low operating temperatures, although this may
be partially offset at high operating pressures due to the effect of solution gas, which
reduces the viscosity. Figure 24.2-13 shows typical oil viscosity vs. temperature
relationships. Measurements on field samples at several temperatures can be used to tune
physical property correlations in multiphase design software to improve the accuracy of
predictions. The increased oil viscosity leads to greater frictional pressure loss, which
may have implications for long flowlines.
Some oils are very viscous and can be non-Newtonian giving rise to high pressure drops
in normal operation and high restart pressure requirements. Some of these problems have
been overcome by using chemicals to form stable low viscosity emulsions or by ensuring
that a lower viscosity fluid is in contact with the pipe wall with the high viscosity fluid
flowing down the middle, such as in core-annular flow.
The determination of the liquid viscosity is generally more difficult if oil/water emulsions
are present since the viscosity can be many times higher than the individual phase
viscosities. The viscosity of an emulsion depends to a large extent on the particle size
distribution, which is a function of the flow history and the shear generated during
transport through chokes, pumps, and the flowline itself. High shear creates smaller
particle sizes and tighter dispersions, which gives rise to increased fluid viscosity as
illustrated in Figure 24.2-14. Peak viscosities (over 30 times the oil phase value) typically
occur near the inversion point where the emulsion reverts from a water- in-oil dispersion
to an oil- in-water dispersion. The inversion point usually prevails at water cuts in the
range 40 to 60 %.
Emulsions generally exhibit non-Newtonian shear thinning flow behavior so that the
viscosity is dependent on the shear rate. Problems can arise following shutdowns due to
increased restart yield stresses and the effects of aging. Longer flowlines with emulsion
formation may require excessive pressures to restart the flow.
Typical assumptions of a weighted average viscosity of the oil and water are likely to
significantly underestimate the liquid viscosity if emulsions are present. More
H-0806.35
24-30
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-31
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-32
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
realistic models for the viscosity of emulsions relate the ratio of the emulsion/continuous
phase viscosity to the concentration of the dispersed phase modified by some power. This
relationship can be tuned with me asured data to improve the prediction accuracy.
A final point on the effect of high fluid viscosities is the impact on multiphase flow
regimes and slug characteristics where it has been seen during tests with air and
water/glycol mixtures that high viscosities lead to a larger slug flow region. However, the
slugs are generally smaller and more frequent.
24.2.3 Delivery
Ensuring that the process facilities can handle the fluid delivery from the flowlines and
risers.
The two main issues here are related to the arrival temperature (which if too low can give
rise to separation problems and if too high may require cooling) and to the variations in
the flowrates of the fluids delivered to the facilities as a result of normal hydrodynamic
slugging, terrain induced slug flow, or resulting from transients caused by changing
operating conditions and pigging.
The arrival temperature problems are related to the low temperature issues discussed in
the integrity section, which can lead to wax, hydrate, or emulsion formation. In addition,
higher temperatures also assist separation, where around 30 C (90 F) is a good rule of
thumb and may require heating the fluids upstream of the separation facilities. A too high
an arrival temperature resulting from HT well production can also give rise to problems
and may require coolers necessary for compression or dehydration.
Some of the most severe potential operating limitations may be imposed by transient
flowrates resulting from normal or abnormal operation. The greater flowline length and
riser depth leads to a larger liquid inventory with potentially increased transient surge
problems. In addition, the flowline topography and the shape of the riser can lead to
severe slugging at relatively high production rates. This would make processing the fluids
almost impossible and could require the use of control techniques such as gas injection to
alleviate the condition. Figure 24.2-15 illustrates the delivery related issues.
H-0806.35
24-33
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-34
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Further discussion of the effects of deepwater riser configuration on severe slugging and
the limitations of design methods is provided below:
a) Effect of riser shape on severe slugging
The effect of the deepwater flowline/riser configuration on the hydraulic stability of a
system was investigated by performing PLAC transient two-phase flow simulations for
various flowline and riser geometries. Three riser configurations were used for the
dynamic simulations and are shown in Figure 24-17. The configurations are all based on
a 10,000 ft water depth and consider vertical, catenary, and S shapes. The base case
flowline configuration consists of a 20 mile horizontal flowline and sensitivities have
investigated the addition of a 10,000 ft, l downhill sloping section to the riser base. All
simulations are based on a 12 inside diameter system.
The PLAC simulations are based on a fluid composition with a GOR of 1200 SCF/STB.
A constant inlet mass flow rate is assumed, and two cases equivalent to 10 and 20
MBOPD have been modeled using a fixed inlet temperature of 40 F. The outlet pressure
is fixed at 1000 psia.
Table 24.2-2 shows the results of the simulations and indicates that inclining the flowline
down hill l at the base of the riser has a large effect of the stability of the system. For all
cases with a horizontal flowline the stability limit is between 10 and 20 MBOPD, but the
dip shape of the S leads to much more severe surges with a horizontal flowline. With
the inclined line the surges produced by the S riser were not as severe as with the other
shapes due to the trapped gas bubble preventing the riser completely filling with liquid.
b) Conclusions on the limitations of transient codes to simulate deepwater flowline/riser
hydraulic instabilities
Although general purpose transient two-phase flow simulators offer the most potential for
assessing the hydrodynamic stability limits of deepwater production systems there are
presently some concerns over the limitations of the codes. This is highlighted in Figure
24.2-17, which shows flow pattern map for lazy S riser tests compared to the results of
the OLGA code. It is seen that OLGA predicts a much smaller severe slugging region.
Present limitations of the transient codes are thought to be:
H-0806.35
24-35
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Vertical
Flowline
20 mile
Oil rate
Static
Dynamic
(MBOPD)
analysis
analysis
10
Unstable
Small fluctuations
10bbl surge
Vertical
20 mile
20
Stable
Stable
10
Unstable
Severe slugging
with 1 dip
Vertical
20 mile
1069bbl surge
Catenary
20 mile
10
Unstable
Small fluctuations
10bbl surge
Catenary
20 mile
20
Stable
Stable
Catenary
20 mile
10
Unstable
Severe slugging
with 1 dip
1432bbl surge
None
10
Unstable
Stable
20 mile
10
Unstable
Slugging
306bbl surge
20 mile
20
Stable
Stable
20 mile
10
Unstable
Severe slugging
with 1 dip
H-0806.35
866bbl surge
24-36
1-Dec-00
H-0806.35
24-37
1-Dec-00
H-0806.35
24-38
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-39
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-40
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
and the implications for future deepwater system design and operation are outlined. It is
not possible to consider limitations simply as low throughput and high throughput limits
as the dynamic nature of two-phase flow leads to some obscure results. For example, low
steady flowrates may lead to riser slug stalling and accelerations that produce higher
loads than steady production at high throughputs.
A large proportion of the operating limitations are related to high or low flowing
velocities which are partly determined by the characteristics of the reservoir fluid and are
principally beyond our control, for example the GOR and water cut. However downhole
gas and water separation may change this in the future. The operating pressure and the
flowline size are also major variables.
It can be difficult to assess the relative importance of the various operational constraints
in practice as it may not be possible to provide a large enough operating envelope which
avoids all limitations, and it may be required to asses the gray areas of operability which
mitigate against the worst problems. Such an assessment requires that all the relevant
considerations are understood and weighed up. This often requires inp ut from various
disciplines in a true integrated design.
Figure 24.3-2 shows a typical operating envelope that was produced for the Foinaven
development and considers the capacity limit due to the available pressure drop, the
unstable hydraulic operating limit, the erosion rate, sand deposition limit, and the
minimum arrival temperature. This only represents a few of the possible operating
limitations, and the figure shows a clear operating envelope. If the water depth and
tieback distance were to increase the flowline pressure would increase and the arrival
temperature would decrease with the result that some of the limit lines may move to
reduce the operating region, or may crossover to produce a gray operating region.
The relative importance of the various operating limits depends to a large extent on the
specific development and hence it is not possible to reliably generalize. It is
recommended that the results of this study be applied to a number of potential future
deepwater developments in order that the research efforts can be better focused.
H-0806.35
24-41
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-42
1-Dec-00
High well PI
The tubing loss may be counteracted by adding energy in the form of down hole ESPs or
reduced by using DRA/foams or gas lift. Gas lift has the disadvantage of potentially
increasing the flowline pressure drop.
The capacity of the flowline/riser system may be increased by:
The effect of each mitigating measure should be judged using accurate pressure drop
prediction methods in an integrated system model. Considering the practicality and cost
of some of the boosting measures, the most promising technologies for deepwater are
considered to be downhole ESPs, water removal systems, the use of drag reducing
agents, and accurate integrated model predictions. The addition of energy using ESPs is
probably the most efficient and reliable means, but may still have problems due to long
distance power transmission. Other means of supplying power need to be considered.
b) Low temperature related problems
Low operating temperatures are likely to result from the lower ambient temperature and
longer fluid residence time in the transportation system. The low temperature related
problems may be overcome by:
H-0806.35
24-43
1-Dec-00
Insulation
Use inhibitors
Pigging
Uninsulated risers
Because of the difficulty and cost of maintaining the temperature of long tiebacks the
most promising control method is the use of low dosage inhibitors, but these may have
limited application due to the relatively low subcooling that can be tolerated. Cooling at
the wellhead may be a potential for wax problems since if the fluids are cooled to the
temperature of the pipe wall there is no temperature gradient for wax deposition and the
small amount of wax that is formed by diffusion can be transported as a slurry. The autorefrigeration in the deepwater risers was previously not anticipated and should be the
subject of further study.
c) High temperature problems
High temperature related problems are only likely in the vicinity of the wellheads and are
mainly associated with increased corrosion and the strength of coatings and flexible
pipes. These issues are being addressed by HP/HT developments and are not considered
as critical here.
d) High velocity limits
Steady state velocities at the receiving facilities are not likely to be any higher than with
conventional developments, but the transient velocities caused by slugging could be
much higher as the water depth and the riser diameter increases. This can yield
intermittent erosion and corrosion inhibitor film stripping. The biggest problem for
deepwater is considered to be in the prediction of slug accelerations and the pipeline load
and fatigue implications. If accurate predictions cannot be made, then in-service
monitoring of the material wall thickness and fatigue life could be necessary. Aerating
the slugs or moderating the slug accelerations may reduce loads.
e) Low velocity related problems
The high backpressure generated by deepwater risers gives rise to lower operating
velocities in the flowline, which may lead to solids deposition and water accumulation.
Pigging can be used to control these problems to some degree, but is costly and time
H-0806.35
24-44
1-Dec-00
consuming. There is little that can be done about the solids problem apart from separation
at the wellhead. Remote water removal is also a possibility as is the use of emulsion
forming agents to maintain the water in suspension in the oil phase, and hence avoid
water accumulation and corrosion.
f) High pressure operation
High pressure operation is likely to be unavoidable. There is still a potential that there
will be a considerable difference between the wellhead shut in pressure and the maximum
required operating pressure of the flowline. HIPPS systems can be used to reduce the
flowline pressure rating and cost if the system is able to monitor and control the pressures
effectively. There are a number of circumstances that can arise where the measurement of
the pressure at the ends of the flowline is insufficient to infer the pressures throughout,
such as during pigging or if blockages occur. Here dynamic hydraulic models tuned to
field measurements may improve the accuracy of the shutdown system.
g) Problems with gas and liquid flowrate variations at the facilities
Larger diame ter flowlines and risers are likely to generate larger normal hydrodynamic
slugs, while the longer flowline length combined with the shape of the riser may increase
the likelihood of severe slugging. The larger system inventory can also lead to more
severe surges during transient operation. The flowrate variations resulting from severe
slugging are so large that this mode of operation is to be avoided, so the use of control
measures such as riser base gas lift or the use of foams is essential, as are design tools
required to predict the occurrence of severe slugging. Methods for limiting the effects of
transient operation, such as reducing the liquid inventory and using operating procedures,
are also important. Normal slug flow is more difficult to avoid, and methods for active
control and detection subsea may be worthwhile pursuing.
The critical areas discussed above are illustrated on a deepwater schematic in Figure 2420.
24.3.2 Assessment of limitations
The real life assessment of critical design limitations is likely to be complicated by the
wide range of factors involved, the variation of operating conditions over the life
H-0806.35
24-45
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-46
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DES IGN GUIDELINE
of the field, and the large cha nges in the flowing conditions from the reservoir to the
processing facilities. There is also a compromise to be made regarding the relative
importance of various issues that may reduce one problem while worsening another.
Table 24.3-1 shows an assessment of the significance of a number of variables related to
deepwater developments and may be used to rank the configuration of a development
with regard to potential hydraulic limitations. The higher the overall score, the more
challenging the hydraulic design is likely to be. This is an initial attempt at this approach
and may be elaborated on in the future if considered to be worthwhile.
TABLE 24.3-1: NATURE OF EXTREMES EFFECT
Extremes / Effect
Significance
Variable
Worst
Best
(out of 10)
Water depth
Shallow (0ft)
10-0
Flowline/riser
diameters
Large 28
Small 3
10-1
Upstream flowline
length
Long
100 miles
Short
0 miles
8 Low flow 0
1 high flow
Inclination of
upstream flowline
0-20 down
7-20 up
10 Low flow 0
2 High flow
Geometry of riser
Double S
S Catenary
Vertical
10 Low flow 2
Low flow
2 High flow 2
High flow
% of production
100%
small %
up the riser
Multiply to get comparisons of different combinations
10-3
24-47
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DES IGN GUIDELINE
the many variables, intelligent software tools may be required. These could be linked to
the monitoring and control system and warn the operator if corrective action is required.
An example of this could be if the measurements of the fluids into and out of the flowline
are used to determine the liquid inventory and warn the operator when to send a pig to
control the build-up of liquid. This type of approach could be important, as operations
become more complex and more marginal.
24.4
Other Studies
The use of three phase separators and water treatment facilities to remove water at a
deep wellhead is not viable, not least due to technical difficulties in meeting
environmental standards for water discharge.
In gas condensate systems bulk separation would probably not prevent hydrate
formation due to condensation at a later stage.
It is
generally the case in subsea developments that in order to minimize the size of
equipment the pressure is maintained at a high level (within design constraints).
H-0806.35
24-48
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DES IGN GUIDELINE
The use of inhibitors (usually methanol or glycol) is probably not feasible for deep
subsea developments where there is significant free water due to the large quantities
of the chemicals that would be required.
Separation of the light hydrocarbons (which form hydrates) and subsequent singlephase transportation is feasible, but might be technically difficult in deep waters.
(DeepStar has
demonstrated that this can be done if care is taken, although the plug velocities can be
very high - up to 270ft/sec for plugs of 25 to 200 ft in length).
With regard to paraffin or wax deposition they concluded:
The expectation is that hydrocarbon fluids from very deep water developments
will have a relatively high wax content.
Chemical, mechanical, and thermal methods are available, but for very deep
developments careful consideration of the correct choice is important to ensure
the integrity of the system.
H-0806.35
24-49
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DES IGN GUIDELINE
1900
1400
1000
2600
2400
300
277
259
389
363
340
A similar analysis for gas condensate systems, based on a 6- inch riser, was used to
generate a relationship between FBHP and gas flow for different water depths, as shown
in Figure 24.4-1.
b) Mid-depth completions
It was concluded that the only real difference between the surface and mid depth
completion was that the mid depth choke would induce more gas to break out of the
liquid flow, thus reducing hydrostatic head in the risers and pressure losses. This effect is
greater with higher GOR's.
c) Subsea completions
They concluded that as an alternative to seabed separation and single phase export, the
use of multiphase pumping systems was viable but presents a number of technical
challenges due to the non- homogeneity of the flow. In fact, for gas/condensate systems
multiphase export is probably the only viable technique. They point out that for oil
systems a number of other associated deep water factors must be considered:
At the pressures required to pump a two phase oil/gas system to the surface the fluid
may be compressed above its bubble point, thus reverting back to a single phase.
A differential head of 200-400 bar may be required, implying the use of multiple
pumping sets.
H-0806.35
24-50
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DES IGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-51
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-52
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
24.4.2 BG
A similar study to identify areas of concern to BG was also carried out. This also
identified produced fluids and slugging as areas of special concern in deepwater. The
produced fluids issues are being addressed through JIPs such as DeepStar, but this study
identified that most of the severe slugging research to date had been conducted in low
pressure test equipment and would be of doubtful value to an assessment of the issues in
deepwater. BG Technology has initiated a separate investigation of severe slugging. A
number of deepwater scenarios have been investigated theoretically, based on deepwater
locations in the Mediterranean, offshore Egypt. Two possible export options were
considered, long distance transport to shallow water and subsea completion with tie in to
a floating structure in deepwater. These are depicted in Figure 24.4-3. Two production
scenarios were considered: A gas/condensate system with a CGR of 20 bbl/MMSCF and
a maximum throughput of 300MMSCFD, and an oil- gas system with a GOR of 400 and a
throughput of 50,000 bbl/d. A turndown ratio of 1:10 was considered for the gas
condensate system. The main hydrodynamic factors, generated using the PLAC pipeline
simulator, are indicated in Tables 24.4-2 through 24.4-4.
From Table 24.4-3, at maximum throughput, the riser case indicated no particular
hydrodynamic problems. The long distance pipeline had a significant pressure drop due
the hydrostatic head to be overcome on the incline. The liquid holdup is not excessive.
Under turndown conditions, the riser did show slug formation with a slug size of about 2
tons. The pressure drop is much larger due to the increased liquid holdup. In the long
distance line, the main problems appear to be the very large holdup in the incline. The
pressure drop in this case was also high (522 psi).
TABLE 24.4-2
Line
Topography
Flow regime
Average pressure drop
Pressure swing
Liquid holdup
Maximum liquid velocity
H-0806.35
Riser
Stratified/annular
65 psi
35 bbl
5.5 m/s
24-53
3 degree incline
Stratified/annular
320 psi
3500 bbl
2 m/s
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Flow regime
Average pressure drop
Pressure swing
Liquid holdup
Maximum liquid
velocity
Line
Topography
Riser
3 degree incline
Slugging/annular
Slugging/annular
334 psi
522 psi
7 psi
420 bbl
48000 bbl
2 m/s
0.15 m/s
For the oil/gas case some hydrodynamic slugging was seen along the line but the outlet
liquid production rate was steady. In the riser, however, severe slugging was clearly a
problem. The slugs were up to 100 tons in size and a pressure swing of 450 psi was seen
(Table 24.4-4).
TABLE 24.4-4: OIL AND ASSOCIATED GAS
Flow regime
Average pressure drop
Pressure swing
Liquid holdup
Maximum liquid velocity
H-0806.35
Line
Topography
Riser
3 degree incline
Severe slugging
Hydrodynamic slugging
348 psi
550 psi
450 psi
800 bbl
12 m/s
1 m/s
24-54
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-55
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
H-0806.35
24-56
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
24.6
References
Wheeler, G.A. et al, The DeepStar Project: An Overview of Industry Cooperation, OTC
Conference, Houston, 1993.
Intec Engineering Inc., Deepwater IIA - System Overview and Integration, DeepStar IIA,
CTR A1102, March 1996.
H-0806.35
24-57
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Anon., Study of Subsea Developments in Very Deep Water, ABB Global Engineering,
DTI-OSO report OTN-93-018, 1993.
Gordon, I.C. and Fairhurst, C.P., Multi-Phase Pipeline and Equipment Design for
Maginal and Deepwater Field Development, 3rd Int. Conference on Multi-phase Flow,
Netherlands, 1987.
H-0806.35
24-58
1-Dec-00
25.0
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Material
Carbon Steel
Stainless Steel
Concrete
(Saturated)
Onshore Soil (Wet)
Subsea Sandy Soil
Coal Tar Epoxy
Fusion
Bonded
Epoxy
Neoprene
Polyurethane Foam
Thermal
Conductivity,
Btu/hr- ft-degF
26
8-13
0.75-1.2
Specific
Btu/lb-degF
0.11
0.11
0.10
490
488
147-200
1.35
1.25-1.50
0.20
0.15
0.20
0.30
0.35
0.32
90-110
105-115
92
75-90
0.12-0.15
0.011-0.022
0.50
0.38
90
2-12
Material
Thermal Conductivity
Btu (hr F ft)
1.66
2.87
1.18(1)
2.04
0.114
W (mK)
0.2
0.114
0.2
Neoprene/EPDM
0.156(2)
0.017(3)
PVC Foam
0.023-0.04(3)
0.04-0.7
Syntactic PU
0.07(3)
0.12
H-0806.35
25-1
027
0.03
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Temperature (deg.C)
UKCS summer
Depth
(m)
50.000
UKCS winter
50.000
4.000
Mediterranean
(summer)
Mediterranean (winter)
30.000
20.000
30.000
10.000
Mediterranean
(summer)
Mediterranean (winter)
surface
29.000
surface
10.000
Gulf of Mexico
600 - 1000
0.5 - 4
Gulf of Mexico
surface
20.000
SE Asia
12.000
27.000
H-0806.35
25-2
1-Dec-00
DEEPSTAR.
MULTIPHASE DESIGN GUIDELINE
Thermal
Conductivity
(Btu/hr/ft/F)
1.2
2.0
0.200
0.343
1.08
1.26
1.51
0.220
0.245
0.285
Thermal
Conductivity
(Btu/hr/ft/F)
1.0
1.2
2.0
0.36
0.393
0.489
H-0806.35
25-3
1-Dec-00