You are on page 1of 21

Compact InLine Water Separation at ATP oil & gas

(UK) Ltd Kilmar Platform Southern North Sea


INTSOK Brownfield Seminar, 17th September 2015
Arno Vissers, FMC Technologies

Outline

InLine separation

Introduction
InLine building blocks
Technology Maturity

ATP(UK) Kilmar:

9/11/2015

Background & challenges


Proposed solution
Illustrations
Operational experience

Separation Systems

Compact cyclonic separation


vs. conventional vessel separation

Stokes

vs =

d s2 c d * g
18 d

Swirling flow

enhanced gravity

a
G=
g

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

InLine separation Compact technology


Swirl element

G-force generated

Swirling flow

1G

9/11/2015

vs.

Separation Systems

G > 100

InLine building blocks


Benefits
Increased production
Reduced operating weight
Low hydrocarbon inventory
Small footprint
Design in accordance with piping code
PhaseSplitter
Separating gas
from liquid

DeLiquidiser
Separating liquid
from gas

DeWaterer
Separating water
from feed stream

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

DeSander
Separating sand
from feed stream
5

Example: InLine PhaseSplitter (bulk gas/liquid


separation)
Swirl element generates G-force
Gas moves to the centre of the
tube, liquid to the outside
Gas removed via central pick-up
tube

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

InLine DeLiquidiser
Compact Gas/Liquid Separation
Typically for low liquid loadings,
LVF < 10%
Integrated 2 stage separation:

Liquid from gas removal in


cyclonic section

Gas from liquid removal in


gravitational boot section

Typical pressure drop < 1 bar

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

InLine DeWaterer
Compact Oil/Water Separation
Typically for high water cuts, WC
> 50%
Different reject sizes for water
removal 80-98%
Relative low DP. Typically 1 bar
over the underflow.
Typical water quality 100 - 1000
ppm OiW

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

InLine HydroCyclone
dPreject

Compact water polishing


Typically for low oil
concentrations, OiW < 10,000
ppm
Relative high DP. Typically 3 bar
over the underflow.
Cut-off size ~10-15 micron

dPunderflow

Typical efficiency ~95-99%

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

TECHNOLOGY MATURITY ASSESSMENT &


TECHNOLOGY READINESS
Technology Maturity Assessment considering:
Basic principles
General sizing considerations
Limitations
Development and qualification process
Field references
Technology Readiness Levels - Assigned rankings by Statoil & Petrobras

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

10

ATP(UK) Kilmar: background & challenges


The Kilmar platform is a not normally manned platform with
three producing wells (K1, K2, and K3).
Kilmar wells are produced and co-mingled with Garrow wells,
sent to host platform for further processing
Host platform: removal of water and condensate; gas
compressed and condensate re-combined for export to
onshore reception facilities.

Kilmar platform
9/11/2015

Separation Systems

11

ATP(UK) Kilmar: problem & solution


Problem description:
Host facility has limited water handling capacity
K3 well is a high water producing well
Limited space & lifting equipment on the platform
Solution:
Pre-processing using compact InLine separation
technology for K3 well:
Separate the liquids from gas
Separate oil from water
Recombine the rejects with the main gas export line
Discharge produced water at platform;
Measurement of Oil-in-water concentration and
produced water discharge rate.

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

12

K3 well production profile

Time (years)

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

13

K3 fluid properties & design conditions


Liquid loading: 3-5% LVF
Oil-in-water concentration: ~1% (= 10,000 mg/l)
Gas flow rate: 15 3 MMSCFD
Operating pressure: ~22 barg
Material & pressure class: Duplex, 1500#
OiW discharge requirement: < 30 mg/l

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

14

ATP(UK) Kilmar: PFD


InLine DeLiquidiser:
Compact Gas/Liquid separator

InLine DeWaterer:
Bulk Oil/Water separator

InLine HydroCyclone:
Designed criterion reduce OiW to below
30 ppm

Note: degassing vessel not shown


9/11/2015

Separation Systems

15

ATP(UK) Kilmar: InLine Separation skid


6 DeLiquidiser with a
20 boot

InLine DeLiquidiser

1x6 DeWaterer

InLine HydroCyclone

8x2 HydroCyclones

Additionally:
Vertical degassing
vessel
Vent flare boom &
pipework added to
platform
Control system

InLine DeWaterer

Skid Dimensions: 3m x 3m x 2.2 m (H) -10000 kg (empty)

Kilmar InLine Separation Skid


9/11/2015

Separation Systems

16

ATP(UK) Kilmar: degasssing vessel

Oil bucket
level gauge

Degasser
liquid level
gauge

Dimensions: 1.3m ID x 1.7 m T/T

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

17

ATP(UK) Kilmar: discharge section


OIW probe assembly

PW flowmeter sensors
9/11/2015

Separation Systems

PW discharge control valve

PW discharge pipework
18

OIW meter unit housing

PW discharge ESD valve

Operational experience 2012/2013


Commissioned end 2012:
More transient/slug flow than expected/designed for
Valve settings really important!
Tests run with certain valves in manual position
Operational experience in 2013:
ATPs plan was to flow K3 well through skid initially at 85
barg FTHP for a period of time to establish WGR at that
rate; then step down to 30barg FTHP in stages,
establishing the WGR at each stage
Operational issues with host platform and onshore facilities
have restricted opportunities to flow through the skid
When restarting the skid, often issues with valves getting
stuck. They often require manual reset.
Test results November 2013:
Gas rate ~ 10 MMSCFD;
Liquid rate ~ 200 m3/d
OiW discharge 1-7 mg/l (requirement < 30 mg/l)

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

19

Operational data November 2013

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

20

Conclusion

A compact partial processing skid has been applied


successfully at the ATP(UK) Kilmar platform
Thank you for your attention!

9/11/2015

Separation Systems

21