SPE 165427

Challenges of Multiphase Flow Metering in Heavy Oil Applications

Flavia Viana, Southwest Research Institute; Parviz Mehdizadeh, Production Technology Inc., Rebecca A.
Owston, Southwest Research Institute, Kevin R. Supak, Southwest Research Institute

Copyright 2013, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Heavy Oil Conference Canada held in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1113 June 2013.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract

Multiphase flow metering has become very important to the development of marginal oil and gas fields, since the economics
of producing these fields do not justify the construction of new platforms; instead, they are tied back to existing
infrastructure. In such cases, several fields are tied back to common facilities requiring each unprocessed stream to be
measured prior to comingling. Multiphase flow metering is also a promising alternative to traditional test separators in those
cases where having a large vessel is not feasible, and in the production of heavy oils where separation represents a big
challenge.

The increasing need for energy, combined with depleting worldwide light oil resources, has generated substantial interest in
heavy oil reserves. Heavy oil applications involve low API gravity oils which are also very viscous. The production,
transport, metering, and processing of heavy oils present a number of challenges associated with the increased resistance to
flowing given the high-viscosity characteristics of heavy oils and the tendency to form emulsions. The hydrodynamics of
high-viscosity oils presents various challenges in multiphase flow metering, including dependence of the discharge
coefficient on the viscosity of the oil at low Reynolds numbers on Venturi-type meters used in commercially-available
multiphase flow meters (MPFMs). Other issues are also related to the tendency of heavy oils of forming emulsion and the
effect of complex fluids on the performance of the meters.

This paper presents a review on heavy oil, multiphase flow metering, and the challenges faced by multiphase flow meters in
heavy oil applications. The purpose of this review paper is to provide relevant information that can be used in the selection of
multiphase flow meters for heavy oil applications. While other studies on the subject have focused on one specific problem or
flow metering technology, this paper provides a general overview of the various issues across existing flow metering
technologies. Special focus is given to in-line multiphase flow meters, since they provide some advantages over other types
of MPFMs in heavy oil applications. In-line MPFMs have the ability to measure the oil, water, and gas flow rates directly in
the multiphase flow stream without separation of the phases. The inherent characteristics and physical properties of heavy
oils impose additional constraints to MPFMs, as well as the enhanced recovery methods employed for the production of
heavy oils. The main issue is associated with the tendency of heavy oil to form complex mixtures (emulsions, foam, etc.) as
they can lead to inaccurate measurement of phase fraction and flow rates. The additional water or steam added to the
reservoir to increase recovery rates can result in flow instabilities, high water cuts, and changes on the continuous phase.
Thermal production methods can also cause inaccurate readings and compromise the integrity of the meters.

Introduction

Heavy oil is characterized by its high viscosity and specific gravity in comparison to light (conventional) crude oil. Heavy oil
generally has low hydrogen-to-carbon ratios, high carbon residues, and high contents of asphaltenes, sulfur (>0.5% wt.),
nitrogen, acids (Total Acid Number (TAN) > 0.5 mg KOH/g), and heavy metals (vanadium, nickel). A further sub-
classification of heavy oils includes extra-heavy oils and bitumen or tar sands. Bitumen is a heavy, black, asphalt-like
hydrocarbon recoverable from tar sands (also called oil sands). This petroleum product can be upgraded to synthetic crude oil
and refined to produce asphalt, gasoline, etc. The term heavy oil implies not only high density (low API gravity), but also
high viscosity. In this paper, the terms heavy oil and viscous oil will be used interchangeably.
2 SPE 165427

While there is no industry-wide consensus on what constitutes conventional and heavy oils, general classifications can be
found in the literature (Meyer and Attanasi 2003, Pinguet 2011, Miller 2008). Table 1 provides a classification of crude oil in
terms of its viscosity and density and includes some of the variations found in the literature.

Table 1. Crude Oil Classification Based on Density (API gravity) and Viscosity
Crude Oil Type Density (API gravity) Viscosity (cP)
Light or Conventional Oil >20 (some use 22, 22.3, 22.7, 25, and 25.7 as the cutoff value) 1-100
Heavy Oil 20-10 (some use 22.7-15 and 22.3-10 ) 100-1,000
Extra-Heavy Oil <10 (some use 15-10) 1,000-10,000
Bitumen <10 (some use 12-7) >10,000

Despite their low density, crude oils with API gravities between 20 and 30 can present similar difficulties during their
production, transport, measurement, and refining as those faced with low API gravity oils. This is due to the high content of
nitrogen, acids, and heavy metals.

Due to the increasing need for petroleum resources worldwide, recovery of heavy oil is gaining more attention throughout the
oil and gas industry. While the number of heavy oil reserves in the world is generally acknowledged to be more than twice
that of conventional light crude (see Figure 1), economical production presents unique challenges. Owing to the high density
and viscosity, novel methods for recovery must be employed. Some of the most common of these are briefly described later
in this document. The two primary categories of recovery may be thought of as cold production, where heavy oil is
produced at its natural reservoir temperature, and thermal production, where a method of heat addition is used to reduce the
viscosity of the oil for ease of flowing.

Bitumen/Oil
Sands Conventional Oil
30% 30%

Heavy Oil
Extra-Heavy Oil
15%
25%

Figure 1. Worldwide Conventional versus Heavy Oil Reserves

Over two thirds of the worlds oil reserves are constituted by heavy/extra-heavy oil and bitumen (Alboudwarej et al. 2006).

It is estimated that 1.2 trillion barrels of the worlds conventional crude oil reserves remain to be produced (Herron 2011).
Heavy oil resources total more than 5 trillion barrels (Herron 2011), but the recoverable volumes are in the billions of barrels
(Kovscek 2007). This is primarily due to challenges in the recovery of heavy oils and the higher costs associated with its
production and transport.

As shown in Figure 2, heavy oil and bitumen deposits estimated as recoverable by the U.S. Geological Survey (Meyer and
Attanacy 2003) are congregated largely in the western hemisphere. Heavy oil reserves in South America are primarily located
in Venezuela with an estimated 513 billion barrels of recoverable heavy oil in the Orinoco Belt (USGS 2010). Canada mainly
accounts for the largest bitumen reserves in North America. In the United States, the largest deposits of heavy oil are located
in Alaska, Utah, and California (Herron and King 2004).

From the foregoing discussion, the measurement of heavy oil streams must be given serious consideration as a part of any
development. The following sections provide an overview of multiphase flow metering technologies, the different heavy oil
production techniques, and the issues faced by multiphase flow meters in heavy oil applications.
SPE 165427 3

Heavy Oil Natural Bitumens

North America Russia Other
Russia 8% 5.2% 0.05%
3%
Asia Af rica Asia
7% 6.6% 6.6%

Middle East
18%
Europe
1% Af rica South America North America
61% 81.6%
2%

Figure 2. Regional Distribution of Estimated Recoverable Heavy Oil and Bitumen Reserves
More than one-half of the heavy oil reserves are located in South America (primarily Venezuela and Brazil), while most of the
natural bitumen reserves are located in North America (Canada).

Multiphase Flow Meter Technologies

Multiphase flow meters are used for production allocation, production monitoring, reservoir management, and well testing.
The economics of producing from marginal oil and gas fields typically do not justify the construction of new platforms.
Instead, several fields are tied back to common flowlines and production facilities requiring each unprocessed stream to be
measured before they are combined (commingled). Production monitoring using MPFMs allows real-time tracking of the
produced streams (oil/water/gas), pressure, temperature, and changes in production that can also be used for production
optimization and reservoir management. Reservoir management enables the development of operational strategies that can be
used to characterize the reservoir, optimize well spacing, and plan for enhanced production methods.

Well testing provides information on well behavior throughout the life of the field and provides a view of well behavior. Well
testing done using multiphase flow metering instead of test separators provides the following advantages: continuous data as
opposed to infrequent data; less time for testing (with a test separator, longer tests are required for stabilization) and a
reduced footprint.

Multiphase flow measurement alternatives can be primarily grouped into three main categories; these are in-line MPFMs,
separation (partial or complete) multiphase flow metering systems, and inference methods. As indicated by the name, in-line
meters perform all measurements directly in the multiphase flow line without requiring separation of the phases. The flow
rate of each phase is computed as the area fraction in the pipe multiplied by the velocity of each phase. This requires a
minimum determination of six parameters (obtained by measuring five parameters); however, this number may be reduced if
it is assumed that two or all of the phases travel at the same velocity. For instance, if the mixture is homogenized and all three
phases are assumed to travel at the same velocity, only one velocity (the mixture velocity) and two phase-fractions need to be
measured. The basic parameters measured by MPFMs may include: density, velocity, mass flow rate, momentum, phase
fraction, or the velocity of individual phases. Methods for obtaining necessary measurements can include combinations of the
following techniques:

Electromagnetic measurements (microwave, capacitance, conductance)

Gamma-ray densitometry/spectroscopy

Differential pressure measurement across flow restriction

Positive displacement volumetric measurement

Coriolis force measurement

Ultrasonic measurement

Cross-correlation of signals to infer flow velocities (pressure, electrical, gamma-ray, etc.)

Separation meters operate on the principle of full or partial separation of the multiphase stream prior to in-line measurement
of the separated phases. These may be subcategorized as (1) full two-phase gas/liquid separation, (2) partial separation, or (3)
sample line separation. Full two-phase separation uses a separator to isolate the gas for subsequent measurement using a
single-phase meter. Likewise, the liquid is measured with a single-phase meter and a water-cut meter is used to determine the
water-in-liquid ratio. Partial separation meters route only part of the gas through a secondary loop to perform wet gas
measurement. The remaining multiphase stream with reduced gas volume fraction (GVF) is handled in a similar manner to
in-line meters. This type of meter is commonly used when GVF conditions are outside the accepted operating envelope of an
4 SPE 165427

in-line meter. Finally, sample line separation meters perform diagnostics on a bypassed sample flow, commonly providing a
water-cut measurement. The total gas/liquid flow rate and ratio are measured in the main flow line.

Inference methods include: virtual metering (downhole and wellhead data combined with multiphase flow modeling),
interpolative methods (neural networks), and the use of choke valves. Virtual multiphase meters include signal processing
and process simulation systems. Under signal processing, flow rates may be estimated using pattern-recognition or statistical
signal processing of time-variant signals from existing sensors in the multiphase line. Process simulation systems are
predictive algorithms that infer, but do not directly measure, the flow at the point of arrival at the meter. For example,
pressure and temperature at two points axially along the pipe may be used in conjunction with measured or assumed fluid
properties to estimate flow rates of the various phases. Inference methods are considered alternative non-conventional options
for multiphase flow measurement; hence, the effect of heavy oils in this type of multiphase flow metering technology was not
investigated as part of this study.

Separation-type flow metering systems in heavy oil applications face the same challenges found in conventional well testing
using test separators. Heavy oils have a tendency to form foam and emulsions that are very difficult to separate by either
conventional separators or other types of separators, such as cyclonic devices. Also, due to the low difference between the
density of heavy oil and water, gravity separation is challenging and requires the use of chemicals. The poor separation leads
to an increase in gas carry under from the separator in the form of gas bubbles entrained in the liquid phase. This will affect
the accurate measurement of the liquid using single-phase meters that are not designed to handle entrained gas. Also, due to
the tight emulsions, determination of water cut from liquid samples may require preheating of the sample and extended
settling time. In turn, oil-water analyzers are used as an alternative option for water-cut determination. However, oil-water
monitors are also affected by the presence of gas, and heavy crude oils are sometimes too opaque in the infrared spectrum
(Ramakrishnan 2009) for some water-cut meter sensors to operate using a standard configuration. More than one water-cut
analyzer may be needed to cover the entire range of water cuts and may have limited use in the thermal production of heavy
oil where temperatures can be well in excess of 150C.

Of the three main types of multiphase flow metering alternatives discussed here, in-line MPFMs represent a good option in
heavy oil applications, since measurement of the flow rate is done directly from the multiphase flow stream without the need
for phase separation.

Multiphase Flow Measurement Challenges in Heavy Oil Applications

This section provides an overview of the multiphase flow metering challenges encountered in heavy oil applications. The
challenges are presented in terms of the effects of inherent properties of heavy oils on multiphase flow metering technologies
and the effects related to enhanced oil recovery techniques used to produce heavy oil.

Challenges Associated with Inherent Properties of Heavy Oils

Heavy oils are characterized by high viscosities, high densities, and often contain other components, such as sulfur and heavy
metals. These inherent characteristics of heavy oils can affect the performance and accurate measurement of multiphase flow
meters and can even result in fouling of the meter components and sensing elements. A summary of the negative effects of
the properties of heavy oils in multiphase flow metering includes the following:

One commonality among commercially-available MPFMs is that they use a Venturi meter to determine the total
flow rate. This makes all of these MPFMs equally susceptible to changes in the discharge coefficient as a result of
changes in viscosity and laminarization of the flow at high viscosities (low Reynolds numbers). Typically, MPFM
manufacturers incorporate calibration curves or data corrections to account for the laminar behavior of the flow at
low Reynolds numbers characteristic of viscous oils.

Sulfur found in heavy oils in concentrations higher than 0.5%Wt. can affect some gamma-ray measurements and
lead to inaccurate water and oil fractions and flow rates.

Metals commonly found in heavy oils can affect impedance measurements due to their conductivity properties.

Heavy oils also involve higher pressure losses due the higher viscosity.

The formation of emulsions (due to high-viscosity oils mixing with produced water) will significantly change the
fluid properties and negatively impact the ability of MPFMs to operate under those conditions. Complex
characteristics of emulsions, including changes from oil continuous to water continuous and variations in the
inversion point, can represent significant challenges for MPFM technologies in the determination of the phase
fraction.

From water-liquid ratios that lead to a water-continuous liquid phase, erroneous information on the water salinity
can cause significant errors in the oil and water flow rates (Wee et al. 2009).
SPE 165427 5

Impedance electrodes used in some MPFMs, which measure phase fraction and gas velocity, can be affected by
heavy oils. Results presented in a study (Paris and Miller 2008) suggest that for water-in-oil emulsions, the
permittivity is a function of water cut and shear rate or level of mixing of the oil and water in stable emulsions. This
could cause errors in the determination of the phase fraction and gas velocity. In very tight emulsions, where a
particular type of emulsion can be formed characterized by water droplets entrained in oil droplets suspended in
water (water/oil/water), the determination of the water cut based on electrical properties may lead to errors. To
alleviate this issue, additional field calibrations can be performed.

In a study conducted by BHP (Paris and Miller 2008) on the viscosity and electrical properties of emulsions, it was
concluded that emulsion properties can be highly unpredictable, difficult to measure, and dependent on emulsion
tightness and shear history. Measurement of fully-stabilized emulsions with dead and live oil and various water cuts
were performed. Live emulsion viscosities at typical wellhead conditions at water cuts from 0% to 60% showed a
steady increase in emulsion viscosity up to the inversion point (around 60% water cut).

Another study (May et al. 2008) reported the permittivity and viscosity data of stable water-in-oil emulsions formed
with a dead oil and brine. This study reported significant deviation between their data and several literature models,
including the Bruggeman equation, commonly used by MPFM manufacturers, and Hanais equation. Significant
time dependency in the apparent dielectric permittivity of water-in-oil emulsions was also observed. This is
particularly relevant for flow meters that rely on permittivity measurements and on the frequency of the
measurement.

Challenges Associated with Enhanced Oil Recovery Techniques

Heavy oil is much more difficult to recover than conventional oil. The main reason is the high-viscosity or high resistance to
flow characteristic of heavy oils. Several techniques have been developed to assist the flow of heavy oils from the reservoir
and into production facilities. These techniques are referred to as Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR). EOR techniques can be
divided into cold production and thermal production. Cold Production techniques include: natural flow, Cold Heavy Oil
Production with Sand (CHOPS), solution gas drive, water flooding, and Vapor-Assisted Petroleum Extraction (VAPEX).

Natural flow relies on reservoir pressure and can result in low recovery rates. Natural flow is usually assisted by the
addition of diluents (to lower the viscosity of the mixture), artificial lift techniques, or the additional drive energy
provided by natural compaction of the reservoir (compressive strength of the porous rock is exceeded resulting in
plastic deformation and the fluid in the porous medium expands due to decreased reservoir pressure). Mixing and
high shear effects introduced by the injection of diluents and the pumping of fluids during artificial lift, respectively,
can lead to the formation of complex oil/water emulsions.

During CHOPS, no sand screens, gravel packs, or other sand exclusion devices are installed in the wellbore. This
allows the initiation and continuation of sand influx from a well. The oil is produced along with the sand, water, and
gas; the four phases are separated by gravity at the surface.

In the solution gas drive mechanism, enhanced oil recovery can be achieved due to: the additional energy associated
with the formation of small gas bubbles that break out of the solution from the gas, the expansion of bubbles, and the
reduction of the mixture viscosity of a continuous (high-viscosity) oil phase with the entrained gas. Pressure drop
below the bubble point due to production is believed to result in evolved gas to form a discontinuous/dispersed gas
phase in the form of small bubbles suspended in the continuous oil phase. The entrained gas reduces the viscosity of
the oil/gas dispersion as compared to the viscosity of the heavy oil alone.

Water flooding is a technique typically used in conventional oil recovery and has also been used in the recovery of
heavy oils with marginal recovery rates. In water flooding, water is injected into the formation through an injection
well. As the zone is flooded, the water displaces the oil towards surrounding wellbores and the oil and some water
are pumped to the separation and processing facilities. Carbon dioxide may be used as a solvent to enhance water-
flooding techniques by reducing the viscosity of the heavy oil.

In VAPEX operations, the viscosity of the heavy oil is reduced by injecting a vaporized solvent along a horizontal
well. The solvent dissolves in the heavy oil, resulting in a lower viscosity fluid that can drain by gravity into a
parallel horizontal production well.

Viscosity of liquids is a strong function of the temperature (viscosity decreases with the increase in temperature). The
viscosity of heavy oils can be lowered and the recovery can be enhanced by increasing the temperature of the fluids in the
reservoir using one or more of the following Thermal Production techniques: Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD),
Cyclic Steam Stimulation (CSS), Toe-to-Heel Air Injection (THAI), and steam flooding.
6 SPE 165427

In SAGD operations, steam is injected at various locations along a horizontal well. The heat from the steam lowers
the viscosity of the oil which is produced as it drains into a parallel producing well located below the injection well.

Unlike SAGD, CSS is a single-wellbore operation where a volume of high-temperature saturated steam is injected
into the reservoir and is allowed to seat for several days or weeks. Heat transfer effects result in lower viscosity oil
that can be naturally produced from the well.

In-situ combustion processes involve the use of vertical injection wells to inject air near a horizontal production well
to initiate a combustion front. THAI is an in-situ combustion process in which oil is ignited to create a fire front
moving from the toe to the heel of the horizontal well. Heating of the oil allows it to flow into the horizontal
production well and thermal cracking effects result in in-situ upgrading of bitumen.

In steam flooding an injection well is used to introduce wet steam into the reservoir resulting in additional thermal
energy (to reduce the oil viscosity) and additional reservoir pressure. The oil is then produced continuously from an
adjacent producing well.

The use of these enhancement recovery techniques can affect the operation, integrity, and performance of MPFMs. A
summary of some of the challenges that have been reported in the open literature is as follows:

Cold production methods can result in the production of complex fluids (tight emulsions, high water cuts, high sand
content, liquid with entrained gas, etc.), that can adversely affect the performance of MPFMs.

Differences in salinity between injected water and connate reservoir water during water-flooding operations can
cause problems with some phase fraction measurements due to deviation from calibration conditions.

Water and steam injection can lead to increased water content, which can cause issues associated with changes in the
continuous phase (inversion point) and challenge the operation of water-cut meters.

Diluents injected to allow for natural flow change the viscosity and density of the oil. Changes in fluid properties
that are not properly captured during the calibration of an MPFM can result in inaccurate reading.

Increased sand production associated with heavy oil production methods such as CHOPS, can lead to mechanical
integrity issues due to erosion (Stobie et al. 2007) and phase-fraction measurement inaccuracies due to the presence
of a fourth phase (solids).

Pumps to boost production may affect the accuracy of MPFMs as they promote the formation of oil/water emulsions
that can affect phase fraction measurements using electric properties. The effect of emulsions on MPFM
performance was discussed in the previous subsection as emulsion forming tendency is an inherent characteristic of
heavy oils.

In thermal recovery MPFMs need to be sized for less viscous fluids than in cold production but for higher
temperatures (>150C) and need to be able to meter the gas and the steam content.

The use of MPFMs in thermal recovery applications, such as SAGD, has led to the development of high-temperature
capabilities on MPFMs (Arendo et al. 2005). Thermal resistance improvement of electrical insulation, temperature
stabilization of gamma-ray detectors, and the incorporation of novel materials of construction were necessary to
allow the use of MPFMs in SAGD operations. Nowadays there are commercially-available MPFMs that can operate
in the range of 130 C to 250C.

High temperatures found in thermal recovery can also lead to coking inside the meter impairing the operation of
conductance/capacitance sensors, as well as overall fouling of the meters.

Examples of MPFMs in Heavy Oil Applications

Several case studies on MPFMs in heavy oil applications have been published describing the conditions and performance of
selected technologies. This section provides some examples of MPFMs in heavy oil applications found in the literature. This
section is not intended to include all existing technologies and case studies, but is a good sample of what is available in the
public domain. Case studies summarized in this section include MPFMs from five different manufacturers (Agar
Corporation, Multi Phase Meter AS, Roxar, Schlumberger/Framo, and Weatherford) and the information is presented in no
specific order. A brief description of the MPFMs used in the cited case studies is also included to provide some background
on the metering technologies employed.

Vx Meter:

Schlumberger, in partnership with Framo Engineering AS, formed 3-PHASE Measurements AS and combined their
multiphase flow experience to develop the Vx meter. The Schlumberger Vx system is composed of the following stationary
SPE 165427 7

elements: a Venturi tube, nuclear source and detector, pressure and differential pressure transmitters, a process fluid
temperature sensor upstream of the Venturi, and a flow computer. All sensors (except temperature) are co-located at the
throat of the Venturi section, requiring no correlations between events measured at different places. The differential pressure
reading across the Venturi allows for computation of the total flow rate through the tube. The nuclear element utilizes
multiple-energy gamma-ray technology to provide simultaneous measurement of the fraction of each component present in
the mixture, i.e., gas, oil, and water (Pinguet et al. 2011).

A significant number of case studies discussing the use of the Vx meter in various areas was found in the literature
[07-WT-162, 2007; Hompoth et al. 2008; Pinguet et al. 2008; 08-WT-0012, 2008; Pinguet et al. 2009a; 2009b; Pinguet
2010]. These case studies cover the use of the Vx meter in cold production (gas lift, downhole pumping, surface pumping,
etc.), as well as hot production (surface heating, SAGD, cyclic steam stimulation, etc.). Other applications include diluents
production and well testing. A comprehensive list of the experience of the Vx meter in various applications has been
summarized by Pinguet et al. [2011].

MPM Meter:

Multi Phase Meters AS (a subsidiary of FMC Technologies) offers their MPM meter. The meter measures the gas, liquid, and
water flow rates without separation via the following major instruments: a Venturi meter, tomographic sensors, a gamma
densitometer, and conductivity probes.

The flow first passes through a Venturi meter, which is used to measure the total mass flow rate and to create radial
symmetrical flow conditions prior to entering the patented 3D Broadband section, which provides high-frequency
tomography of the flow geometry. The gamma densitometer is used to calculate fluid densities and the meter utilizes
temperature and pressure transmitters. Tomography and 3D measurements eliminate the error effect of gas concentration in
pipe cross sections.

The MPM meter measures the conductivity (for determining salinity) and density of the water in water continuous flow. This
water property measurement capability could be used to detect formation water breakthrough in the well. The meter also
offers in-situ sampling to measure and compensate for fluid property changes. MPM states that this reduces, or in many cases
eliminates, the need for fluid sampling (Wee and Farestvedt 2011).

From conversations with MPM representatives, it is known that the MPM meter was tested in 2007 at the Petrobras test
center NUEX in Atalaia, Brazil. Testing was performed using oil with 22.9 API. The objective of the testing was to evaluate
the performance of the MPM meter with a heavy oil and qualify the meter for well testing and allocation metering. Results
from this testing are not available in the open literature. MPM also indicated that one of their meters is undergoing testing
under heavy oil conditions with API gravity between 18 API and 20 API.

Roxar 1900VI and 2600 Series:

The Roxar 1900VI multiphase flow meter and the new generation Roxar 2600 meters calculate gas, liquid, and water flow
rates without separation through measuring the fluid electrical impedance and sizing the Venturi discharge coefficient for the
expected fluids extracted from the reservoir. Correlations are used to determine the phase velocities and distributions. The
Roxar meter measures pressure, delta pressure, temperature, multiple velocities, near wall measurements, and real-time
characterization of flow patterns. A gamma densitometer is used for density measurements within high GVF conditions. Non-
gamma versions are also available for low-GVF applications.

Roxar claims that their multiphase meter technology used for the velocity measurements can be used for applications with
emulsions and high viscosity below 90% GVF and with the correct meter configuration (RFM-TD-01676-191, 2006).

The Roxar 1900VI multiphase meters have been deployed in the PEMEX oil fields (Mexico) by an international well testing
company. The wells vary from extra heavy oil (10 API) to light crude (30 API). The maximum allowed error in the well
testing contracts is 7% oil relative uncertainty (Roxar Technical Bulletin, 2011).

In 2008, a field verification test was performed on a 2-inch Roxar 1900VI in Venezuela. The oil was more than 1,000 kg/m3
and classified as extra heavy oil. The liquid rate uncertainties were within 15% and the gas rate uncertainties were within
10% (Roxar Technical Bulletin, 2011). Roxar states that the larger uncertainties are due to the well flow rates being much
less than the design pressure drop for the 2-inch meter.

On the functional description document for Roxar 2600, Roxar summarizes influential quantities and their effect on their
meter accuracy (Roxar Document 091980, 2011). They claim that:
8 SPE 165427

Variations in water salinity have no effect on water-cut readings under all process conditions with less than 60% to
80% water cut.

Since sand has dielectric properties very close to oil, any sand will be measured as a part of the oil. However,
dielectric measurements are volume based; sand will have little effect on the performance of the meter.

Wax present in the flow or deposited inside the sensor will be measured as oil because the density and dielectric
properties of wax and oil are similar.

The Roxar 2600 was independently evaluated by the research group NEL and third parties in 2009. NEL indicated that the
meter performed well during the tests and published the following results (Report No: 2009/265, 2009):

Maximum error in measured liquid flow rate in oil continuous flow was -2.81% and in water continuous flow
was -3.5% with a total spread of 6.1%, mean offset of -0.59%, and a standard deviation of 1.77%.

Maximum error in gas flow was -8.78% with a total spread of 15.77%, mean offset of -2.45%, and a standard
deviation of 4.7%.

In oil-continuous flow, maximum deviation from the reference water cut was 1.41%. In water-continuous flow it
was 2.75%. Water-cut errors gave a total spread of 3.78% with a mean offset of 0.42% and a standard deviation of
0.89%.

NEL also indicated oil flow rate measurements were within the meters stated uncertainties (Report No: 2009/265,
2009).

MPFM-50, -300, and -400 Series:

Early versions of the MPFMs manufactured by Agar Corporation include the MPFM-300 series and the MPFM-400 series.
The latest multiphase flow meter model is the MPFM-50 series. This is available either as an in-line version or a trailer-
mountable assembly. It includes three-phase (gas, water, and oil) metering capabilities, and does not require separation of the
liquid and gas phases for analyses [Agar, ER No. 5485].

The technology is based on 1) measurement of the mass flow rate and density of the multiphase flow mixture using an Agar-
designed Coriolis meter, 2) determination of gas fraction using a dual Venturi meter, and 3) calculation of water-in-liquid
percentage via a water-cut meter (either OW-201 microwave transmitter technology or OW-301 permittivity property-based).
Data analysis is performed in real time to determine the flow rates of the three phases [Agar, 2010].

Some examples of the Agar MPFMs used in heavy oil applications include:

Field testing, Romania, Suriname, Mexico, Canada, and U.S. [Agar 2010]: MPFM flow rate measurements (low-
flow wells) were compared to test-tank references using a 1-inch unit. For the majority of wells, accuracies of 1%
FS 3% R were obtained.

Field testing, New Mexico [Mehdizadeh et al. 2009]: More than five low-GVF (< 30%) wells underwent
qualification testing, indexed against a three-phase separator with single-phase meters on the outlet. Liquid rates of
the MPFM were found to be within 7% of reference measurements, while water-cut values were within 1%. Total
liquid rates between about 900 bpd to 3,700 bpd were measured.

Nexen temporary installation, Calgary, Alberta, Canada [Spitzer 2006]: An Agar meter was installed in a steam-
assisted, gravity-8F5=B5;9
H5F
G5B8G
C=@
DFC8I7H=CB
+
^
5B8
(
65F. Accuracy was good over vapor fractions
between 40% and 99%, with existing inaccuracy attributed mostly to insufficient calibration time for the meter.

Staatsolie testing, Paramaribo, Surinam [Spitzer 2006]: Two portable Agar meters were tested on more than 200 oil
wells. They were found to be efficient and reliable, with better accuracy and speed than tank measurements.

Field testing in heavy oil thermal production [Mehdizadeh 2005]: Two operator companies using steam flood
processes at two separate field sites evaluated Agars multiphase flow meters.

An MPFM 301-20 was tested at Site A using tank tests as a reference. Operating under high-temperature conditions,
it was reported that the meter provided reliable flow rate and water-cut data. Accuracy was found to be as good
as the best tank test procedure that can be practically achieved in the field. Due to the high GVF at Site B, an
MPFM 401-20 model was tested against separated liquid/gas meter and water-cut reference readings. Two pairs of
wells were tested over a 30-day period. Some over-reporting of oil and under-reporting of water was noted, though
measurements agreed relatively well overall. Error was attributed primarily to uncertainty in the reference water-cut
device, and possible deposition of heavy oil components on the probes of the MPFM during a shut-down period in
the testing.

Production and well testing, Venezuela [Bortolin et al. 2004]: Heavy oil wells being produced through naphtha
injection/dilution were equipped with Agar MPFMs. A pilot test of three wells was first undertaken to verify if
SPE 165427 9

diluent slugging, foamy oil, and highly variable density/viscosity properties would cause inaccuracy in the meter.
Liquid rates were found to be measured accurately, leading to the procurement and long-term installation of 37 units
for the field. Start-up issues included: 1) susceptibility of the positive displacement meter to wear and seizing with
sand production in excess of 5%, and 2) bitumen plugging of pressure and differential pressure transmitter impulse
tubing. Manufacturer redesign of the positive displacement meter and tubing lines significantly reduced these issues.
After gaining experience with the meters, average reported failure rates of the deployed units decreased to about
0.94 failures per month (0.025 per month per unit).

Flow loop and field testing for heavy oil applications [Padron and Guevara 1998]: The MPFM-301 model was tested
in a flow loop facility using oil with a viscosity of 2,000 cP, water with varying salinity, and natural gas.
+9AD9F5HIF9G
F5B;98
:FCA

^
HC
^. Agreement between the flow rates of each of the three phases was reported
to be within 10% for total flow rate ranges between 150 bpd and 4,260 bpd. The meter was then installed at the
outlet of a steam-producing well in Venezuela. The hot crude entered the MPFM at temperatures of 15F to 280F,
and viscosity was reported as 10,000 cP at 100F. Again, individual phase flow rates were within 10%, with most
of the data falling within 5%. The performance of the meter did not appear to be affected by the high viscosity of
oil during testing.

Alpha VSR/VSRD Meter:

Weatherfords Alpha VSR/VRSD Wet-Gas/Multiphase flow meter is an in-line multiphase flow metering system that
combines different technologies to estimate the flow rates of gas, oil, and water.

Weatherford produces three Alpha-series flow meter modules, which are combinations of the following primary instruments:
Venturi-nozzle, Sonar flow meter, Red Eye water-cut meter, and a densitometer. They may be arranged in the following ways
for the indicated applications (Weatherford Brochures 7950.00, 5317.00, and 1510.03):

VS (Venturi-nozzle and Sonar): wet gas (fixed water cut)

VSR (Venturi-nozzle, Sonar, and Red Eye): wet gas (0% to 100% water cut)

VSRD (Venturi-nozzle, Sonar, Red Eye, and Densitometer): full multiphase (0% to 100% GVF and water cut)

The Sonar meter provides a measurement of bulk flow rate in the pipe, using the principle of direct proportionality of
volumetric mixture flow rate to convective mixture velocity. The meter is composed of an array of piezoelectric film/strain
sensors circumferentially mounted and axially distributed in the throat section of the Venturi. The Venturi nozzle is an
extended throat meter, following ISA 1932 geometry. Static pressure drop across the converging section is measured, and is
proportional to the momentum of the stream. The third instrument is a Red Eye water-cut meter (0% to 100%). This is a filter
spectrometer that uses near-infrared absorption to measure water content in the stream. The final instrument that can be
added, specifically for measuring multiphase flows with low GVF (< 90%), is a gamma densitometer. This device uses a
single-beam, single-energy-level Caesium-137 source to provide a direct measurement of the liquid holdup (mixture density)
in the pipe [Rodriguez 2011].

Testing of both VSR and VSRD meters at 15 gas-lifted wells in a BP-operated field (Prudhoe Bay, Alaska) was conducted
[Ramakrishnan et al. 2009; Lievois 2010b]. Average GVF of the tests ranged from 84% to 98%, while the average water cut
spanned from 2% to above 90%. Results were compared against a portable separator with single-phase outlet reference
meters. Reported results with the VSRD included: gas rates within 7% relative to reference data, liquid rates within 8%,
and water cuts within 5% (absolute). It was also concluded that gas flow results using the VSR meter had comparable
accuracy. However, higher relative errors were seen in liquid rates (primarily bias/systematic error) compared to the VSRD
meter.

REMMS Multiphase Metering System:

The Red Eye Multiphase Metering System (REMMS) manufactured by Weatherford is based on partial separation
technology combined with classic liquid/gas metering. REMMS is composed of the following three primary components: a
gas-liquid cylindrical cyclone separator, flow metering instruments, and level control valves.

Separation of the gas and liquid phases first occurs in the cyclone separator, after which the individual streams are measured
using conventional flow meters. An optical Red Eye water-cut meter is installed on the liquid stream to provide water-cut
data. Liquid and gas control valves, together with differential pressure transmitter level indicators, are used to maintain an
optimal level in the separator. The gas and liquid streams can be either recombined at the outlet of the system, or allowed to
continue into separate flow lines.
10 SPE 165427

A well testing and optimization experience in Alberta, Canada was reported by Lievois [2010]. A REMMS was designed and
manufactured for use in a heavy-oil, tar-sand field being produced under steam-assisted gravity drainage. Operating
H9AD9F5HIF9
5B8
DF9GGIF9
K9F9
^
5B8


DG=;
F9GD97H=J9@M. The system included a cyclonic two-phase separation
system with conventional flow meters for gas and liquid outlets. Automation of well testing, optimization of steam injection,
and production monitoring were primary advantages of the new system.

Downhole Optical MPFM:

According to Weatherford, their optical flow meter is designed for real-time measurement of downhole oil, gas, and water
flow rates. The upper assembly contains the optical pressure and temperature transducers, while the lower assembly is the
flow meter. Through-bore access along its length allows for negligible pressure drop through the meter. The pressure and
temperature sensors provide inputs for determining property data of the flow components [Ferraris and Gonzalez 2010].

Flow loop testing and heavy oil field trials of Weatherfords optical meter have been reported [Kragas et al. 2002]. Flow loop
benchmarking was conducted at various facilities, including: Texaco Humble Test Facility, Southwest Research Institute,
Norsk Hydros loop in Porsgrunn, Norway, and at the Shell loop in Rijswijk, The Netherlands. Testing parameters included
liquid flow rates up to 60 m3/hr, and water cuts ranging from 0% to 100%. +KC
C=@G
K9F9
IG98
5

^(!
;F5J=HM
C=@
5B8
5

<95J=9F

^(!
;F5J=HM
C=@. +<9
@5HH9F
C=@
<58
5
J=G7CG=HM
C:

7(
5H

^. It was shown that both volumetric flow rate and
phase fraction remained within 5% accuracy bands for the majority of the 143 test points. Field deployment of the meter in
the Gulf of Mexico was carried out placing the meter at a depth of 21,138 feet in 2,940 feet of water. Good agreement with
test separator data during startup was reported. A second field trial in two wells at PDOs Nimr field in Oman took place to
benchmark the response to heavy, viscous crude. The reference meter was a Coriolis mass flow meter at the surface. In one
well, accuracy between the test and reference meter was reported as 2% on water cut and 3% on total flow rate. In the
other well, it was not possible to obtain good data due to noise generated from a nearby pump.

Conclusions

Heavy oils characterized by high viscosities and high densities present significant challenges in multiphase flow
measurement. Production streams from heavy oil fields are typically difficult to separate due to the tendency of heavy oils to
form tight emulsions and due to the low difference in density between the heavy oil and the water. This makes in-line
multiphase flow meters a preferred alternative over separation-type MPFMs for measuring heavy oils, since no separation of
emulsified oil/water/gas mixtures is required. Even though in-line MPFMs provide the operational advantage of measuring
the oil, water, and gas flow rates directly from the multiphase stream, the formation of complex emulsions can challenge the
operability of some of the sensors typically incorporated into multiphase flow meters, e.g., capacitance, conductivity, etc.
Discharge coefficients of Venturi-type flow meters, usually incorporated into MPFMs, can be affected due to changes in
viscosity, and correction must be made for the laminarization of the flow for the high viscosity of the oil. Sulfur and metals
commonly found in heavy oil can also affect phase fraction measurement techniques employed in MPFMs.

Heavy oils cause higher pressure drops in production systems and are more difficult to produce than light oils due to their
resistance to flow. Several techniques have been developed to assist the flow of heavy oils from the reservoir and into
production facilities. Most of these techniques involve the reduction of the viscosity of the produced stream by means of
dilution with a solvent, gas entrainment, or adding heat through steam injection or in-situ combustion. The use of these
techniques often results in the production of complex fluids (e.g., emulsions, foam), entrained gas, sand, hot streams
(>150C), increased water content, changes in salinity, flow instabilities, erosion issues, and plugging of impulse lines, all of
which can adversely affect the performance of MPFMs.

The industry has attempted to address and solve some of the above challenges through pilot and field installation of MPFMs.
Although several studies have been conducted to assess the effect of some of these challenges in multiphase flow metering,
additional work is needed to better understand the limitation of current sensing technologies incorporated into MPFMs.
Additional controlled and independent testing of MPFMs, phase fraction measurement devices, and, Venturi meters exposed
to emulsions, sand, sulfur, metals, changes in salinity, and other conditions found in heavy oil production will aid in the
better understanding of the use of MPFMs in heavy oil applications and will help in the improvement and selection of
available technologies.

References
Agar, J., New Coriolis Based Multiphase Flow Meter for Heavy Oil Mature Fields, SPE 135992, 2010.
Agar MPFM-50 Series Datasheet, ER No. 5485: ACI-A-7.2-DOC-001 Rev-01, http://www.agarcorp.com/PDFFiles/
Brochure/MPFM_50.pdf.
SPE 165427 11

Al-Taweel, A. B. and Barlow, S. G., Field Testing of Multiphase Meters, SPE 56583, 1999.
Alboudwarej et al., Highlighting Heavy Oil, Oilfield Review, Summer 2006.
Bertolin L., Mehdizadeh P., and Stobie G., Petrozuata - An Application of Multiphase Metering Technology, SPE paper
89870 presented at the SPE-ATCE 2004, Houston, TX, Sept. 28-29, 2004.
Evaluation of a Roxar MPFM 2600 Multiphase Flow Meter, TUV-NEL Technical Report for Roxar AS, Report No:
2009/265, August 2009.
Ferraris, C. G. and Gonzalez, L. E., Phase Implementation to Real Time Well Testing Using Fiber Optical Sensing
Technology, San Alberto San Antonio Fields: Case Study Part 1, SPE 139347, 2010.
Herron, E. H., Tar Sands as a U.S. Energy Resource, Petroleum Equities, Inc., March 2011.
Herron, E. H. and King, S. D., Heavy Oil as the Key to U.S. Energy Security, Petroleum Equities Inc. report, December
2004.
Hompoth, D., Pinguet, B. G., Guerra, E., The Importance of Fluid Property Knowledge in Multiphase Metering Applied to
SAGD Well Production, BHR Group 6th North American Conference on Multiphase Technology, Banff, Canada, June 4-6,
2008.
http://www.slb.com/~/media/Files/testing/brochures/multiphase/vx_technology_brochure.ashx.
http://www.slb.com/~/media/Files/testing/case_studies/phasetester_venezuela_petroleos.ashx.
http://www.slb.com/~/media/Files/testing/white_papers/vxtech_evaluating_flowmeter.ashx.
Kovscek, T., Heavy Oil Overview, Journal of Petroleum Technology, April 2007.
Kragas, T. K., Bostick, F. X., Mayeu, C. Gysling, D., Van der Spek, L. A., Downhole Fiber-Optic Multiphase Flowmeter:
Design, Operating Principle, and Testing, SPE 77655, 2002.
Lievois, J. Alpha VSRD Multiphase Meter Trial Demonstrates Accurate Flow Rates and Water-Cut Measurements,
http://www.weatherford.com/dn/WFT158496, 2010
May E. F. et al., Shear and Electrical Property Measurement of Water-in-Oil Emulsions and Implications for Multiphase
Flow Meters, Energy and Fuels, 22, p. 3308-3316, 2008..
Mehdizadeh P., Hi-Temperature Multiphase Flow Meters in Heavy Oil Thermal Production, SPE paper 98009 presented at
SPE International Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1-3 November 2005.
Mehdizadeh P., Multiphase Metering Proves Effective in SAGD Tests, Oil & Gas Journal, Jan. 16, 2006.
Meyer, R. F. and Attanasi, E. D., Heavy Oil and Natural Bitumen Strategic Petroleum Resources, United States
Geological Survey (USGS), Fact Sheet 70-03, August 2003.
Miller, G., A Heavy Prospect, World Pipelines Magazine, March 2008.
MPM Topside Technical Description, TDS-001 - MPM-Meter - Topside - Technical Description v4.doc 2.09, MPM Email
Communication, November 2011.
MPM Subsea Technical Description, TDS-002 - MPM-Meter - Subsea - Technical Description v5-12.10, MPM Email
Communication, November 2011.
Norwegian Society for Oil and Gas Measurement (NFOGM), Handbook of Multiphase Flow Metering, Revision 2, March
2005.
Padron, A. and Guevara, E., Multiphase Flow Metering Experience in the Venezuela Oil Industry, Paper 1998.049,
Proceedings of 7th UNITAR Conference on Heavy Crude and Tar Sands, October 27-30, 1998.
Paris N. and Miller G., The Application of Multiphase Flow Meters in the Development of Oil with Emulsion forming
Tendency, 7th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop, March 5-7, 2008.
Pinguet, B. G., Guerra, E., Drever, C., The Combination of ESP and Vx Technology yowards SAGD Well Production
Optimization, BHR Group 6th North American Conference on Multiphase Technology, Banff, Canada, June 4-6, 2008.
12 SPE 165427

Pinguet, B., Miller, G. J., Mosknes, P. O., Theuveny, B., The Influence of Liquid Viscosity on Multiphase Flow Meters,
8th International South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement Workshop, Kula Lumpur, Malaysia, March 4-6, 2009.
Pinguet, B., Theuveny, B., Miller, G. J., Moksnes, P. O., A Review of the Influence of Liquid Viscosity on Multiphase Flow
Meters Using Differential Pressure Measurements, The Americas Workshop, Houston, TX, February 3-5, 2009.
Pinguet, B., Gaviria, F., Kemp, L., Graham, J. Coulder, C., Damas, Ben Relem, C. K., First Ever Complete Evaluation of a
Multiphase Flow Meter in SAGD and Demonstration of the Performance Against Conventional Equipment, 28th
International North Sea Flow Measurement Workshop, Saint Andrews, United Kingdom, October 26-29, 2010.
Pinguet, B. G., Worldwide Review of 10 Years of the Multiphase Meter Performance Based on a Combined Nucleonic
Fraction Meter and Venturi in Heavy Oil, in preparation for: 10th South East Asia Hydrocarbon Flow Measurement
Workshop, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, March 8-10, 2011.
Ramakrishnan, V., Rodriguez, D., Lievois, J., Hall, A., Brady, J., BP Alaska Field Test of a Modular Multiphase Metering
System, The Americas Workshop, Houston, TX, February 3-5, 2009.
RFM-TD-01676-191: Capability of emulsion measurement by Roxar Sub-sea and topside MPFM, March 2006.
Rodriguez, D. J., A Modular Wet Gas and Multiphase Flowmeter, 6 Jornada Internacional de Medicin de Fluidos,
Bogot, Colombia, June 28 July 1, 2011.
Roxar 2600 Functional Description, Roxar Internal Document Number 091980.
Roxar Multiphase Flow Meter 1900 VI Datasheet, Rev2-06/07.
Roxar Multiphase Flow Meter 2600 Datasheet, Draft 5-310809.
Schlumberger PhaseWatcher Vx Datasheet, 05-WT-062, http://www.slb.com/~/media/Files/testing/product_sheets/
multiphase/phasewatcher_vx_ps.ashx, July 2006.
Schlumberger, Vx Technology in Unconventional Oil, 07-WT-162, http://www.slb.com/~/media/Files/testing/
product_sheets/multiphase/vx_technology_unconventional_oil_ps.ashx, 2007.
Schlumberger, Vx Technology: Multiphase Flow Rate Measurements without Fluid Separation, 07-WT-080, 2007.
Schlumberger, Vx Technology Delivers Flow Rate Measurement Solution for Extra Heavy Oil, 08-WT-0012, 2008.
Schlumberger, Evaluating Flowmeter Accuracy through Flow Loop Testing, 08-WT-0037, 2008.
Settari, A., Reservoir Compaction, Distinguished Author Series, Journal of Petroleum Technologies, SPE-76805, 62-69,
August 2002.
Spitzer, D. W., Nasty Flows Need Novel Flowmeters, Control 19(4):96, 2006.
Stobie, G., Hart, R., Svedeman, S., and Zankar, K., Erosion in a Venturi Meter with Laminar and Turbulent Flow and Low
Reynolds Number Discharge Coefficient Measurements, 25th International North Sea Flow Measurement Workshop, Oslo,
Norway, October 16-19, 2007.
United States Geological Survey (USGS) Technical Announcement: Venezuela Holds One of the Largest Oil
Accumulations, Released: 01/22/2010.
Wee A., Skjaeldal I. M., Bo O. L., Multiphase Metering with Early Detection of Changes in Water Salinity, The Americas
Workshop, Houston, TX, February 3-5, 2009.
Whitaker, T. S. Multiphase Flow Measurement: Current and Future Developments, Advances in Sensors for Fluid Flow
Measurement, IEE Colloquium, April 1996.
Weatherford Alpha VSRD Multiphase Flowmeter Datasheet, Brochure 7950.00, http://www.weatherford.com/weatherford/
groups/web/documents/weatherfordcorp/wft141714.pdf, 2010.
Weatherford VS/R Wet-Gas Flowmeter Datasheet, Brochure 6018.00, http://www.weatherford.com/dn/WFT159040, 2009.
Weatherford Red Eye Multiphase Metering System Datasheet, Brochure 5317.00, http://www.weatherford.com/weatherford/
groups/web/documents/weatherfordcorp/WFT118301.pdf, 2009.
Weatherford Optical Multiphase Flowmeter Datasheet, Brochure 1510.03, http://www.ep-solutions.com/PDF/
Literature/wft020125_Optical_Multiphase_Flowmeter.pdf, 2008.