ASSESSMENT OF FLUID PRESSURE LOSS IN OIL & GAS IN-FIELD

PIPELINES: A GIS BASED APPROACH

Nicols Metallo
a
, Antonio Liporace
b

a
Mechanical Integrity Department, Sinopec Argentina Exploration & Production Inc., Manuela Saenz
323, Buenos Aires, Argentina, Nicolas_Metallo@sinopecarg.com.ar
b
Mechanical Integrity Department, Sinopec Argentina Exploration & Production Inc., Manuela Saenz
323, Buenos Aires, Argentina, Antonio_Liporace@sinopecarg.com.ar
Keywords: multiphase flow, GIS, pressure drop, emulsion viscosity, phase inversion.
Abstract: The assessment of fluid pressure loss in pipelines plays a major role in the solution of
problems of practical interest. Indirect corrosion monitoring as well as pipe size calculations, they both
rely on an accurate calculation of pressure loss. However this is not a trivial task. In this paper we
present an innovative methodology to calculate and display fluid pressure drop in Oil & Gas pipelines.
This methodology addressed all relevant aspects of multi-phase fluid pressure drop such as emulsion
kinematic viscosity model and emulsion density model. A solution to readily acquire input parameters
to perform pressure drop calculations via Geographic Integration System (GIS) is also presented. The
same system is use to present calculation results. This procedure allows a complete automatization of
the calculations for an entire pipeline network.

1 INTRODUCTION
The assessment of fluid pressure loss in pipelines plays a major role in the solution of
problems of practical interest. Indirect corrosion monitoring as well as pipe size calculations,
they both rely on an accurate calculation of pressure loss. However this is not a trivial task.
Fluid flowing from oil wells is a variable mixture of oil, water and gas. There are many
theories to tackle down every related problem but, unfortunately, none of them is of general
application. In addition, the total length, the volumetric flow rate and the topographic
elevation of start and end points of a pipe must be known in order to perform the calculations.
Finding these values can be a demanding task, especially for pipelines that receives fluid from
many wells.
Fluids extracted from Oil wells are a variable mixture of petroleum, gas and water. The
fluid fraction is always prevalent but water to petroleum ratio is highly variable. This is
especially true in regions where secondary oil recovery techniques are implemented, like in
Argentine oil fields. This variability makes the assessment of density and kinematic viscosity
a real challenge. The accurate assessment of these values along with the selection of a suitable
multi-phase flow theory is vital to accurate assessment of fluid pressure loss. In this paper we
analyze multiple models of density, kinematic viscosity and multi-phase flow in order to
select the more suitable ones. This lead to the development of a complete methodology to
determine pressure loss in oil & gas pipelines that addresses, and hopefully overcomes, all the
stated difficulties. We also present a way to readily obtain pipeline total length, volumetric
flow rate and topographic elevations from Geographic Integration System (GIS) corporate
database.
Although many theories to assess fluid pressure loss are already developed, none of them
is a complete one, with wide application to in-field oil and gas pipelines analysis. Moreover
these theories usually overlook density and kinematic viscosity variations leading to results
that do not correlate well with experimental and field measurements. GIS integration requires
the development of a well-planned application (ArcObjects) that could be run overnight in
order to process introduced changes in corporate database (such as new volumetric flow rates
of wells).
In the following sections we cover the basis of multi-phase flow theories. Then we revise
most relevant kinematic viscosity and density models and select the most suitable one. After
that, a methodology is proposed and an example calculation is given. Finally, GIS integration
is described both to gather required data and to graphically present calculations results.

2 MULTIPHASE FLOW FUNDAMENTALS
In the oil and gas industry multiphase flow often happens with fluid from well production
and gas and oil flow simultaneously through the pipeline. This is what we know to be two-
phase flow (gas-liquid) but in addition to gas and oil, it is normal to find water flowing also
forming an gas-water emulsion known to be a three-phase fluid flow.
2.1 Superficial velocities
It is possible to find the superficial velocity of each phase (that being gas or liquid) by
dividing the volumetric flow rate of the phase by the cross-sectional area of the pipeline. We
consider the system as if only one phase was flowing through it. We would then have:

(2.1.1)

(2.1.2)

The liquid phase contains both oil and water:

(2.1.3)

Where

(oil),

(water) and

(gas) formation volume factors convert to the prevailing

pressure and temperature conditions in the pipe from standard (or stock tank) conditions.

The gas phase could be treated as a function of pressure:

(2.1.4)

In the end, superficial velocities could be rewritten as:

(2.1.5)

(2.1.6)

As the cross-sectional area occupied by liquid phase is smaller than that of the entire pipe, we
could find that in-situ velocity (considering liquid hold-up) is then higher than superficial
velocity.

To know the final mixture velocity the following equation shall be considered:

(2.1.7)

2.2 Liquid hold-up
When two or more phases are present in a pipe, in most cases gas flows faster than the
liquid, that is to say that

. This typically happens for the less dense phase causing a

slip between the two. As a consequence, the in-situ volume fractions of each phase (under
flowing conditions) will differ from the input volume fractions of the pipe.

No-Slip Liquid and Gas Holdup (

):

is defined as the ratio of the volume of the

liquid in a pipe segment divided by the volume of the pipe segment which would exist if the
gas and liquid travelled at the same velocity (no-slippage). It can be calculated directly from
the known gas and liquid volumetric flow rates from:

(2.2.1)

Liquid and Gas Holdup (

):

is defined as the ratio of the volume of a pipe segment

occupied by liquid to the volume of the pipe segment. The remainder of the pipe segment is of
course occupied by gas, which is referred to as:

(2.2.2)

When slip occurs, then:

2.3 Gas-liquid mixture density and flowing velocity
Pressure gradients on multiphase lines normally lie in the range 0-1.5 kg/cm
2
/km but a
more useful way of addressing if flowing conditions are acceptable is to check whether the
velocity of the fluid is in a required threshold.

The actual (not the superficial) liquid velocity

should be greater than 3 m/s to ensure that

sand and water are continuously transported with the liquid and should not accumulate at the
bottom of the pipe. The actual liquid velocity is given by:

(2.3.1)

At the maximum throughput conditions the mixture velocity

should not exceed the

erosional velocity as it would induce a loss of wall thickness that occurs by a process of
erosion/corrosion. This process is accelerated by high fluid velocities, presence of sand,
corrosive contaminants such as

, and fittings which disturb the flow path such as

elbows.
The following procedure (API 14E) for establishing an erosional velocity can be used
where no specific information as to the erosive/corrosive properties of the fluid is available.

(2.3.2)

Where:

= maximum acceptable mixture velocity to avoid excessive erosion (ft/s)

= no-slip mixture density (lb/ft

3
)
C = a constant, given in API R14E as 100 for carbon steel

And

can be determined using the following derived equation:

(2.3.3)

Where:
P = operating pressure, psia

= liquid specific gravity (water = 1) at standard conditions

R = gas-liquid ratio,

at standard conditions
T = operating temperature, R

= gas specific gravity (air = 1) at standard conditions

Z = gas compressibility factor, dimensionless


2.4 Phase inversion
Oil and water mixtures in crude oil pipelines interact across their interface and the extent
of this interaction determines the effective properties of the mixture. Two dispersions can be
formed usually: one being water-in-oil (W/O) dispersion formed when the aqueous phase is
dispersed in the organic phase and oil-in-water (O/W) dispersion is a dispersion which is
formed when the organic phase is dispersed in the aqueous phase. Phase inversion is the
phenomenon whereby the phases of liquid-liquid dispersion interchange such that the
dispersed phase spontaneously inverts to become the continuous phase and vice versa. This
could be seen illustrated in Figure 2 below and we could then say that the inversion point is
the holdup of the dispersed phase for a system at which the transition occurs i.e. when the
dispersed phase becomes the continuous phase.


Figure 1: Phase inversin ocurrence. (Arirachakaran 1989)
Factors that may influence phase inversion are among others: two-phase density, viscosity,
interfacial tension, and other physical properties and operation conditions. At the same time,
temperature, oil-water system formation, and mixture container wettability also play an
impact. The inversion point aims to provide a probable range of distinguishment between
continuous and disperse phase where Decarre and Fabre (Eq. 2.4.1) and Arirachakaran et al.
(Eq. 2.4.2) equations are introduced:

[ (

(2.4.1)

(2.4.2)

The viscosity increase that happens with the variation of the water fraction was found to
had a peak at the inversion between W/O and O/W emulsions. This mixture viscosity was
found to increase initially as the fraction of the dispersed phase (water) increased up to a point
where it would then decrease. This can be seen in Figure 3.



Figure 2: Mixture viscosity as it evolves with input water fraction (Arirachakaran 1989)
Various models for calculating the viscosity of liquid-liquid dispersions can generally be
grouped into three main categories, namely linear, exponential and power function models.


Table 2.4.1: Mixture viscosity of oil-water emulsions (Ngan 2011)

Based on results obtained and easiness of application, it is recommended the usage of any
of the power functions such as the one developed by Brinkman/Roscoe or the following by
Barnea & Mizrahi which showed great results:

(2.4.3)

The phase inversion range is shifted to lower water fractions in a plastic pipe compared to
a steel one and also by increasing flow velocity, the inversion region width decreases as the
dispersion becomes more homogeneous. Normally from the point obtained there exist a +-
10% of uncertainty in which the inversion point could develop (Ngan 2011).

To address the issue of the sudden change of mixture viscosity along the lines of the
continuous and disperse phases, an emulsification index is introduced as looking at existing
methods, we identify two extremes of possibilities. Power functions (that is Brinkman or
Barnea as well) correlations represents one extreme in which there is total emulsification,
giving very high emulsion viscosities up to the inversion point. And on the other side, the
weighted-average method assumes no interfacial interaction between the dispersed and the
continuous phases, that is, there is total absence of emulsification. In practice, the truth is
somewhere in between. A formal definition of emulsification index would be as follows:
Emulsification index (Ei) is the extent to which the viscosity of a water-in-oil emulsion is
determined by power functions correlations.

Emulsification index will conventionally be taken as ranging from 0 to 1. For a fully
emulsified mixture,

. Total absence of emulsification means

. This is equivalent to
the weighted-mean assumption. Viscosity of an emulsion is then calculated as comprising
partly of the value given by power functions, and partly by the weighted average. For
simplification purposes,

would be considered 1 when above the Inversion Point and 0

below.

Mixture viscosity calculated as the weighted average:

(2.1.15)

What the final equation may look like:

(2.1.16)

2.5 Viscosity measurements normalization.
As a way of addressing the issue of having a normalized viscosity per area we used the
ASTM D341 standard to convert viscosity at different temperatures. Given two known
kinematic viscosities at two temperatures this standard gives means to ascertain kinematic
viscosity of a petroleum oil or liquid hydrocarbon at any temperature within a limited range.

(2.5.1)

And Z is the result of:


(2.5.2)

Where,

2.6 Friction factor (no-slip)
As a way to calculate the no-slip friction factor (Darcy-Weisbach) what is normally used is
the Colebrooks equation. The downside is that as it is an implicit equation is not easy to
calculate and so many approximations were covered. We recommend the use of Haaland
equation as it provides reasonably good statistical parameters and required few hand
calculations.


{ [(

] }

(2.6.1)

3 LINE SIZING AND PRESSURE DROP
To begin designing it is required to set the specifications of the line size to meet the
required capacity with the pressure constraints available. And although it is important to size a
line to meet pressure requirements one has to ensure that flowing conditions provide good
operating conditions.

The total pressure drop

to which our pipeline shall be sized, is given by the following

equation:

(3.1)

The recommended pressure drop method is the Beggs & Brill correlation (Beggs and
Brill 1973) as it is considered one of the most reliable one among the most widely used as it is
also capable of working properly along different pipeline inclinations. It normally over-
predicts pressure drop by between 0-30%, and by doing so it provides a mean of conservation.

3.1 Frictional pressure loss
The frictional pressure gradient shall be given by the following equation:

(3.1.1)


Where:

two-phase friction factor

acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s
2
)
height increment (m)

mixture density (kg/m

3
)

3.2 Hydrostatic pressure loss
When the liquid hold-up

is known it is possible to calculate the hydrostatic pressure

loss by the following equation:

(3.2.1)

Where:

hydrostatic pressure loss (N/m

2
)
acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s
2
)
height increment (m)

mixture density (kg/m

3
)

3.3 Kinetic pressure loss
In the extent of this paper

will be considered to be small enough to be neglected as it

only becomes significant for high velocity flows approaching critical conditions.

3.4 Flow regime and pattern map
As there is little contribution by potential energy in horizontal flow, the pressure drop is
not affected in such a way by flow regimes as it is in vertical flow. Shown below in Figure 3
we can see the different flow regimes in horizontal gas-liquid flow. We could sum this in
three types of regimes (Beggs and Brill 1991): segregated flows, in which the two phases are
separated; intermittent flows, in which gas and liquid are alternating; and distributive flows,
in which one phase is dispersed in the other phase.


Figure 3: Mixture viscosity of oil-water emulsions (ref here)

Segregated flow could be further classified as being stratified smooth, stratified wavy
(ripple flow), or annular. At higher gas rates, the interface becomes wavy, and stratified wavy
flow results. Annular flow occurs at high gas rates and relatively high liquid rates and consists
of an annulus of liquid coating the wall of the pipe and a central core of gas flow, with liquid
droplets entrained in the gas.

The intermittent flow regimes are slug flow and plug (also called elongated bubble) flow.
Slug flow consists of large liquid slugs alternating with high-velocity bubbles of gas that fill
almost the entire pipe. In plug flow, large gas bubbles flow along the top of the pipe.

Distributive flow regimes include bubble, mist, and froth flow.


Figure 4: Flow pattern map (Gas Lift Manual 2005)
3.5 Liquid hold-up calculation
There exists a single liquid holdup formula for the three basic horizontal flow patterns
(Beggs and Brill 1973). After the holdup for the horizontal case is found, a correction is
applied to calculate its value at the given inclination angle. It has been proved by
experimental data that liquid holdup varies with the inclination angle in such a way that a
maximum and a minimum is found at the inclination angles of approximately +50 and -50,
respectively. In summary, follow these steps:
1. Find the holdup that would exist when the pipe is horizontal
2. Correct the value for the actual inclination angle

The horizontal liquid holdup is found for all three basic flow patterns from the following
formula, where the coefficients vary according to the flow pattern:

(3.5.1)

Where:

liquid hold-up

Froude number

(3.5.2)


The coefficients a, b and c are given in Table 3.5.1, and the calculated hold-up is restricted
to

Flow Pattern a b c
Segregated 0.980 0.4846 0.0868
Intermittent 0.845 0.5351 0.0173
Distributed 1.065 0.5824 0.0609
Table 3.5.1: Liquid hold-up coefficients (Beggs & Brill 1973).
Based on its value for the horizontal case, holdup for the actual inclination angle is
calculated from the following equation:

(3.5.3)

The holdup correcting factor (), for the effect of pipe inclination is given by:

(3.5.4)

Where is the actual angle of the pipe from horizontal. C is:

) (3.5.5)

The values of parameters, e, f, g and h are shown for each flow regimes in this Table:

Flow Pattern e f g h
Segregated uphill 0.011 -3.768 3.539 -1.614
Intermittent uphill 2.96 0.305 -0.4473 0.0978
Distributed uphill No correction C = 0 , = 1
All patterns downhill 4.70 -0.3692 0.1244 -0.5056
Table 3.5.2: Liquid hold-up coefficients (Beggs & Brill 1973).
For vertical flow, i.e. =90 the correction function is simplified to:

(3.5.6)

If in the transition flow pattern, liquid holdup is calculated from a weighted average of its
values valid in the segregated and intermittent flow patterns:

(3.5.7)

Where:

(3.5.7)

3.6 Friction factor determination
The two-phase friction factor

is given by the following equation:

(3.6.1)

Where:

no-slip friction factor (Darcy-Weisbach) based on homogeneous two-phase flow

a dimensionless two-phase multiplier used to account for slippage between phases

(3.6.2)

Where:

(3.6.3)

(3.6.4)

The parameter S can be calculated as follows:
For
For y=0, then S=0 (to ensure that the expression is reduced to single-phase liquid)

(3.6.5)

(3.6.6)

4 DATA INTEGRATION AND COMPUTER SIMULATION

Once we have set our boundary conditions and also the calculation model we proceed to
the actual simulation of the
4.1 GIS data acquisition application
The main purpose of this application is to integrate available data and represent it in a way
that can be employed to performed fluid pressure drop calculations. As this will be an over-
night run application so data related to every pipeline in the network is analyzed.
Pipeline network information is stored in a GIS corporate database, mainly by the usage of
proprietary software by ESRI. Data is held in ArcSDE geodatabase which are a collection of
various types of GIS datasets held as tables in a relational database. ArcSDE geodatabase
storage for all DBMSs uses the OGC and ISO standards for an SQL spatial data type. This
provides full geodatabase support and access as well as an SQL interface to feature class
geometry. This enables you to write SQL applications to your DBMS which you can use to
access feature class geometry and perform SQL operations and queries. The spatial type for
SQL.
The first task of this application is the subdivision of the entire network into pipeline units.
A point called "node" is artificially created along pipeline network at the following locations

Oil-Wells
In-field manifolds
Battery manifolds
Treatment Plants

Two or more pipelines junction
Pipeline material change point
Pipeline diameter change point

Each pipeline segment between nodes is treated as an individual unit. Later on, fluid
pressure drop will be calculated for each of these units.
Total length is calculated adding up the lengths of the segments between nodes.
Topographic elevations of start and end nodes are determined by matching them to the
Digital Elevation Model (DEM).
Finally, volumetric flow rate is calculated by adding up flow rates from all pipelines
converging to the one under analysis.

4.2 Computational simulation
With an established mathematical model and all input parameters determined we can
proceed to the actual simulation.
For the computational simulation we will use standard office software (namely Microsoft
Excel) which can easily create a dynamic link between the database and data tables. For
calculation purposes we recommend avoiding over complex VBA programming and the use
of array formulas particularly if they are nested inside IF statements. We also do not
recommend the usage of VLOOKUP or INDEX+MATCH functions over large data tables.
We recommend the usage of multi-variable data tables found inside the Excel API; the use of
these tables could reduce end processing time by more than 2 orders of magnitude.
Calculated data is then automatically exported to a csv (coma separated values) file which
is then joined with the data already held in the geodatabase and is to be displayed on a map.


Figure 5: Results being showed on ArcMap (ESRI)




5 CONCLUSIONS
In this paper we presented an innovative methodology to calculate and display fluid
pressure drop in Oil & Gas pipelines.
A complete mathematical model to estimate fluid pressure drop is presented. The
aforementioned model holds adequate results when used to solve Oil & Gas industry related
problems. This model addressed multiphase pressure drop calculations as well as kinematic
viscosity and mixture density prediction.
We also presented a solution to readily acquire input parameters required to perform the
above stated calculations and to graphically present their results, using GIS database and
system. This does not require the use of any software that is not already available in most Oil
& Gas companies so the level of required investment to implement this calculation is really
low.
We tested our simulations against real data on the field and, on average, the model
overestimated pressure drop in around 10 to 30%. This shows that error is on the safe side and
that it is small enough to be practically applicable.

REFERENCES
Brill, J., Beggs, H., 1991, Two-Phase Flow in Pipes, 6
th
edition, University of Tulsa
Garca, F., Garci, J. M., Garca, R. and Joseph, D. D., 2007, Friction factor improved
correlations for laminar and turbulent gas-liquid flow in horizontal pipelines, International
Journal of Multiphase Flow, Volume 33, p. 1320 1336
IPS, 1996, Engineering Standard for Process Design of Piping Systems, Iranian Petroleum
Standard
Ngan, K.H., 2011, Phase inversion in dispersed liquid-liquid pipe flow (Doctoral thesis),
University College London
Takcs, G., 2005, Gas Lift Manual, 1
st
edition, PennWell Books
Wang, W., Cheng, W., Li, K., Loun, C. and Gong, J., 2013, Flow Patterns Transition Law of
Oil-Water Two-Phase Flow under a Wide Range of Oil Phase Viscosity Condition, Journal
of Applied Mathematics, Volume 2013
Xu, Y., Fang, X., Su, X., Zhou, Z., Chen, W., 2012, Evaluation of frictional pressure drop
correlations for two-phase flow in pipes, Nuclear Engineering and Design Journal, Volume
253, p. 86-97
Beggs, H. D., and Brill, J.P., 1973, A Study of Two-Phase Flow in Inclined Pipes, Journal of
Petroleum Technology, p. 607-617
Arirachakaran, S., Oglesby, K.D., Malinowsky, M. S., Shoham, O., Brill, J.P., 1989, An
Analysis of Oil/Water Flow Phenomena in Horizontal Pipes, Paper SPE 18836, Society of
Petroleum Engineers, Oklahoma
Brennen, C., 2005, Fundamentals of Multiphase Flow, Cambridge University Press
ASTM Standard D341, 2009, Standard Practice for Viscosity-Temperature Charts for Liquid
Petroleum Products, ASTM International
API Standard 14E RP, 2013, Recommended Practice for Design and Installation of Offshore
Products Platform Piping Systems, American Petroleum Institute