Dehydration Deoiling Manual PDF

PETRONAS TECHNICAL STANDARDS

DESIGN AND ENGINEERING PRACTICE
MANUAL
DEHYDRATION/DEOILING MANUAL
PTS 10.01.00.19
FEBRUARY 2011
© 2011 PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD (PETRONAS)
All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the permission of the copyright owner.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 3

PREFACE

PETRONAS Technical Standards (PTS) publications reflect the views, at the time of publication, of
PETRONAS OPUs/Divisions.
They are based on the experience acquired during the involvement with the design, construction,
operation and maintenance of processing units and facilities. Where appropriate they are based on, or
reference is made to, national and international standards and codes of practice.
The objective is to set the recommended standard for good technical practice to be applied by
PETRONAS' OPUs in oil and gas production facilities, refineries, gas processing plants, chemical plants,
marketing facilities or any other such facility, and thereby to achieve maximum technical and economic
benefit from standardisation.
The information set forth in these publications is provided to users for their consideration and decision to
implement. This is of particular importance where PTS may not cover every requirement or diversity of
condition at each locality. The system of PTS is expected to be sufficiently flexible to allow individual
operating units to adapt the information set forth in PTS to their own environment and requirements.
When Contractors or Manufacturers/Suppliers use PTS they shall be solely responsible for the quality of
work and the attainment of the required design and engineering standards. In particular, for those
requirements not specifically covered, it is expected of them to follow those design and engineering
practices which will achieve the same level of integrity as reflected in the PTS. If in doubt, the Contractor
or Manufacturer/Supplier shall, without detracting from his own responsibility, consult the owner.
The right to use PTS rests with three categories of users:
1) PETRONAS and its affiliates.

2) Other parties who are authorised to use PTS subject to appropriate contractual arrangements.
3) Contractors/subcontractors and Manufacturers/Suppliers under a contract with users referred to
under 1) and 2) which requires that tenders for projects, materials supplied or - generally - work
performed on behalf of the said users comply with the relevant standards.
Subject to any particular terms and conditions as may be set forth in specific agreements with users,
PETRONAS disclaims any liability of whatsoever nature for any damage (including injury or death)
suffered by any company or person whomsoever as a result of or in connection with the use, application
or implementation of any PTS, combination of PTS or any part thereof. The benefit of this disclaimer shall
inure in all respects to PETRONAS and/or any company affiliated to PETRONAS that may issue PTS or
require the use of PTS.
Without prejudice to any specific terms in respect of confidentiality under relevant contractual
arrangements, PTS shall not, without the prior written consent of PETRONAS, be disclosed by users to
any company or person whomsoever and the PTS shall be used exclusively for the purpose they have
been provided to the user. They shall be returned after use, including any copies which shall only be
made by users with the express prior written consent of PETRONAS.
The copyright of PTS vests in PETRONAS. Users shall arrange for PTS to be held in safe custody and
PETRONAS may at any time require information satisfactory to PETRONAS in order to ascertain how
users implement this requirement.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 4

Contents

Summary of Changes .................................................................................................................................. 12
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 22
1.1 General ........................................................................................................................................ 22
1.2 Purpose and summary of the Manual ........................................................................................ 24
1.3 Structure of the Manual and acknowledgement ........................................................................ 26
2 EMULSIONS AND OIL/WATER SEPARATION PROCESSES .................................................................... 28
2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 28
2.2 Emulsions .................................................................................................................................... 28
2.2.1 Definition and types ............................................................................................................ 28
2.2.2 Formation of emulsions ...................................................................................................... 29
2.2.3 Stability of emulsions .......................................................................................................... 29
2.2.3.1 Emulsifiers ....................................................................................................................... 30
2.2.3.2 Solids ............................................................................................................................... 35
2.2.3.3 Electrical charges ............................................................................................................ 35
2.2.4 Bulk properties of oil‐water mixtures ................................................................................. 35
2.2.4.1 Relative quantities of oil and water ................................................................................ 36
2.2.4.2 Density ............................................................................................................................ 36
2.2.4.3 Rheological properties .................................................................................................... 36
2.2.4.4 Wax Drop‐Out Point (cloud point) .................................................................................. 40
2.2.4.5 Droplet size distribution .................................................................................................. 40
2.3 Destabilisation of emulsions ....................................................................................................... 41
2.3.1 Chemical nature of emulsion breakers ............................................................................... 42
2.3.2 Selection of emulsion breakers ........................................................................................... 43
2.3.3 Dosage rate of emulsion breakers ...................................................................................... 43
2.3.4 Fast/slow acting demulsifiers ............................................................................................. 43
2.3.5 Injection points of emulsion breakers ................................................................................ 44
2.3.6 Temperature effects ........................................................................................................... 44
2.4 Coalescence ................................................................................................................................ 44
2.4.1 General ................................................................................................................................ 44
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 5

2.4.2 Mixing energy and coalescence. ......................................................................................... 45
2.4.2.1 Droplet sizes and mixing energy ..................................................................................... 45
2.4.2.2 Calculation of mixing energy ........................................................................................... 46
2.4.2.3 Dispersion and coalescence ............................................................................................ 49
2.4.3 Coalescence zones .............................................................................................................. 50
2.4.4 Pipeline coalescence ........................................................................................................... 51
2.4.5 Pressure reduction pipeline ................................................................................................ 53
2.4.6 Electrostatic coalescence .................................................................................................... 53
2.4.7 Coalescence media.............................................................................................................. 53
2.5 Gravity separation ....................................................................................................................... 54
2.5.1 Stokes' Law .......................................................................................................................... 54
2.5.2 Effect of heat on dehydration behaviour ............................................................................ 56
2.6 Additional oily water treatment processes ................................................................................. 59
2.6.1 Coagulation or flocculation ................................................................................................. 60
2.6.2 Flotation .............................................................................................................................. 60
2.6.3 Filtration .............................................................................................................................. 61
3 SAMPLING AND TESTING FOR DEHYDRATION BEHAVIOUR ............................................................... 63
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 63
3.2 Formulation of a sampling programme ...................................................................................... 64
3.3 Surface sampling of oil/water mixtures. ..................................................................................... 65
3.3.1 Sampling considerations ..................................................................................................... 65
3.3.2 Sampling points ................................................................................................................... 66
3.3.3 Sampling methods and equipment ..................................................................................... 67
3.3.4 Sample handling and preservation ..................................................................................... 69
3.4 Analysis of actually produced oil/water mixtures ...................................................................... 70
3.4.1 Samples characterization .................................................................................................... 70
3.4.2 Dehydration tests with actually produced emulsions ........................................................ 72
3.4.2.1 General ............................................................................................................................ 72
3.4.2.2 Outline of dehydration testing ........................................................................................ 72
3.4.2.3 The bottle test ................................................................................................................. 74
3.4.2.4 Evaluation of the effectiveness of demulsifier dosage ................................................... 76
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 6

3.4.3 Common test methods for analysis of dehydration behaviour .......................................... 77
3.4.3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 77
3.4.3.2 Determination of free water ........................................................................................... 77
3.4.3.3 Determination of water and sediment in oil .................................................................. 79
3.4.3.4 Determination of oil‐in‐water ......................................................................................... 80
3.4.3.5 Determination of droplet size distribution of emulsions ................................................ 80
3.5 Standard laboratory dehydration tests ....................................................................................... 82
3.5.1 General ................................................................................................................................ 82
3.5.2 Crude oil and water characterisations and handling .......................................................... 83
3.5.3 Emulsification ...................................................................................................................... 85
3.5.4 Demulsifier selection and addition ..................................................................................... 85
3.5.5 The standard settling test ................................................................................................... 85
3.5.6 Data processing ................................................................................................................... 86
3.5.7 The dynamic coalescer ........................................................................................................ 88
3.6 Rontgen Scan (Tomograph) study ............................................................................................... 90
3.7 Discussion on dehydration tests ................................................................................................. 93
3.7.1 Representativeness of standard laboratory dehydration tests. ......................................... 93
3.7.2 Interpretation of field vs. laboratory dehydration behaviour ............................................ 94
3.7.3 Selection of demulsifier chemicals ..................................................................................... 95
APPENDIX 3.1 .......................................................................................................................................... 96
APPENDIX 3.2 ‐ SUMMARY OF ADDITIONAL METHODS RELATING TO THE ANALYSIS OF DEHYDRATION
AND EOILING BEHAVIOUR ...................................................................................................................... 98
APPENDIX 3.3 ‐ THE BOTTLE TEST ......................................................................................................... 101
APPENDIX 3.4 ‐ LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES FOR DEHYDRATION TESTS ..................................... 102
APPENDIX 3.5 – CALCULATIONS REQUIRED FOR THE STATIC DEHYDRATION TEST ............................. 103
APPENDIX 3.6 – DEHYDRATION TEST REPORT SHEET ........................................................................... 105
4 ASPECT OF DEOILING AND PRODUCED WATER DISPOSAL ............................................................... 108
4.1 Oil‐in‐water emulsions .............................................................................................................. 108
4.1.1 General .............................................................................................................................. 108
4.1.2 Emulsification .................................................................................................................... 108
4.1.3 Deoilers ............................................................................................................................. 109
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 7

4.1.4 Mixing and coalescence .................................................................................................... 110
4.1.5 Deoiling tests ..................................................................................................................... 110
4.2 Disposal of produced water ...................................................................................................... 110
4.2.1 General .............................................................................................................................. 110
4.2.2 Water quality requirements ............................................................................................. 112
4.2.2.1 Downhole injection ....................................................................................................... 112
4.2.2.2 Surface disposal ............................................................................................................ 112
4.2.3 Oil‐in‐water ....................................................................................................................... 114
4.2.3.1 Occurrence and environmental aspects ........................................................................ 114
4.2.3.2 Regulatory limits ........................................................................................................... 115
4.2.4 Determination of hydrocarbons in water ......................................................................... 118
4.2.4.1 Sampling ........................................................................................................................ 118
4.2.4.2 Sample preparation....................................................................................................... 119
4.2.4.3 Infrared analysis if hydrocarbons in water ................................................................... 120
4.2.4.4 Other methods for analysis of hydrocarbons in water ................................................. 122
4.2.4.5 Variability of analytical results ...................................................................................... 122
4.2.4.6 Measurement of dispersed oil ...................................................................................... 123
4.2.5 Discharge of production water from gas/condensate platform ....................................... 123
APPENDIX 4.1 ....................................................................................................................................... 125
APPENDIX 4.2 ....................................................................................................................................... 129
5 DEHYDRATION EQUIPMENT AND PROCESSES .................................................................................. 134
5.1 General principles ..................................................................................................................... 134
5.2 Chemical destabilisation ........................................................................................................... 135
5.2.1 Injection system requirements ......................................................................................... 135
5.2.2 Demulsifier supply and storage ........................................................................................ 135
5.2.3 Location of injection points............................................................................................... 136
5.2.4 Chemical injection pumps ................................................................................................. 136
5.2.4.1 General characteristics.................................................................................................. 136
5.2.4.2 Common pumphead types ............................................................................................ 136
5.2.4.3 Pumps specifications ..................................................................................................... 138
5.2.4.4 Example of a basic chemical injection system .............................................................. 139
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 8

5.3 Batch dehydration ..................................................................................................................... 141
5.3.1 Operating principles .......................................................................................................... 141
5.3.2 Settling tanks ..................................................................................................................... 142
5.4 Continuous dehydration ........................................................................................................... 143
5.4.1 Separators ......................................................................................................................... 143
5.4.1.1 Free water knock‐out vessels ........................................................................................ 146
5.4.1.2 Plate separators ............................................................................................................ 147
5.4.1.3 Heater treaters .............................................................................................................. 149
5.4.1.4 Electrostatic Precipitators ............................................................................................. 151
5.4.2 Dehydration tanks ............................................................................................................. 154
5.4.2.1 Operating principles ...................................................................................................... 154
5.4.2.2 Tank design features ..................................................................................................... 155
5.4.2.3 Alternative tank designs ................................................................................................ 161
5.4.2.4 The concentric wash tank ............................................................................................. 164
5.4.3 Coalescers ......................................................................................................................... 167
5.4.3.1 Coalescence media ........................................................................................................ 168
5.4.3.2 Coalescer pipes ............................................................................................................. 168
5.4.3.3 Electrostatic coalescers ................................................................................................. 168
5.4.4 Centrifuges ........................................................................................................................ 170
5.5 Condensate dehydration........................................................................................................... 173
5.5.1 Free (dispersed) water removal ........................................................................................ 173
5.5.2 Dissolved water removal ................................................................................................... 173
5.6 Desalting ................................................................................................................................... 175
5.7 Sludge treatment ...................................................................................................................... 177
6 DEOILING EQUIPMENT AND PROCESSES .......................................................................................... 180
6.1 General principles ..................................................................................................................... 180
6.1.1 Removal of suspended oil ................................................................................................. 180
6.1.2 Removal of dissolved oil ................................................................................................... 181
6.2 Gravity separators ..................................................................................................................... 181
6.2.1 Skim tanks ......................................................................................................................... 181
6.2.2 Skim piles .......................................................................................................................... 183
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 9

6.2.3 API oil interceptor ............................................................................................................. 184
6.2.4 Plate interceptors .............................................................................................................. 185
6.2.4.1 The corrugated plate interceptor (CPI) ......................................................................... 186
6.2.4.2 The Natco Performax coalescer .................................................................................... 189
6.3 Gas flotation units. .................................................................................................................... 190
6.3.1 Induced gas flotation (IGF) units. ...................................................................................... 191
6.3.2 Dissolved gas flotation (DGF) units ................................................................................... 194
6.3.3 Tilted plate flotation units. ............................................................................................... 196
6.4 Flocculation units ...................................................................................................................... 197
6.4.1 Flocculation‐sedimentation .............................................................................................. 198
6.4.2 Flocculation‐flotation ........................................................................................................ 198
6.4.3 Sludge disposal from flocculation processes .................................................................... 199
6.5 Coalescers ................................................................................................................................. 199
6.5.1 Examples of commercial coalescers ................................................................................. 200
6.5.1.1 Degremont coalescer .................................................................................................... 200
6.5.1.2 Plenty Metrol coalescer (Fig. 6.20 Fig. 6.19) ................................................................. 201
6.5.1.3 KnitMesh DC coaleser (Fig. 6.20) .................................................................................. 202
6.5.2 Expandable fibrous bed coalescer .................................................................................... 204
6.5.3 Pipeline coalescers ............................................................................................................ 205
6.6 Filters ......................................................................................................................................... 206
6.6.1 Granular media filters ....................................................................................................... 206
6.6.2 Precoat filters .................................................................................................................... 206
6.6.3 Novel media filters ............................................................................................................ 207
6.7 Hydrocyclones ........................................................................................................................... 207
6.8 Removal of dissolved hydrocarbons ......................................................................................... 211
6.8.1 Carbon adsorption ............................................................................................................ 211
6.8.2 Gas stripping ..................................................................................................................... 212
6.8.3 Biological treatment .......................................................................................................... 212
7 EQUIPMENT SELECTION AND DESIGN/SIZING GUIDELINES .............................................................. 214
7.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 214
7.2 Dehydration equipment ............................................................................................................ 215
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 10

7.2.1 Design approach ............................................................................................................... 215
7.2.2 General design considerations .......................................................................................... 216
7.2.2.1 Design conditions .......................................................................................................... 216
7.2.2.2 Nature of the feed ......................................................................................................... 217
7.2.2.3 Product specifications ................................................................................................... 218
7.2.3 Equipment selection and application ............................................................................... 218
7.2.4 Equipment sizing ............................................................................................................... 219
7.2.4.1 Sizing criteria ................................................................................................................. 219
7.2.4.2 Sizing method ................................................................................................................ 220
7.2.4.3 Sizing routines ............................................................................................................... 221
7.2.5 Equipment internals and accessories ............................................................................... 235
7.2.5.1 Separators (including plate separators) ........................................................................ 235
7.2.5.2 Dehydration tanks ......................................................................................................... 236
7.2.6 Control and instrumentation ............................................................................................ 237
7.2.6.1 Separators (including plate separator) ......................................................................... 237
7.2.6.2 Dehydration tanks ......................................................................................................... 238
7.3 Deoiling equipment ................................................................................................................... 239
7.3.1 General considerations ..................................................................................................... 239
7.3.2 Equipment selection and application ............................................................................... 240
7.3.3 Equipment sizing ............................................................................................................... 242
7.3.3.1 Skim tanks ..................................................................................................................... 242
7.3.3.2 API interceptors ............................................................................................................ 242
7.3.3.3 Plate interceptors .......................................................................................................... 246
7.3.3.4 Flotation units ............................................................................................................... 247
7.3.3.5 Flocculation units .......................................................................................................... 248
7.3.3.6 Hydrocyclones ............................................................................................................... 251
APPENDIX 7.2 ‐ EQUIPMENT SIZING CURVES AND TABLES .................................................................... 255
8 SYSTEM INTEGRATION ...................................................................................................................... 305
8.1 General ...................................................................................................................................... 305
8.2 Design considerations for offshore systems ............................................................................. 306
8.3 Design considerations for onshore systems ............................................................................. 307
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 11

8.4 Factors affecting oil/water separation efficiency ..................................................................... 308
8.4.1 Demulsifier chemicals ....................................................................................................... 308
8.4.2 Physical properties of oil and water ................................................................................. 308
8.4.3 Flow conditions ................................................................................................................. 309
8.4.4 Solids ................................................................................................................................. 310
8.4.5 Pumps and control valves ................................................................................................. 310
8.4.6 SRB .................................................................................................................................... 311
8.4.7 Recycling of skimmings and sludges ................................................................................. 311
8.4.8 Mixing of disposal water streams ..................................................................................... 311
8.5 Review of field installations ...................................................................................................... 311
8.5.1 Shell Expro ......................................................................................................................... 311
8.5.2 New North Sea platform designs ...................................................................................... 314
8.5.3 Gabon‐Gamba/Ivinga fields .............................................................................................. 318
8.5.4 PD Oman ........................................................................................................................... 320
8.5.5 SPDC ‐ Nigeria ................................................................................................................... 323
8.5.6 BSP .................................................................................................................................... 324
8.5.7 SSB/SSPC ........................................................................................................................... 327
8.5.8 Thailand‐Sirikit field .......................................................................................................... 329
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................... 331

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 12

Summary of Changes
Section Changes
1.1 Water: 0.2 to 0.5% vol (0.05% vol in Oman )
Salt: 42 - 72 g/m³ (15-25 lb/1000 bbl).

1.1 However, typical maximum is 100 g/m3.
1.1 Process water always contains hydrocarbons,
1.2 This Dehydration and Deoiling Manual has been prepared with the following objectives in
mind:
1.2 This process is only qualitatively understood, however, because the drainage of thin
liquid films between droplets and the behavior of dispersions are influenced by many
complex factors.
1.2 Such correlations are currently not available,…
1.2 To comply with these limits, modifications to the analytical procedure have recently been
proposed.
1.2 Empirical, design and sizing guidelines for dehydration equipment were developed
recently in PETRONAS based on an in-depth review
1.2 These guidelines have been incorporated in full in Chapter 7.
1.2 These requirements are not always met as evidenced by a review of Group installed field
applications.
1.3 Relevant appendices have been included at the end of each chapter.

Section Changes
2.2.1 At lower watercuts the emulsions usually tend to be of the water-in-oil type and vice
versa.
2.2.2 Emulsions will therefore be formed in those sections of the production system…
2.2.2 The higher the energy of mixing/agitation, the finer the resulting emulsion is.
2.2.3.2 Waxy crude should therefore be dehydrated above the temperature at which wax starts
to crystallise, the so-called Wax-Drop-Out-Point
2.2.4 The design of facilities and the selection of process condition ideally require a knowledge
of the following bulk properties…
2.2.4 The significance of these properties is discussed below in some detail, while method to
measure them will discussed in Chapter 3.
2.2.4.3 Dynamic and kinematic viscosities are distinguished and interrelated as follows:-
2.2.4.5 Fig. 2.8 –Continuous droplet size distribution curve.
2.3 An emulsion breaker also removes skin strengthening solids from the interface…
2.3 …while breakers for oil-in-water emulsions are known as deoilers.
2.3.2 Because of the large number of variables in the system and emulsion breakers for a
particular emulsion requiring treatment, laboratory tests are required to select from a
large number of available chemicals to determine the most effective one(s) for a given
emulsion.
2.3.3 Testing of a demulsifer should include test on overtreatment… a low dosage rate may
become less effective at higher treatment ratios…
2.3.3 Deoiler dosages are lower and are typically some 5 ppm.
2.3.3 The required dosage is a.o.* dependent on the treatment temperature
2.4.2.1 density of the continuous phase (g/cm³)
2.4.2.2 The mixing intensity, which is defined as the work done on the fluid per unit mass and
per unit time can be calculate for any part of the flow system by the relation:
2.4.2.2 t = retention time of the fluid in that part of the system
2.4.2.2 T = retention time (hours)
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 13

Section Changes
2.4.6 Electrostatic coalescence can be applied to any dispersion with an insulting continuous
phase and a difference in dielectric…
2.4.6 However, this has not yet led to a large scale application…
2.5.1 Heavy viscous crudes are therefore much more difficult to dehydrate than a light crudes

Clause Changes Reason

3.1, Para 3 Delete “to the first” Redundancy
3.1, Para 7 Delete “are currently” Redundancy
Replaced comma with full stop (line 6) after Original sentence too long.
“ available.”
Replaced small “h” with capital “H” for
“however”
Improve sentence
Deleted “and” after “however” (line 6)
3.2, Para 10 Deleted “of the” and replaced with “and” (line Specifications and objectives are two
2) separate items.
3.3.1, Para 7 Deleted “the” and “for” (line3) To improve sentence
3.3.3 Para 7 Deleted “KSEPL have designed” and Specific statement
“These bottles can be ordered through
KSEPL, LRS/1616.”
3.3.1 Added “Repeat Formation Test” To improve sentence

Para 1
3.3.1 Deleted “report” and “April 1988” Clearer requirement
Para 8 Added “ latest version”
Table 3.1 Added “Gas Liquid Ratio” and “Gas Oil Ratio” To improve sentence
3.3.2, Para 1 Deleted “oil and water requires great care” Already mentioned at the middle of the
sentence
Deletd “unless” and replaced with “If”
Improve sentence.
Changed “froma” to “from a”
Improve typo error
3.3.3, Para 1 Deleted “be” (line 1) Redundancy
Section 2: Deleted “1/min” for line 2 and 5 Unit must reflect sampling rate.
and replaced with “L/min”
3.4.1, (ii) Replaced “will” with “with” (line 8) To improve sentence
3.4.1 (ii) Deleted “(e.g. to KSEPL)” Specific statement
3.4.2.1 Replaced “T” with “t” To improve sentence
3.4.2.2 Deleted “ IKA bottle shaker” (line 5) Brand of an equipment
Para 2
3.4.2.2 Added “ High Pressure” Abbreviation
Para 4
3.4.2.2 Replaced “is” with “are” To improve sentence
Para 5
3.4.3.5.1 Deleted “KSLA have developed a” and Specific statement
Para 1 “Unfortunately the equipment is not portable
and the photographs have to be analysed at
KSLA.”
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 14

Added “Alternative”
3.4.2.3 Replaced “if” with “of” (line 3) To improve sentence

Para 4
3.4.2.3 Added “portion of oil” and “Basic Sediment Abbreviation and flexibility of the test
Para 5 and Water (BS&W)” equipment/apparatus
Deleted “of oil”, “ of the BS&W content” and “
5 ml “
3.4.2.3 Deleted “are” To improve sentence
Item (ii)
3.4.2.3 Deleted “the” and “selected by the screening Redundancy
Item (iii) test”
Appropriate term used for observation.
Replaced “cleanliness” with “ appearance”
3.4.2.3 Replaced “if” with “of” (bullet 1) To improve sentence
Para 6
Replaced “ sharply define” with “clearly Specific statement
separated” (bullet2 )
Replaced “The present” with “Presence”
Deleted “the”
Replaced “when a local requirement” with Strengthens the sentence

“depends on local/statutory requirement”
3.4.2.3 Replaced “If a low mixing intensity is Strengthens the sentence

Para 8 sufficient plant with the benefit of a more
centralised operation.” with “For a low mixing
intensity, it is sufficient for the chemicals to
be injected at the plant”
3.4.2.4 Deleted “additional of” To improve sentence

Para 1
3.4.2.4 Deleted “1796-69” and “IP 75-69” Test method year is removed to ensure
Para 3 Replaced with “1796” and “IP 75” only the latest version of standard
Added “ Latest version of” method is used.
Deleted API 2548

Standard method withdrawn.
Deleted “The samples are heated in a water
bath to 50 °C and centrifuged for 10 minutes, Specified in the test method.
after which the amounts of free water and
emulsions are observed”
3.4.2.4 Deleted “(no highly skilled labour required). “ Not applicable

Para 7
3.4.3.3 Added “ (2 centrifuge tube)” (line 2) Better explanation
ASTM D4007
and IP 359 Replaced “15” with “10” (line 3) As per the standard method.
Replaced “500 – 800 g” with minimum 600 rcf As per the standard method.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 15

Replaced “The separated quantity of water As per the standard method.

and sediment is read from the graduations of
the centrifuge tube, and multiplied by a factor
of two to give results in percent by volume”
with “Record the final volume of water and
sediment in each tube. Express the sum of
the two admissible readings as the
percentage by volume of water and
sediment.”
3.4.3.3 Added “water” (line 3) “Water” was missing

ASTM 4006
and IP 358
Deleted “This method is a modified version of
ASTM D95-70, IP 74/77,and introduced in
1981 to increase the accuracy of the "testing"
of crude oil samples for custody transfer and
trading.
The modifications include:
• The use of a 1000 ml flask to permit
the use of a large sample.
• The installation of a drying tube with
desiccant on top of the condenser to prevent
entry of atmospheric moisture.
• The use of calibrated traps. “
3.4.3.3 Deleted “ASTM D96 "Test for water and Method ASTM D 96 withdrawn in year
Para 2 sediment in crude oils" is basically similar to 2000
the one described above but the use of a
heated centrifuge is optional. It also allows
different types of centrifuge tubes and a
choice of solvents. Its use shall be restricted
to the testing of on-site samples. “
3.4.3.4 Deleted “In the extraction/IR method, using Equipment mentioned obsolete
Para 2 the Horiba OCMA 200 oil content monitor,
carbon tetrachloride is often used as the
extraction solvent. Further”
3.4.3.5.3 Deleted Not limited to one single supplier
Para 3
3.5.1 Deleted “at KSEPL at the request of Opcos” To make a general statement
Para 2
3.5.1 Para 4 Deleted “at KSEPL” Specific statement
3.5.1 Replaced “if” with “of” Improve sentence
Para 5
3.5.1 Para 6 Deleted ” KSEPL standard” and added “test” Specific statement
3.5.2 Para 8 Deleted “(see also the SIPM Water Injection Specific statement
Manual): “
3.5.3 Deleted “at KSEPL is a Waring Blender To make a general statement
Para 2 model HGB-100”
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 16

Added “in the laboratory”
3.5.3 Deleted the whole para Para is a specific statement

Para 3
3.5.5 Replaced “at KSEPL with the extraction/IR To make a general statement
Para 3 absorption method “using an established
method”
3.5.6 Deleted “e.g. with the ZXSSQ routine from Specific statement
Para 2 the IMSL library”
3.5.6 Replaed “on a HP” with “using a scientific” Specific statement
Para 3
3.6 Deleted “studies at KSEPL” Specific statement
Title Added “study
3.6 Para 4 Deleted “at KSEPL” Specific statement
3.6 Para 8 Deleted “Research on these topics was Specific statement
started at KSEPL, late 1987. “
3.7.1 Added “should be” and deleted “ could be Improve sentence

Para 9 made have not yet sufficiently” & “and further
research is currently being done at KSEPL to
formulate such rules”
Appendix 3.2 Add “Petroleum” Improve statement
Para 1
Appendix 3.2 Replaced petroleum with “oil” and added Improve sentence
IP 77 “petroleum”
Deleted “IP248-ASTM D2547;” Specific statement

Appendix 3.2 Replaced “oils” with “products” Improve sentence
ASTM 2500
& IP 219
Appendix 3.2 Deleted Covered by other method
AMS 259
Appendix 3.2 Replaced “SMS-1897 “ with ASTM D 3246 / Replace with standard method
SMS 1897 ASTM D 3120
Appendix 3.2 Deleted “SMS 2384” Use standard method only

ASTM
664/SMS
2384
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 17

Appendix 3.2 Deleted: Use standard method
Shell Method Series (SMS) 1769

Wax content of petroleum products.
Samples containing asphaltenes are
dissolved in hot toluene, mixed with active
earth, and stirred, while heating until an
almost dry powder is obtained. This is
extracted with toluene in a Soxhlet apparatus.
The extract solution is filtered (if required),
and the toluene is evaporated. The residue is
dissolved in hot MIBK. The wax is crystallised
at -30°C, recrystallised from MIBK at this
temperature, dried and weighed. The
congealing point of the wax us is determined.
For products known to be free from
asphaltene and resins, such as distillates, the
adsorption and extraction step can be
omitted.
Added:
UOP 46
Parrafin Wax Content of Petroleum Oils and

Asphalts
Light, clear oils are analyzed as received.

Heavily colored oils and asphalts are clarified
by treatment with sulfuric acid. The asphalt-
free sample is dissolved in warm methylene
chloride. This solution is chilled to 30° C and
filtered through a cold fritted glass filter. The
wax collected on the filter is removed with hot
hexane. The hexane is evaporated and the
wax weighed.
Appendix 3.3 Deleted “e.g. ASTM D96” and added ASTM D 96 obsolete.
Test “standard test method” To make a general statement
Procedure,
Bullet 2 & 7
Appendix 3.4 Deleted “KSEPL STANDARD” Specific statement
Title
Added “test”
Appendix 3.4 Deleted “tank” and added “from tank” Improve sentence
Pretreatment
of oil sample
Appendix Deleted “stock oil sample “, “crude oil” , Enhance sentence for better
3.4 “sample” , “mixed” and “stock sample” understanding.
Para 2 & 3
Added “above mixture” , “homogenized” and
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 18

“mixture”
Appendix 3.4 Deleted “gauge” Improve sentence

Note for
Bullet 6
Appendix 3.4 Deleted “with a Horiba Ocma 200 oil content To make general statement for oil in
Bullet 7 analyser” water analysis
Appendix 3.4 Deleted “(Mitsubishi moisture meter).” To make general statement.

Bullet 6
Appendix 3.5 Deleted “This fit can be done numerically with Specific example
Curve Fitting a routine ZXSSQ from the IMSL library. “
Section Changes
4.1.4 The point of deoiler addition should be selected such that sufficient mixing occurs for the
chemical to become effectively point may be required.
4.1.4 This is sometimes done with the aid of a coalescer pipe or by the use of coalescer units
4.2.1 a) Discharge to surface water, where there is sufficient dispersion, e.g. open sea,
coastal waters.
4.2.2.2 Deleted “Therefore, uniform standards for discharge of production water do not exist. “
4.2.2.2 Aspects to be considered are eco- toxicity, persistency/(bio)degradability,
bioaccumulation/tainting
4.2.2.2 Delete “In the absence of governmental regulations, the Group policy (ref.EP-61240) is that”
…… discharges.
4.2.2.2 • Delete “ PETRONAS maintains a databank in which this type of information is
stored for a variety of chemical compounds and organisms.”
4.2.2.2 • Heavy metals (e.g. boron, mercury, etc.)
Table 4.2 Replace Temperature (oC): 40 – 60 with <45
4.2.3.1 4.2.3.1. Occurrence and environmental aspects
4.2.3.1 There is, therefore, considerable scope for improved monitoring and recording of such
discharges by OPU's in line with PETRONAS Group Minimum Environmental Management
Standards Implementation Guide PTS 60.3006.
4.2.3.2 In formulating limits for hydrocarbon levels in effluent water, authorities have, in a number if
of cases,..
4.2.3.2 • can be very dependent on sample handling and preparation.
4.2.3.2 Currently there is a tendency for regulatory limits for effluent water to be tightened up…
4.2.4 The determination of hydrocarbons in water consists of a number of steps preceding the
actual measurement
4.2.4.1 However, for practical reasons, the usual sample size is about 1 litre.
4.2.4.2 A quantitative prediction of the deviation cannot, therefore, be made.
4.2.4.3 Sample preparation is extremely important for the final measurement result, since any
compound with a C-H bond, whether oily or not, will give a reading.
4.2.4.3 The most direct way consists of comparing the absorbances with those of a calibration
solution,
4.2.4.3 In a significant number of cases, and also in the PARCOM recommended IR method
4.2.4.4 The sample is extracted with a suitable solvent (n-pentane) and injected into a gas
chromatographic column…
4.2.5 The above situation is aggravated by the use of corrosion inhibitors in gas production
operations…
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 19

Section Changes
APPENDIX 5.2 It will be seen that the concern at that time was with 'interference' from low molecular
4.1 weight hydrocarbon gases, but the problem of interference from water soluble polar
substances was not recognised or addressed.
APPENDIX 6.1. Subsequent information has indicated that the concentrations of hydrocarbons in
4.1 aqueous
APPENDIX 7.2 ... The method had to be adapted to avoid interference from certain low molecular
4.1 weight volatile water soluble species that were not removable by oily water
separators.
APPENDIX 7.3. Little or no consideration was given in the early stages to the small discharges of low
4.1 molecular weight species from gas platforms …

Old section New Section Change

Chapter 5 Chapter 5 Additional info:
5.2.1 5.2.1 • An auxiliary chemical injection pump on standby or on auto
start
Chapter 5 Chapter 5 Spelling Check:
5.3.2 5.3.2 ‘This “sludge” layer may consist of untreated …’
‘The system is however, proven for E&P operations.’
‘During discharging the cleanest oil…’
Additional Info
‘Nucleonic, type (profiler) interface level measurement is also
available in the market; thus expensive.’
Chapter 5 Chapter 5 Add new paragraph
5.4.1 5.4.1 ‘Additional level tapping are needed to measure level for increase
water out in the feed. The internals weirs in the separator shall be
adjustable to accommodate more water in the future.’
Chapter 5 Chapter 5 Add new paragraph
5.4.1.1 5.4.1.1 ‘It is important to provide sampling facilities at all levels for physical
verification and the different phases.’
Chapter 5 Chapter 5 Add new section 5.4.1.4
5.4.1.4 5.4.1.4 Electrostatic Precipitator/Desalter/Electrostatic Dehydrator Operating
Principle
Chapter 5 Chapter 5 Spelling Check:
5.4.2.1 5.4.2.1 ‘Daily temperature changes the incoming emulsion…’
Chapter 5 Chapter 5 Additional Info
5.4.2.2 5.4.2.2 ‘Capacitance Level Probe’
‘Conductivity Based Level Profiler’
‘Nucleonic Interface Level Profiler’

Section Changes
6.1 The water separated in a dehydration process always contains some oil, the quantity of
which varies from several tens to hundreds of ppm oil-in-water.
6.2.3 The interceptor consists of a rectangular basin which is divided into a number of
channels.
6.2.4 A number of designs for plate interceptors are available from various manufacturers, all
operating on a similar principle.
6.2.4.1 “In tests at various offshore locations, it was demonstrated…”
6.2.4.2 “CE Natco have introduced…”
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 20

Section Changes
6.2.4.2 Delete “As to this aspect, NAM has had problems with this coalescer.”
6.3.3 Para 2: The TPF…..water for disposal but yet to be commercially proven.
6.5 Delete “To date, the application of coalescers … has so far proved unreliable.”
6.5.1.1 “However, pilot scale tests carried out indicated that…”
6.5.1.2 Removed entire section on Elf Anvar coalesce
6.5.1 Numbering for section 6.5.1.3 changed to 6.5.1.2
6.5.1.2 Numbering for “Fig. 6.20” changed to “Fig. 6.19”
6.5.1.2 Delete “however, there is no operating experience within PETRONAS.”
6.5.1.3 Numbering for “Fig. 6.21” changed to “Fig. 6.20”
6.5.2 Numbering for “Fig. 6.22” changed to “Fig. 6.21”
6.6 In general application, filters in deoiling systems are limited to polishing only, when
high water quality is required for injection purposes.
6.6 This has proved to be very effective and reduce the oil content to less than 5 ppm.
6.6.3 Media other than conventional mineral particles can be used for filtration.
6.6.3 Delete “In a recent trial with production water as feed (BEB, Germany, 1984) influent oil
contents of 50-70 g/m³ were reduced consistently to some 5 g/m³.”
6.7 …the geometry of the liquid/liquid hydrocyclone differs substantially from the
conventional cyclone.
6.7 Numbering for “Fig. 6.24” changed to “Fig. 6.23”
6.7 The separation performance for solids/gas and liquids/gas cyclones and for
solids/liquid hydrocyclones are well establish and many design are available.
6.7 Delete “This type of hydrocyclone is now being marketed by BWN, an Australian
company, as the BWN Vortoil.”
6.7 Numbering for “Fig. 6.25” changed to “Fig. 6.24”
6.7 Higher reject ratio may only yield a marginal improvement in separation efficiency, but
this is…
6.7 The residence time in the hydrocyclones are in the order of 2-3 seconds,…
6.7 Delete “They have been installed on North Cormorant for debottlenecking of the
produced water system and are planned for Kittiwake, Draugen and Troll.”

Section Changes
Section 7.1 The design/sizing of dehydration and deoiling equipment should be based on a
Paragraph 1 quantitative description of the separation behavior of two immiscible liquids from an
unstable emulsion.
Section 7.1, In December 1987 a research………..Timing of the project is such that major result are
5th Paragraph not expected within the next few years.
Section 7.1, Recently empirical design guidelines for oil field dehydration equipment were
7th paragraph developed in SIPM………. These guidelines are integrally taken into account in this
page 194 Manual, and they are presented in Section 7.2, together with various other
considerations relevant to the design of dehydration equipment. Selection and design
guidelines for deoiling equipment is discussed in Section 7.3.
Section 7.2.1, As discussed in Section 7.1, Stokes' Law provides a means that can be used to size
2nd para, page an oily-water separator. The example shown in Appendix 7.1 indicates that separation
194 capacity mainly a function of horizontal cross-sectional area.
7.2.4.1 Update PTS revision
PTS 31.22.05.11, January 2010
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 21

Section Changes
8.1 To maintain the required BS & W content of the export crude with increasing watercuts,
the operating temperature had to be increased to about 65 °C.
8.1 This resulted in overstabilisation and loss of crude export, since vapour recovery systems
were inadequate.
8.2 Add (Requirement to latest approved Malaysian Regulation to be complied) in Para 6
8.3 Skim or buffer tanks are always required when linking a continuous water treatment
process to a batch dehydration system, to avoid step changes in flow rate, especially
during pigging, and in water quality.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 22

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
Production of hydrocarbons, the prime objective of the Group Operating Companies, is in all cases
accompanied by the production of unwanted water at some stage in the production life of a well. The
amounts of production water, which may consist of formation water only, or a mixture of formation and
injection water, will normally increase with processing reservoir depletion. The following table shows
average oil and water production rates (1986) for various OPUs, illustrating the significance of the various
amounts of water produced.
Table 1.1: Total oil and water production rates (1986)
Opco Production in Oil '000 m³/d Water Watercut % (vol.)
BSP, Brunei 26.2 16 38
Shell, Gabon 4.5 13 75
BEB, Germany 4.8 60 95
NAM, Holland 4.0 51 95
SSB/SSPC, Malaysia 38.2 20 35
SPDC, Nigeria 120 50 30
TSEPCO, Thailand 3.5 2 35
NVTS, Turkey 2.9 10 80
PD Oman 83.5 65 45
Shell Expro, UK 120 55 30
TOTAL 408 342 46
(2.56 Mbpd) (2.15 Mbpd)
Figures are only indicative and are based on production figures reported in various report and documents
The produced mixture of oil, gas and water first requires separation in order to fully realize the value of
the hydrocarbons. Separation of water and its subsequent disposal is, to a varying degree, an area of
concern in most producing areas since it often requires capital expenditure and increased operating costs
later on in a field's life as reserve levels decline and tighter standards are imposed on disposed water
The degree to which oil, gas and water mixtures need to be treated in dehydration/deoiling facilities
depends primary on the type of crude produced, the production conditions, and the product specifications.
Crude oil needs to be dehydrated to a certain level to meet purchaser's limits.
These limits on the water and salt content of the crude are typically:
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 23

Water: 0.2 to 0.5% vol (0.05% vol in Oman )
Salt: 42 - 72 g/m³ (15-25 lb/1000 bbl).
As salt is dissolved in the aqueous phase separation to the above BSW criteria in many cases also
reduced the salt content to acceptable levels. However, in a number of operation the salt criterion is the
main issue. Examples of this include Oman, Gabon and Syria. In Oman the salt criterion is met by deeper
dehydration down to BSW levels of 0.05%. In other situation however (e.g. Gabon), the introduction of a
desalting stage (Section 5.6) may be more appropriate.
The implication of accepting a given salt specification for new areas and/or fields should be realised. In
this context it is worth noting that Expro's recent experiences with Fulmar crude have indicated that salt
concentrations up to 200-300 g/m³ are still acceptable. However, typical maximum is 100 g/m3.
Process water always contains hydrocarbons, both in a dissolved and dispersed state. Produced water is
mainly disposed off through (re)injection into subsurface strata or discharge to surface water bodies
(rivers, lakes, sea). Subsurface injection requires limits to the oil content in order to minimize plugging of
the formation, although in some cases water can be accepted with a relatively high oil content without
significant reduction of injectivity Discharge at surface most of the time have to meet statutory criteria for
oil content as well as other contaminants to limit environmental impact and for good oil field practice
reasons. Such criteria, varying from country to country, also depend on whether water is disposal of in an
offshore or onshore environment and often require inclusion of a deoiling process.
A typical limits for oil-in-water for platform discharges in the North Sea is 40 mg/l. Comparing this limit
with the 0.2 - 0.5% vol. water content specification for crude oil export quality, which is significantly less
stringent, it is clear that in general it is more difficult to de-oil the produced water than to remove water
from the crude. This is compounded, in some cases, by the increased operator attention being given to
effective dehydration, which has a direct bearing on income, and less attention being given to effective
deoiling, which in most cases contributes to increased costs only.
In principle, mixtures of oil and water can be separated by gravity settling only. However, the oil/water
separation process is complicated by the formation of emulsions, caused by agitation of the mixture
during its flow through the well and surface facilities, and by the presence of surface active components in
the crude, which stabilize the emulsions formed. Dehydration is therefore not a simple process and many
aspects underlying the physics and chemistry of the separation of oil/water emulsions are not sufficiently
understood at present.
In general, a dehydration process consist of the initial removal of the (often larger) part of the produced
water which is not emulsified ("free" water), followed by the subsequent further treatment of the emulsified
part of the oil/water mixer. Complete dehydration of the crude oil and deoiling of produced water usually
requires chemical treatment, possibly combined with the gravity separation, either continuous or batch
wise.
Design and operation of dehydration/deoiling facilities has been, till the present day, largely based on
practical field experience and operators' judgement, due to the incomplete understanding of the
chemical/physical principles governing the oil/water separation process. In the past this has met with few
problem as shore based installations are often oversized and in offshore production a higher BS & W
usually accepted where the oil is shipped to shore for "polishing" in a terminal. Moreover, an increasingly
wide range of treatment chemicals is available enabling a smooth operation
This traditional approach to equipment design and process operation is, however, no longer adequate for
efficient, cost-effective dehydration of crude oil and treatment of produced water for the following reasons:
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 24

i) For offshore installations, where space and weight are at a premium, installation of large
dehydration tanks and bulky water treatment equipment is unacceptable. The development of
compact separation equipment with similar or better performance compared to existing
equipment, is therefore required.
ii) More offshore fields require 'deep' dehydration at the platform (e.g. North Sea) either for direct
tanker loading or for pipeline transport, where as little volume as possible should be occupied by
water.
iii) As they deplete oil fields produce increasing amounts of water and watercuts of well over 90%
are not uncommon, in particular in those fields with pressure maintenance by water injection.
iv) Because of increased environmental concern legislation governing the quality requirements for
disposal of produced water tends to more stringent with time many areas.
v) Crudes produced by EOR methods in the future will be heavier, more viscous and/or
contaminated and thus fall outside the range of current experience.
In view of these requirements it is necessary to stimulate and undertake the development of:
i) improved (novel) dehydration and deoiling technology, able to cope with future requirements;
ii) a Group wide policy and guidelines on dehydration and deoiling processes and practices and
process selection;
iii) planning and design guidelines for dehydration and deoiling equipment and systems
In this Manual in particular the last two mentioned requirements are addressed. It reviews the various
processes and piece of equipment currently available and in use and presents guidelines on equipment
selection and integration. While this Manual does not give explicit recipes, and cannot be used as a cook
book, it is expected that a more uniform approach to dehydration and deoiling of produced fluids will lead
to a more efficient operation of equipment and facilities, with less system upsets.
1.2 Purpose and summary of the Manual
This Dehydration and Deoiling Manual has been prepared with the following objectives in mind:
i) To provide engineers/operators with a basic understanding of the principles of oil/water

separation processes.
ii) To provide guidelines for equipment selection and design, and for subsequent system
planning/integration
This Manual is not specifically meant for specialised design and process engineers, although they may
find its contents of interest and useful, since it provides an integration of petroleum and process
engineering aspects.
In Chapter 2 some of the physical and chemical aspects of emulsions and the principles underlying
oil/water separation processes, are briefly discussed. Some understanding of these processes is
essential for the proper operation of oil/water separation facilities and for the selection and planning of
new facilities
A fundamental understanding of the coalescence mechanism of liquid droplets in a destabilised emulsion

would form the basis for quantitative facilities design. This process is only qualitatively understood,
however, because the drainage of thin liquid films between droplets and the behavior of dispersions are
influenced by many complex factors. Most of these are surface phenomena, so the coalescence process
is extremely sensitive to small amounts of undefined contaminants which make a quantitative difficult.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 25

Sampling and testing of emulsions is discussed in Chapter 3. Analysis of the separation behavior of
water-in-oil emulsions is required for a variety of reasons.
• In existing facilities on site 'bottle' test can be performed, using freshly produced emulsions, to
compare and select de-emulsifier chemicals and their dosage requirements and for performance
monitoring/troubleshooting. Additional field testing will invariably be required, however, to
optimise selection/treatment.
• For new facilities dehydration test using artificial (laboratory prepared) emulsions can be
performed, however, the results may be of limited value. In this respect the representativeness of
emulsion behavior as observed in laboratory tests (in which artificial emulsions are used) for the
behavior of actual emulsions under field conditions, is the most critical aspect for the
interpretation of results of laboratory dehydration test. For such interpretation/translation
correlation are required between behavior of laboratory made emulsions and that of
corresponding emulsions actually encountered in the field. Such correlations are currently not
available, however, and in the absence thereof it has become practice to standardize laboratory
dehydration test, in order to facilitate compassion of laboratory made and in-field emulsion
characteristics. More work on the classification/characterization of field emulsions and on
establishing correlation's between field emulsions and emulsions created in the laboratory is
required, and research is ongoing
Aspects of oil-in-water emulsions and disposal of production water are discussed in Chapter 4. Disposal
routes for produced water are injection into subsurface formations and, more commonly, discharge into
surface water sources. Disposal of produced water into the environment is, however, subject to
environmental quality restriction, as set, in most cases, by legislation. For offshore discharge only oil-in-
water content has been specified by regulatory authorities thus far, whereas for discharges into coastal
waters more parameters need to be monitored. Oil-in-water limits, as set by regulations, were originally
based on expectations of oily water treatment equipment performance and hence refer in principal to
dispersed oil-in-water. With available analytical techniques, however, of which the infrared (IR) absorption
technique is the most commonly used method, total oil content (i.e. dispersed plus dissolved oil) is
determined. Furthermore, since most formation waters also contain dissolved organic material, which is
not related to the occurrence of hydrocarbons but contributes to the result of an IR analysis, sample
handling and preparation is very important for the result of an oil-in-water determination. As discussed in
Chapter 4, problems with oil-in-water determination with the IR method also arise for discharges from
gas/condense platforms. Since this water contains a relatively high amount of dissolved aromatic
hydrocarbon, which are not removed by currently used deoiling facilities, high oil-in-water readings can be
obtained exceeding limits. To comply with these limits, modifications to the analytical procedure have
recently been propos,ed.
In Chapters 5 and 6 dehydration and deoiling equipment and processes currently in use in E & P
operations are briefly reviewed. As far as future requirements are concerned for in particular compact,
relatively low weight equipment with equivalent or improved performance when compared to conventional
equipment, hydrocyclones for deoiling purpose are now considered to be field proven and are being
installed/planned a.o. on several North Sea platforms. R & D work is ongoing for the development of
hydrocyclones for dehydration purposes, and compact more efficient electrostatic dehydration equipment.
The applicability of centrifuges for oil-water separation has been evaluated in the field, but more testing is
required before they can be considered as oil-field proven.
In Chapter 7 equipment selection and design/sizing guidelines are given for both dehydration and
deoilingequipment. Since in general in deoiling processes relatively large quantities of water are handled,
containing relatively small amounts of oil (typical less than 2% vol.) the dispersion is very dilute and the
oil-water separation process is well described by Stokes' Law. Consequently Stokes' Law can be
successfully applied for the sizing of deoiling equipment. In most dehydration processes, however, the
dispersed water phase is much more concentrated. As mentioned before, a fundamental and quantitative
understanding of the coalescence of liquid droplet in an emulsion would form the basis for the design of
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 26

dehydration equipment. However, such a quantitative description of the separation process of a
dispersion has proved to be extremely complex, and a simple and practically applicable mathematical
description of the coalescing mechanism has not yet been forthcoming. Moreover, in the absence of a
practical translation of artificial emulsion behavior to field emulsion behavior, design parameters for
dehydration equipment have had, until now, to rely on empirical (local) field experience and on
comparison with performance of facilities encountering similar production conditions. Empirical, design
and sizing guidelines for dehydration equipment were developed recently in PETRONAS based on an in-
depth review of operating experience in various OPUs and on feedback from equipment manufactures.
These guidelines have been incorporated in full in Chapter 7.
The selection and sizing of equipment for dehydration and deoiling purposes cannot be done in isolation
but must always be carried out within the framework of an integrated system design. This is dealt with in
Chapter 8, where guidelines and further aspects are discussed for the incorporation of individual pieces
ofequipment into an integrated system. Depending on the type of crude to be processed, together with
target specifications for gas, oil and produced water, the selection of a system will be governed by
different consideration. In most cases the final or polishing dehydration step is incorporated at the low
pressure stage, following crude stabilization. However, opportunities to start dehydration at an earlier
stage in the process should always be considered, an aspect which has received further impetus from the
recent development of hydrocyclones which require a certain inlet pressure for maximum efficiency. No
single recipe for the most economical and efficient system can be given and in particular the field location,
whether onshore or offshore, whether remote or within an existing production infrastructure, will influence
system selection and integration. As to last mentioned aspect, many new offshore developments in the
North Sea now involve the planned production of smaller, marginal fields. Here the concept of minimum
facilities definition is imperative to ensure acceptable economics and any opportunity to use existing
facilities at a nearby platform should be investigated.
Offshore systems have normally a requirement for deep dehydration (i.e. very low water content) to meet
a crude specification for either pipeline transport to an onshore terminal, or for direct tanker loading from
the platform facilities. In view of space and weight limitation, compact and efficient separation facilities are
required. Onshore systems have the advantage that space and weight considerations for equipment
design are not often as critical as for offshore system and the use of large dehydration and deoiling
facilities is normal. In all systems, however, there is a need for each process step to be compatible with
the preceding and subsequent steps, and equipment items need to be matched in terms of capacity,
performance and mode of operation. These requirements are not always met as evidenced by a review of
Group installed field applications.
Finally, when deciding on the installation of a system, the advantages of pilot testing, where practical,
cannot be over-emphasized. In this way proof of performance prior to full scale investment can be
confirmed.
1.3 Structure of the Manual and acknowledgement
Each chapter of this Manual is self-contained in respect of numbering of pages, tables and figures.
Relevant appendices have been included at the end of each chapter. A detailed table of contents is
included with each chapter. Since each chapter should be accessible and understandable without having
to rely too much on other chapters, some repetition has been unavoidable. References are not given in
the text, to enhance readability, but have been grouped together in various categories, at the end of the
Manual. Since it is thus impractical to indicate in the Manual where parts of available notes and reports
have been used, these contributions are hereby gratefully acknowledged.
The initial version of the manual was prepared by Karl Mess during a temporary assignment with SIPM.
Use was made of available notes and reports, and where feasible, parts were incorporated without further
modification. The unfinished draft concept manual by R.A Bakels was of particular use.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 27

The initial version of the manual was reviewed by various departments within SIPM/KSEPL and
subsequently a draft version forwarded to the larger OPUs for comment. The efforts of all involved were
much appreciated. Final editing was undertaken by Mike Beaumont whilst Liesbeth Hendriks coordinated
the typing and associated administration.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 28

2 EMULSIONS AND OIL/WATER SEPARATION PROCESSES
2.1 Introduction
During the life of a well, normally dry oil (and/or gas) is produced initially followed, after some time, by
the onset of water, the amount of which will generally increase with time. Consequently, a mixture of oil
and water is being produced, which requires separation (ideally into dry oil and clean water) before
further processing and/or transportation or disposal. Simple mixtures of oil water can usually be
separated by gravity settling only. However, the oil/water separation process is complicated by the
formation of emulsions, caused by agitation during flow through the well and the surface facilities, and
the presence of surface active components which stabilise the emulsions formed.
In general, a dehydration process consists of the initial removal of the (often larger) part of the produced
water which is not emulsified ('free' water) for which free water knock-out vessels are used, followed by
the subsequent further treatment of the emulsified part of the oil/water mixture. The degree of further
treatment required is dictated by the physical and chemical properties of the emulsions. However, the
separation of oil field emulsions into their respective phases is generally effected by the following steps:
• Destabilisation of the emulsion by chemical treatment, possibly combined with the addition of
heat.
• Coalescence of the destabilised droplets into larger ones
• Separation of the mixture into an oil and a water phase under the influence of gravity forces.
In this chapter some of the physical and chemical aspects of emulsions and oil/water separation
processes are briefly discussed. Some understanding of these processes is necessary for the design
and proper operation of oil/water separation facilities.
2.2 Emulsions
2.2.1 Definition and types

An emulsion is a heterogeneous system, consisting of at least one immiscible liquid, intimately dispersed
in another in the form of droplets. The droplet size of the dispersed phase can vary considerably and
droplet radii from 1 micron to several hundred microns have been measured in a single emulsion.
This manual, by virtue of its purpose, is only concerned with emulsions formed by crude oil and water.
Two types are recognised:
• Water dispersed in crude oil, water-in-oil (w/o) normal emulsion.

• Oil dispersed in water, an oil-in-water (o/w) or reserve emulsion.
Of the two types of emulsion mentioned, the continuous phase consists of oil or water respectively. In
many instances the type of emulsion is dependent on the prevailing watercut. At lower watercuts the
emulsions usually tend to be of the water-in-oil type and vice versa.
Figure 2.1 show a photomicrograph of a water-in-oil emulsions.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 29

2.2.2 Formation of emulsions
To create an emulsion of oil and water, the two immiscible liquids must be subjected to a degree of
agitation which imparts sufficient energy to disperse one liquid into the other. Emulsions will therefore be
formed in those sections of the production system where violent agitation occurs such as:
• perforations
• subsurface pumps
• high GOR tubing flow, including gas lift
• flow beans
• manifolds
• pumps
• control valves (throttles)
The higher the energy of mixing/agitation, the finer the resulting emulsion is. For example, control valves,
where the fluids undergo a large pressure drop in a very short time, are notorious for producing very fine
emulsions. The distribution of the droplet sizes in an emulsion is dependent on the properties of the crude
and water, and on the amount of agitation to which it has been subject during its 'life' (so-called shear
history).
2.2.3 Stability of emulsions

The molecules of the dispersed phase at the interface between the dispersed and continuous phases of
an emulsion are subject to a net force pulling them into the droplet, a consequence of the immiscibility of
the two liquids. Likewise, molecules of the continuous phase are pulled back into their phase.
Consequently there is a tendency for molecules to be removed from the interface. The interface thus
assumes a form where its area is minimal, which is achieved when the droplets are spheroidal. The 'pull'
towards minimum area is known as interfacial tension. Since one sphere of a certain volume has less
surface area than two smaller spheres of the same total volume, droplet tend to coalesce when they
come into contact, i.e. the system is unstable. The greater the surface tension, the greater the stability of
the emulsion. A simple crude oil/water emulsion would therefore, in principle, separate spontaneously into
the separate phases once agitation of the mixture ceases.
The coalescence between two drops is controlled by the rate of drainage of the intervening film of the
continuous phase. The rate of drainage is opposed, and the stability of an emulsion is thus enhanced, by
the presence of surface active material, so-called emulsifiers. These surfactants occur naturally in crude
oil and concentrate at the droplet interface of oil and water where they strengthen the film or skin around
the droplets and so hamper the coalescence of small droplet into larger ones.
Film drainage is also opposed by the presence of finely divided solids, which have a tendency to
concentrate at the oil-water interface and to become part of the skin. Moreover, the droplets of the
dispersed phase may carry an electric charge, giving rise to mutual repulsion which also opposes droplet-
droplet coalescence.
Finally it should be mentioned that the degree to which emulsions affect the interfacial properties of
emulsion droplet is also dependent on the pH and salinity of the aqueous phase. To minimise emulsion
formation, the crude oil should not contact either high or low pH water since the interfacial tension
between the oil and water droplets is relatively low at either end of the pH scale, thus enhancing emulsion
stability. In general, the interfacial tension is lowered by increasing salt concentration. However,
increased salt content of the water phase does not imply increased stability of the emulsion. On the
contrary, it has been noticed in many cases that the stability of oil-in water emulsions decreases with
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 30

increasing salt content of the water phase. Coupled with the increased gravity forces (due to the higher
water density) this often results in very high separation efficiencies.
2.2.3.1 Emulsifiers
Emulsifying surfactants are typical long chain organic molecules with both a polar and non-polar end. The
polar portion of the molecule is hydrophilic (preferred affinity for water) and the non-polar portion
oleophilic (preferred affinity for oil). In Fig.2.2.a surfactant is shown schematically, with two examples.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 31

Fig. 2.1 – A photomicrograph of a water-in-oil emulsion (x 100). The clear circles area water droplets.
Note the variety of sizes of the droplets in this picture. (Photograph courtesy of D.R. Lewis,
EPRC Houston).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 32

Fig. 2.2 – Examples of surfactants
The examples shown in Fig .2.2 are both soaps, i.e. salts of fatty acids. Although soaps are common
formulations, surfactants need not contain metallic cations, such as sodium or calcium, to function
efficiently. Entirely organic molecules may be surface active, provided they contain a water soluble an oil
soluble portion. For example, long chain alcohols, esters, organic acids, and sulphonates are often
surface active.
When an emulsifier adsorbs at an oil-water interface the hydrophilic portion protrudes into the water
phase and the oleophilic portion into the oil phase. Fig. 2.3 shows typical schematic examples of
stabilisation of w/o and o/w emulsion by surfactant.
Fig. 2.3 – Examples of surfactant stabilisation.
The emulsifier molecules thus form a protective skin around the droplets which obstructs coalescence.
The skin can sometimes be actually observed between bulk quantities of crude oil and water, appearing
as a grey, opalescent film.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 33

In Fig. 2.4 a photomicrograph is shown of a water droplet surrounded by a rigid in a w/o emulsion. Fig.
2.5 shows two water droplets which area touching, but which have not coalesced because of skin around
droplets.
Fig 2.4 – A photomicrograph of a water droplet in a water-in-oil emulsion. Observe the rigid film, or ‘skin’,
surrounding the droplet. It is this film that retards droplet coalescence and separation of the
water from the oil.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 34

Fig. 2.5 – Photomicrograph (x4000) of two water droplets which are touching, but have not coalesced,
because of skin around droplets. (Photograph courtesy of D.R. Lewis, EPRC Houston).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 35

2.2.3.2 Solids
As mentioned earlier, the protective skin around the droplets of the dispersed phase may be further
strengthened by finely divided solids which also tend to concentrate at interfaces.
These solids include:
• Formation fines.
• Insoluble asphaltenes and resins.
• Scales, such as calcium carbonate, calcium and barium sulphate.
• Corrosion products such as iron oxides and iron sulphide (H2S !).
• Wax crystals.
Whether solids do contribute or not the stability of an emulsion depends on a variety of factors, such as
polarity and wettability. Thus, solid particles may even promote coalescence when they are wetted by the
droplet phase since the bridge the draining film and promote rupture of the skin. Wax crystals usually
enhance emulsion stability significantly. Waxy crude should therefore be dehydrated above the
temperature at which wax starts to crystallise, the so-called Wax-Drop-Out-Point. This temperature can
be found when cooling a drop of crude oil under a microscope and observing the temperature at which
the first paraffin crystals appear.
In many cases stabilisation due to solids is mainly apparent by the formation of a stable layer at the
oil/water boundary, in a settling tank or separator, which requires separate treatment.
2.2.3.3 Electrical charges

The droplets of the dispersed phase may carry an excess electrical charge, either positive or negative.
The resulting mutual repulsion opposes droplet coalescence.
One cause of the excess charge is the presence of anionic or cationic emulsifiers in the skin surrounding
the droplet but the charge may also arise from friction between the droplet and the droplets and the
surrounding continuous phase.
In w/o emulsions the repulsive forces are low because of the low dielectric constant of the oil phase and
may be neglected for practical purposes. In o/w emulsions on the other hand the excess charge of the oil
droplets is an important stabilising factor.
2.2.4 Bulk properties of oil-water mixtures

The design of facilities and the selection of process condition ideally require knowledge of the following
bulk properties of the produced oil-water mixture:
• relative quantities of oil and water

• density
• rheological properties
• Wax-Drop-Out-Point
• droplet size distributions
The significance of these properties is discussed below in some detail, while method to measure them will
be discussed in Chapter 3.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 36

2.2.4.1 Relative quantities of oil and water
Water can be dispersed in oil as either 'free' or emulsified water. 'Free' water is a coarse dispersion
which will settle out in a short time, without requiring destabilisation by the addition of chemicals.
Emulsified water, on the other hand, is intimately dispersed as fine droplets (usually smaller than 100 µm
) in the oil and requires prolonged settling for phase separation
The droplet are usually stabilised by surfactants in the surrounding film, which must be weakened or
destroyed by chemical treatment before separation can take place.
Oil may dispersed in (separated) water either as 'free' oil which separates in a short time by 'creaming' to
the surface, or as an emulsion which requires destabilisation before separation can take place.
Oil and water are mutually soluble to some extent. While the amount of water dissolved in oil is of no
practical significance, the amount of oil dissolved in water can be relevant for water disposal. The total
oil content of water (expressed as ppm) is, therefore, the sum of dispersal and dissolved oil (see also
Chapter 4 ).
2.2.4.2 Density
The density of a fluid is temperature dependent. In the case of water and oil mixture it is found that the
density difference between the two liquids also varies with temperature. A larger density difference will
promote gravity separation. It should be realised, however, that some crudes, particularly waxy ones, may
require a minimum temperature for dehydration to take place.
For a more detailed discussion on the effect of temperature on the separation of oil-water mixtures, see
Section 2.5.2.
2.2.4.3 Rheological properties

Knowledge of the rheological or flow properties of a produced fluid is required for the design of gathering
and dehydration facilities. In additional the flow properties of the continuous phase of an emulsion are
important parameters of its settling behaviour.
'Simple' liquids such as water, alcohol or light mineral oil offer resistance to flow due to friction between
the molecules. The relationship between the applied stress (shear stress) and the resulting flow (shear
rate) is linear. The ratio between the two, the viscosity, is a constant, i.e. independent of the shear rate.
This type of flow is called Newtonian flow. Most crudes are Newtonian liquids.
Heterogeneous system such as suspensions and emulsions, however, display a more complex,
nonlinear flow behaviour. Here resistance to flow is not only caused by friction between the molecules of
the continuous phase but also by the quantity, size and shape of the droplets of the dispersed phase
and by electrical or mass-attraction forces between (solid or liquid) particles in the fluid. These liquids do
not show a constant viscosity with increasing shear rate and they are classified as non-Newtonian
liquids.
More specifically the flow properties of emulsions are affected by the following factors:
• the viscosities of oil and water

• relative quantities of oil and water
• particle size distribution of the dispersed phase
• interaction between droplets
• nature of solids (e.g. wax) and solids content
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 37

• size distribution of the solids
• interaction between solid particles
In addition the shear history of the fluid may have an effect on flow properties when continuous shearing
may reduce flow resistance (thixotropic flow). In Fig. 2.6 the basic characteristics of Newtonian and non-
Newtonian liquids are shown. An example of a liquid with Bingham plastic behaviour is a waxy crude oil
below its pour point.
Fig. 2.6 – Basic characteristics of Newtonian and non-Newtonian liquids.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 38

Emulsions may exhibit pseudoplastic flow, i.e. the viscosity decreases with increasing shear rate, or
plastic flow, i.e. the shear stress must exceed a threshold value, the yield point, for flow to start (Fig.2.6.).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 39

Fig. 2.7. – Kinematic viscosity vs. temperature, and other properties, for a wide range of traditional crude oils.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 40

Dynamic and kinematic viscosities are distinguished and interrelated as follows:-
η=ν●ρ
where: η = dynamic viscosity, Pa.s = 10³ cP = 10³ mPa.s

6 6
ν = kinematic viscosity, m²/s = 10 cSt = 10 mm²/s
-3
ρ = fluid density kg/m³ =10 g/cm³
Figure 2.7 shows, for illustrative purposes, the kinematic viscosity versus temperature for a wide range of
crude oil listed with their basic properties.
In several cases it has been attempted to predict the viscosity of produced liquids based on
measurements with artificially prepared emulsions This can lead to over-design of pumps and pipelines
and is therefore not recommended unless the shear rate and shear history of the actual emulsion is
known. Since this is hardly ever the case in a new field development a better approach is to rely on local
field experience to design on the basis of the more viscous phase (the oil).
Temperature has a profound effect on flow properties of oil/water mixtures and on settling behaviour of
emulsions, due to reduction in viscosity of oil and water with increasing temperature. Dispersions in low
viscosity fluids separate faster than those in more viscous fluids (Stokes' Law, see Section 2.5.1.)
indicating that heating may be required for effective phase separation.
The effect of increased temperature on settling behaviour of emulsions is discussed in more detail in
Section 2.5.2.
2.2.4.4 Wax Drop-Out Point (cloud point)

Wax crystals, adsorbed at the droplet interfaces may increase the stability of an emulsion significantly.
Waxy crudes should therefore be dehydration above the temperature at which solids wax starts to
precipitate, the so-called Wax-Drop-Out-Point.
2.2.4.5 Droplet size distribution

In an oil field emulsion, water is dispersed throughout the form of spherical droplets, varying size from
less than 10 µm to several hundreds of µm. The droplet size distribution of a typical stable emulsion is
shown in Figure 2.8.
As the settling velocity of a water droplet in the continuous (oil) phase is proportional to the square of the
droplet diameter (Section 2.5.1.) droplet size distribution is related to emulsion separation efficiency. The
importance of droplet size is apparent when it is realised that, to promote emulsions breaking, the smaller
droplet must collide with other small droplet to form larger droplets which then settle more rapidly. The
number of droplet collisions required is enormous. For example, about 125,00 droplet of 5 µm radius must
collide and coalescence to form one droplet of 250 µm radius.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 41

Fig. 2.8 –Continuous droplet size distribution curve.
2.3 Destabilisation of emulsions
To break an emulsion and promote efficient separation of the oil and water phases, the following
conditions must be fulfilled:
1) Droplet must collide.
2) The emulsifying agent must be deactivated or delocalised so that the droplets, when they
collide, coalescence. In order to achieve this, the de-emulsifier must have first been
transported to the interface (mixing).
3) The water droplets must have a different density than the oil so that gravity separation can be
achieved.
The processes are enhanced by higher temperatures.
Emulsions are destabilised by treatment with emulsion breakers. These are surface active agents which
diffuse through the continuous phase of the emulsion to the oil-water interface where they deactivate the
emulsifying compounds. The stabilised films around the dispersed phase droplets are thus weakened and
colliding droplet are able to merge into larger ones. An emulsion breaker also removes skin strengthening
solids from the interface by dispersing them into one of the separate liquids.
Emulsions breakers for water-in-oil emulsions are usually referred to as demulsifiers, while breakers for
oil-in-water emulsions are known as deoilers. The correct application of the chemicals is a key factor in
emulsion breaking processes; without destabilisation of the emulsion the subsequent steps of
coalescence and gravity separation cannot usually take place. In Fig. 2.9 photomicrograph of two
samples of the same emulsion are shown, illustrating the effect of the additional of a demulsifer on
emulsion stability.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 42

Fig. 2.9 – Photomicrograph (x 80) of two samples of the same emulsion, maintained at a temperature of
79 °C, with no chemical treatment (upper row), and with 200 parts per million of an emulsion
breaking chemical (lower row).
2.3.1 Chemical nature of emulsion breakers

Demulsifiers are surface active agents capable of easily migrating through the oil phase to the interface
and changing its character from oleophilic to hydrophilic. The basic theory is that an emulsifying agent
should be added which would normally produced an oil in water emulsion. By attempting to reverse
phases the intermediate condition of a destabilised water drop is obtained.
Demulsifiers are available in anionic, cationic or non-ionic form. Anionic demulsifiers are typically oil and
alcohols, organic amine-fatty acid soaps and sulphonated aliphatic and aromatic compounds whose
water soluble group is negatively charged. Cationic demulsifers are typically quaternary ammonium salts
whose water soluble group is positively charged. Non-ionic demulsifiers are organic molecules which do
not ionise and therefore remain unchanged. The majority of the non-ionic demulsifiers are esters
containing water soluble groups which are polymers of either ethylene and/or polypropylene oxide.
Because they are more active the majority of demulsifiers are used in the oil field are of the non-ionic
type.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 43

To facilitate the diffusion of emulsion breakers to the oil/water interface, oil soluble or oil dispersible
compounds are preferred for the treatment of water-in-oil emulsions, while water dispersible breakers are
preferably used for the treatment of oil-in-water emulsions.
Emulsions breakers are usually supplied as a 25-50% solution of the active material in alcoholic or
aromatic solvents. To prevent separating during storage, the solvent(s) should be carefully selected to
form a true solution with the active component(s).
2.3.2 Selection of emulsion breakers

Because of the large number of variables in the system and emulsion breakers for a particular emulsion
requiring treatment, laboratory tests are required to select from a large number of available chemicals to
determine the most effective one(s) for a given emulsion. This should also include test on interference of
demulsifier with other production chemicals (for example corrosion inhibitors may interfere with
demulsifiers to give emulsion problems). When making such a selection due consideration should also be
given to the quality of the separated water.
To obtain reliable conclusions it is required that representative emulsion samples be used and that the
test temperature be adjusted to that expected to prevail in the field. Consequently, the most reliable
results are obtained from on-site testing with fresh emulsion samples. The method used for the on-site
screening of demulsifiers is the bottle test (see Section 3.4.2.3.)
When samples of produced emulsions are not available, e.g. during the appraisal stage of a new
discovery, it is not recommended to resort to the preparation of artificial emulsions for demulsifier
screening tests. A better approach would be to rely on local field experience or to design on the basis of
general design criteria for that type of gravity crude. In this respect it should be mentioned that the
selection and dosage of emulsion breakers is not critical in the early stages of field development and
when actual emulsions do occur, further on-site testing can be carried out to optimise/change the
selection and dosage of demulsifiers, as derived from laboratory testing.
2.3.3 Dosage rate of emulsion breakers

For light crude oils, 10-20 ppm (w.r.t. dry crude) of demulsifier is typically required, while for heavy crudes
dosages of up to 100 ppm or more are sometimes needed. Deoiler dosages are lower and are typically
some 5 ppm. The required dosage is a.o.* dependent on the treatment temperature (see Section 2.3.6.).
In cases where wet crude passes through emulsion generating regulators in the flow/pump system,
additional injection of demulsifier may be required.
Testing of a demulsifer should include test on overtreatment: a demulsifier which shows promising results
at a low dosage rate may become less effective at higher treatment ratios and sometimes separated oil
and water are re-emulsified upon agitation. Whilst this is an undesirable feature the potential operational
and economic benefit may warrant its further consideration.
2.3.4 Fast/slow acting demulsifiers

Some demulsifiers are able to effect an oil/water separation in a time span of a few minutes at a certain
temperature, while others require a much longer period (in the order of hours) to be fully effective.
Emulsions treated with fast acting demulsifiers, however, generally have a higher residual water-in-oil
content compared to slow acting demulsifiers and the oil content of the separated water may be too high
for disposal without further treatment.
Fast acting demulsifiers have an application in particular offshore, where available settling times are
limited due to apace/weight restrictions and where line capacities are at a premium for crude
transportation, or where line capacities are insufficient to transport all the water to a central treatment
plant for separation and disposal. Slower acting chemicals which produced dryer crudes and cleaner
water may be preferred in cases where sufficient settling times/capacity exist (mostly onshore).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 44

2.3.5 Injection points of emulsion breakers
Emulsion breakers should always be injected at a point where sufficient turbulence ensures quick and
even distribution of the chemical through the production stream. The breaker should be injected as far
upstream of the point of emulsification as practically feasible since emulsion stability will be reduced and
emulsification may even be prevented. Injection downhole would be ideal but is rarely applied because an
impractically large number of injection points would be required to treat the entire stream. Generally
demulsifiers are injected at flow stations or into manifolds where temperature and mixing conditions are
still reasonably favourable.
Deoiling chemicals are added to the dehydration water downstream of the bulk oil and water separation
stage, if so required. In most cases, however, a suitable demulsifier can be selected which yields a
good/acceptable water quality from a dehydration process such that addition of a deoiler is not required,
and the oil content of the produced water can be sufficiently reduced by coalescence and gravity
separation only.
2.3.6 Temperature effects

Elevated temperatures enhance the destabilising action of emulsion breakers. However, demulsifiers
should remain stable at the highest process temperature encountered. The minimum temperature at
which a particular emulsion breaker is still effective can be established by bottle testing (Section 3.4.2.3.).
To avoid process upset, it is vital that the breakers selected for a particular operation still perform
sufficiently at the lowest encountered operating temperature. In some areas it is necessary to adjust the
injection rates to seasonal temperature fluctuations.
2.4 Coalescence
2.4.1 General
Coalescence is the process of the merging of small droplet into larger ones. When two small droplets
come into contact with each other, the interfacial film must be ruptured for coalescence to take place. The
resistance to occur, otherwise coalescence cannot be achieved. Therefore an emulsion needs to have
been destabilised prior to coalescence, whereby the interfacial films surrounding the droplets have been
ruptured or weakened sufficiently.
The process of coalescence may occur at any point in the production system. Coalescence is promoted
by subjecting the destabilised oil/water mixture to a certain level of agitation/turbulence, which enhances
the probability of droplet-droplet collisions. The degree of coalescence is, however, strongly dependent
on the level of agitation and turbulence (mixing energy) that exists in a particular part of the system (see
Section 2.4.2.).
The probability for droplet-droplet collisions (and thus coalescence) is increased by:
• The creation of coalescence zones in continuous oil/water separation vessels.

• Control of the energy level and residence time of an emulsion flowing through a pipeline system
(pipeline coalescence)
• Exposure of an emulsion to an electrical field (electrostatic coalescence)
• Passage of an emulsion through beds of fibrous or granular material (coalescence media).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 45

2.4.2 Mixing energy and coalescence.
2.4.2.1 Droplet sizes and mixing energy
The droplets contained in a destabilised emulsion are subject to continuous dispersion and coalescence.
A vibrating droplet will become unstable when its kinetic energy is sufficient to make up for the difference
in surface energy between a single droplet and the two smaller droplets formed from it. At the same time
that this process is occurring, the motion of the smaller droplets is causing coalescence to take place.
Therefore, it should be input per unit mass and time at which the rate of coalescence equals the rate of
dispersion.
Various studies have been done both experimentally and theoretically on this topic. A relationship
between the maximum stable droplet size in a destabilised emulsion and mixing intensity, which has
proved useful in analysing oil/water separation facilities, was developed by Hinze, of the form:
0.725 10 (2.1)
where:
dmax = maximum stable droplet size (m m)
ε = mixing intensity equivalent to the work done on the fluid per unit mass per unit
time ( cm²/s³, erg/g.s, 10-4 Watt/kg)
σ = surface tension (dyne/cm, mN/m)
ρc = density of the continuous phase (g/cm³)
Above relationship is shown graphically in Fig. 2.10 for the range of values expected to occur in a crude
handling and dehydration system.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 46

Fig. 2.10 – Mixing intensity and maximum stable droplet size
The mixing intensity shown in Fig. 2.10 ranges from 10 cm²/s³, which occurs during the filling of settling
tanks, up to 109 m²/s³, a mixing intensity which may occur (or higher) when an emulsion passes through a
pressure control valve. Fig. 2.10 indicates that the maximum stable droplet size may then vary from
10,000 mm at low mixing intensities, down to 1 mm at very high mixing intensities. The average droplet
size of unstable dispersions will of course be smaller than the indicated maximum droplet size.
2.4.2.2 Calculation of mixing energy

The mixing intensity, which is defined as the work done on the fluid per unit mass and per unit time can
be calculate for any part of the flow system by the relation:
∆p
ε (2.2)
where: ∆p = pressure drop over a certain part of the system
t = retention time of the fluid in that part of the system
ρ = density of the fluid.

For field applications it has, in the past, been considered more practical to use as a yardstick the work
done on the fluid per unit volume per unit time, expressed in psi/hour and denoted by E, taking the form:
∆p
E (2.3)
T
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 47

where:
∆p = pressure drop (psi)
T = retention time (hours)
To convert ε (in erg/g.s = cm²/s³) into E (in psi/hr) multiply by ρ / 19.16.
Equation for mixing intensity parameters e and E for pipeflow are summarised in Table 2.1 for both
laminar and turbulent flow. The dimensionless Reynolds number, Re, is defined as:
inertial forces v vd
Re
viscous forces v/d
(v = average flow velocity, m/s).
It is mentioned that the equations shown for laminar flow can be derived directly from equation (2.2) by
substitution of ∆p from the Poiseuille pipe-flow equation.
Table 2.1: Mixing intensity equations for pipe flow
Type of flow ε(SI unit) E (field units)
Laminar 51.2 10 26.72ηQ

/ E psi/hr
(Re < 1500) d D
Turbulent
(Re > 3000) ∆P
∆p E
T
t
3.2 10 q 0.493 10 psi/hr

/
d
1) The friction factor f can be estimated from the Figure 2.11.
The symbol and units used in the mixing intensity equations are:
In SI units In field units

q = flow rate, m³/s Q = flow rate, bbl/d
∆p = pressure drop, Pa ∆P = pressure drop, psi
t = residence time, s T = residence time, hr
η = dynamic viscosity, Pa.s η = dynamic viscosity, poise (g/cm.s)
ρ = fluid density, kg/m³ ρ = fluid density, g/cm³
d = pipe diameter, m D = pipe diameter, in.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 48

Fig. 2.11 – Estimation of friction factor. Values derived from this diagram are similar to those obtained
from the well-known ‘Moody diagram’.
It is emphasised that the relation (2.1) between mixing intensity and maximum droplet size is only valid for
liquid-liquid systems. When free gas is present, or when gas break-out may occur with a drop in pressure,
the resulting droplet sizes cannot be estimated from eqn. (2.1) since the expanding gas contributes to the
energy of mixing in an unknown manner. Mixing intensities and droplet sizes can therefore only be
calculated for parts of a production system where complete degassing of the production stream has
occurred.
From eqns. (2.1) and (2.3) the following qualitative conclusions can be drawn:
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 49

i) The greater the pressure drop, and thus the shear forces that the fluid experiences in a given
period of the time, while flowing through parts of the treatment facilities, the smaller the droplet
diameter will be. That is, large pressure drops which occur over small distances through chokes,
control valves, etc. result in emulsions that are harder to treat.
ii) The lower the surface tension, the lower the maximum droplet size.
To simulate mixing intensities, encountered in the field in laboratory testing, KSEPL develop the dynamic
coalescer, which is similar in construction to a simple rotational viscometer (e.g. a Fann viscometer). This
device is discussed in more detail in Section 3.5.7. Laboratory testing of dehydration and deoiling
behaviour of emulsions as a function of mixing intensity showed that optimum dehydration results could
be obtained at a mixing intensity of about 5500 cm²/s³ - range 2200 – 11000 cm²/s³ (250 psi/hour, range
100 – 500 psi/hour). Optimum deoiling performance was determined for mixing intensities of ε = 11,000 –
110,000 cm²/s³ (E = 500 – 5000 psi/hour).
Some typical mixing intensities, retention times and maximum stable droplet sizes expected to occur in
parts of crude handling system, are shown in Table 2.2. Calculated values assume no free gas present.
In reality free gas is likely to be present, thus increasing the calculated mixing intensities by an unknown
amount, also further decreasing droplet sizes.
Table 2.2 : Example of mixing intensity and droplet sizes.
2.4.2.3 Dispersion and coalescence

The dispersion process, i.e. the process in which a droplet breaks up into smaller droplets under certain
conditions of mixing energy, is theoretically not instantaneous. However, it appears from field experience
to take place very rapidly. For design purposes it can be assumed that whenever large pressure drops
occur, all droplets larger than dmax as given by eqn. (2.1), will disperse instantaneously.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 50

Coalescence of droplets, whether it occurs in piping systems or in large vessels, e.g. free water
knockouts and settling tanks, is a more time consuming process than dispersion. The time required to
obtain a desired droplet size, can be approximated by:
d
t (2.4)
K
where: d = final droplet size

fv = volume fraction of the dispersed phase
Ks = empirical parameter for the particular system
The following qualitative conclusions for coalescence in a gravity settler can be drawn from the above
relationship:
i) A doubling of the residence time will increase the maximum droplet size by only 19%.
ii) The more dilute the dispersed phase, the greater the residence time needed to yield a given
droplet size. This is, coalescence occurs, more rapidly in high water content systems.
2.4.3 Coalescence zones

In continuous gravity separation processes an oil/water interface is maintained in the vessel. By
introducing the destabilised 'feed' emulsion just below this boundary, a high water content emulsion layer
builds up between the water and the oil. This zone is called the 'dispersion band', 'working layer' or
'coalescence zone' because the gentle movement caused by the rising oil promotes active coalescence.
From various studies on coalescence in liquid-liquid dispersions it has been demonstrated that there are
two zones in a dispersion band: a turbulent zones where the hold-up is about 50% in which the droplets
are free to move relative to each other, and a calmer zone close to the disengaging interface in which the
droplets are closely packed. Coalescence in the former zone, which is called sedimenting zone, takes
place after impact of the drops which grow in size until they are large enough to sediment into the second
zone (the close-packed zone) where gravitational forces are transmitted from drop to drop, thus
influencing the coalescence time at the disengaging interface.
In the closed-packed zone the hold-up is high and may approach unity. In Fig.2.12 the structure of liquid-
liquid dispersions is shown schematically for a vertical separator.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 51

Fig. 2.12. – Structure of liquid / liquid dispersions
The quantitative description of the dispersion band thickness versus throughput, as a function of
coalescence parameters, would form the basis for separator design and sizing rules. However, such a
relationship has been found difficult to predict, and considered impossible to do so from physical
properties and operating data alone. Separator design and sizing rules have experience, taking
performance of existing facilities duly into account. Currently research is being conducted at KSEPL to
establish separator design rules based on the behaviour of liquid/liquid dispersions (see also Section 3.6)
2.4.4 Pipeline coalescence

In a destabilised emulsion flowing through a pipeline, droplet coalescence and break-up will occur
simultaneously which eventually leads to an equilibrium droplet size distribution, the characteristics of
which depend on the level of mixing energy imparted on the flowing oil/water mixture. Equations (2.1) and
(2.3) can be used to predict maximum droplet sizes that may result from coalescence during fluid flow
through a pipeline. However care must be taken to ensure that sufficient residence time exists in this
relatively 'quiet' area to allow the coalescence process to reach equilibrium, and the length and diameter
of the coalesce pipe should be adapted to arrive at optimum mixing conditions for the emulsion
concerned.
The required pipe diameter can be calculated from the mixing intensity equations given in Table 2.1, and
the pipe length from:
T Q
L km
76.45D
For estimation of friction factor see Fig. 2.11, using the quantities and units shown below:
fLQ
Pressure loss h 1.05
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 52

Reynolds number Re 580
Dν
64
Laminar flow when Re < 1500; friction factor f
Re
Turbulent flow when Re > 3000; friction factor f = f1 + ∆f (Fig 2.11)
h = pressure loss, m liquid
L = length of pipe, km
Q = throughput, m³/d
D = internal pipe diameter, in.

ν = kinematic viscosity, mm²/s (cSt)
Coalescer pipes have been used in the field to achieve the following objectives:
– To provide time and favourable mixing conditions for coalescence
– To provide a pressure drop, ∆p, in a gradual form (see Section 2.4.5)
In Table 2.3 two examples of typical mixing intensities, retention times and maximum droplet sizes are
shown for pipelines.
Table 2.3 – Examples of pipeline coalescence parameters.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 53

In designing a pipeline stem, it is recommended that dimensions, pressure drops and flow rates be
verified to achieve mixing intensities which do promote coalescence and avoid re-emulsification due to
turbulence. Optimum mixing conditions can be derived from laboratory tests on representative samples of
emulsion. If such tests are not available, tentatively a pipe length of 1 km and a mixing intensity of around
5500 cm²/s³ (250 psi/hour) are recommended. In view of the number of unknown critical parameters in
designing coalescer pipes, a pilot scheme might be useful to ensure a successful application.
2.4.5 Pressure reduction pipeline

The use of pressure reduction pipes is a related application to coalescer pipelines. The purpose of such a
facility is to avoid emulsification as a result of high shear forces in for instance pressure control valves. A
successful application is found in PDO Oman, where originally two pressure control valves in series were
installed at the coastal terminal to provide back pressure of some 4100 kPa (600 psi) to a crude oil
stream crossing a mountain range with a high point elevation of some 680 m. Severe re-emulsification of
the crude stream dehydration in the interior, took place causing prolonged settling times in the terminal
tanks to achieve export quality crude for which a maximum BS & W of 0.05% v was required on account
of the very high water salinity (150-180 kg/m³). The problem was partly solved by replacing one control
valve by three parallel coalescer pipes of 8 and 10 inch diameter and 1 km length, accounting for a back
pressure of some 2050 kPa (300 psi) at 80,000 m³/d (500,000 bbls/day ) throughput.
2.4.6 Electrostatic coalescence

Electrostatic coalescence is a liquid-liquid phase separation process that employs an intense electrical
field to enforce collisions between small droplets. The resulting larger drops are readily separated by
gravity. This technology has been successfully applied to crude desalting processes for more than 50
years and it is available from several manufactures.
Electrostatic coalescence can be applied to any dispersion with an insulting continuous phase and a
difference in dielectric constant of continuous and dispersed phase. When these types of dispersion are
subjected to an electrical field, the dispersed phase can experience several types of electrical force.
Droplets that acquire a net charge will start to move in the direction of the field: furthermore dipoles can
be induced (charge separation in a neutral droplet) leading to droplets being attracted towards each
other. The total result is accelerated movement and increased frequency of collisions. The electrical
forces attainable are two to three orders of magnitude higher than gravitational forces.
There have been some developments in the technology of electrostatic coalescence. However, this has
not yet led to a large scale application to other liquid-liquid phase separation operations such as
dehydration of production fluids. For this application the electrostatic coalescer should be capable of
handling larger ranges of water concentration in an even more compact separator.
KSLA are currently developing a multistage electrostatic coalescer for dehydration of production fluids
containing water concentrations from 50 ppm to 40%. The multistage coalescence contains several
electrode-separator stages with intermediate water removal and increasing electrical fields. This allows
separation over a wide range of water concentrations in one vessel (see Section 5.4.3.3).
2.4.7 Coalescence media

Coalescence is promoted by the passage of an emulsion through a bed made up of fibrous or granular
material which is preferentially wetted by the dispersed phase. When installed in a stream of destabilised
emulsion, the coalescing medium will be wetted by colliding droplets, spreading over the fiber surface.
Once the surface is saturated, excess dispersed fluid will be shed into the stream as coarser droplets,
which facilitates subsequent gravity settling.
Coalescer beds are sensitive to blockage by solids in the process stream. They are therefore rarely used
in crude oil dehydration, but they have some promise for the deoiling of effluent waters (see Section
6.5.2).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 54

2.5 Gravity separation
2.5.1 Stokes' Law

Oil and water can be separated by virtue of their different densities which cause the droplets of the
dispersed phase to separate from the continuous phase (oil droplets rising, water droplets falling). The
basic equations governing this motion are the buoyant force:
This equation is usually referred to as Stokes' Law.
From the above simple equation it is apparent that the separation velocity is affected by the following
factors:
• Acceleration due to gravity forces.
Separation is usually effected under conditions of normal gravity. In some latest developments the
separation velocity has been significantly increased by increasing the gravitational acceleration forces by
the use of centrifuges of hydrocyclones.
• Droplet size.
As the terminal velocity is proportional to the square of the droplet diameter, it is desirable to have
relatively large dispersed phase droplets, which can be achieved by minimising the degree of turbulence
and promoting coalescence.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 55

• Density different and viscosity of the continuous phase.
The term (ρw -ρο) / η or ∆ρ / η is called Stokes’ parameter. It is apparent that a low density difference and
a high viscosity slow down oil water gravity separation. Heavy viscous crudes are therefore much more
difficult to dehydrate than light crudes. Heat reduces the viscosity of the continuous phase (particularly oil)
thus promoting gravity settling, but also effects the density difference between oil and water. This is
discussed in more detail in Section 2.5.2.
In Fig. 2.13 settling velocities of a 200 µm water droplet are shown for various crude gravities, as a
function of temperature.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 56

Fig. 2.13 – Settling velocity-temperature relationship, using Stokes’ Law, for three different API gravity
crude oils (based on water drop size of 200 microns) (source: Heavy Oil Dehydration, R.S.
Jackson et. Al).
2.5.2 Effect of heat on dehydration behaviour

Heat always reduces the viscosity of the oil (continuous) phase of a water-in-oil emulsion. Low oil
viscosity enables water droplets to move faster, thereby promoting droplet collisions and faster water
droplet settling. There is a small percentage of produced emulsions where the emulsifying agent is
relatively weak, and heat alone causes emulsion breaking solely by lowering oil viscosity and increasing
the speed at which water droplet can move.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 57

However, it is not always true that the hotter the emulsion, the better the emulsion breaking, particularly
when low API gravity crudes are considered. In order to determine how any water-in-oil emulsion will
behave under varying condition of temperature, it is necessary to measure water density, oil density and
oil viscosity at a series of different temperatures. This provides what has come to be known as an
emulsion 'fingerprint', and these data, when used with Stokes' Law, can help determine proper operating
temperatures in cases where settling is the prime means of treating the emulsion.
Fig.2.14 shows 'fingerprints' of the three principal types of emulsion, with the following differences:
• Type I : oil and water density curves are about parallel as temperature increases
• Type II : oil and water density curves converge slightly as temperature increases
• Type III: oil and water density curves cross at a point within the range of treating temperatures.
Value of ρw, ρo and ηo can be taken from the 'fingerprint' at a series of temperatures within the operating
of emulsion treating equipment. These data, combined with an arbitrary fixed value of water droplet
radius, can be used in Stokes' Law to generate pattern of water droplet settling as a function of treater
temperature. Such data are shown on Fig.2.15. The upper figure shows a Type I oil-water system, in
which an increase in temperature always results in an increased droplet velocity. The centre figure shows
a Type II system in which a maximum droplet velocity is reached, and heating beyond this point creates a
disadvantage. The lower figure shows a Type III system, in which a maximum droplet velocity is reached,
after which further heating causes a zero droplet velocity (no separation of oil and water possible),
followed by a reverse of water droplet direction. At temperatures above the zero velocity point the system
inverts, and water goes to the stock tank, while oil goes into the water disposal system. This has
happened many times in heavy oil fields.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 58

Fig. 2.14 – Plots of water density (ρ w) oil density (ρo), and oil viscosity (ηo) at various temperature for
Type I emulsions (upper), Type II emulsions (centre), and Type III emulsions (lower).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 59

Fig. 2.15 – Water droplet vertical velocity at different tempereatures for Type I emulsions (upper), Type II
emulsions (centre), and Type III emulsions (lower).

2.6 Additional oily water treatment processes
In addition to the various processes for oil/water separation, discussed in the previous sections, there are
a number of processes available/in use which are being applied for the treatment of oily water containing
very fine oil droplets and/or solids/. In these processes use is made of methods to speed up oil removal
from dehydration water since a simple gravity process alone would be ineffective and too time
consuming.
The following processes for treatment of oily water will be briefly discussed:
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 60

• coagulation or flocculation
• flotation
• filtration
2.6.1 Coagulation or flocculation

Coagulation is the process where suspended, finely divided particles are combined by chemical means.
Flocculation is the further increase in size and volume of the resulting precipitate to form larger and more
readily settleable masses. The water is treated with small amounts (10-50 ppm) of aluminium or ferric
salts (coagulant), the action of which is threefold :
– To form an iron hydroxide ‘floc’ which traps suspended oil and solids, e.g:
Fe SO 6 OH 2Fe OH 3 SO
– To neutralise the electrostatic forces which cause individual suspended droplets to repel each
other, thus allowing coalescence.
– To precipitate some dissolved substances such as sulphur and some heavy od transition metals,
e.g:
2 Fe 3 2 FeS S
The resulting floc is subsequently removed from the water by either sedimentation or gas flotation.
The process is sensitive to the pH which should be between 5 and 9 in fresh water. In saline waters the
pH range for optimum floc formation is much smaller and adjustment by treatment with calcium hydroxide
may be necessary.
The quality of the floc can be improved considerably by the addition of polyelectrolytes. These are long
chain, water dispersible polymers with excess electric charges along their entire length. Due to these
characteristics they can effectively join with a large number of particles and droplets of the opposite
charge to form a coarse floc. The type of polyelectrolyte to be used depends on the characteristics of the
water and the suspended solids, and must be decided upon on the basis of laboratory tests.
Polyelectrolytes are used in dosages of 1-10 ppm.
This process is not suitable for offshore applications since it generates chemical waste.
2.6.2 Flotation
Flotation is a process which consists of generating fine gas bubbles in oily water and contracting these
bubbles with the oil droplets in the water. After the droplet has attached itself to the bubble, the two will
travel to the surface more rapidly than the droplet would on its own. As a result, the rate of oil removal is
increased considerably.
The flotation process consists of the following four basic steps:
• Bubble generation in oily water.

• Contact between a gas bubble and an oil drop suspended in the water.
• Attachment of the oil droplet to the gas bubble.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 61

• Rising of the gas-oil combination to the water surface where the oil can be removed by skimming.
Each of these steps is briefly discussed below.
i) Bubble generation in oily water
In commercially available equipment two methods of gas bubble generation are being used:
• Bubbles can be generated by pressure reduction of water which has previously been saturated
with H2S-free gas at an elevated pressure (dissolved gas flotation). The quantity of gas that can
be contained by the water is limited by the solubility of gas in water (typically 0.4-0.9 m³/m³ (0.2-
0.5 scf/bbl) for pressures of 400-600 kPa).
• Mechanical mixing of gas and water (dispersed or induced gas flotation). This process is not
limited by the solubility of gas in water and is able to intermix 4-9 m³ of gas with one m³ of water.
In this process longer residence times are obtained as compared to dissolved gas flotation.
Bubbles can also be generated by sparging, but this process is not (yet) being applied in commercial
flotation equipment.
The method of bubble generation is important since it determines the bubble size gas concentration for a
given feed. These two parameters influence the collision efficiency and thus the rate of oil recovery.
ii) Bubble-droplet contact
Gas bubbles and oil droplets must come into contact for flotation to occur. Due to their lower density than
water, gas bubbles and oil droplets will both travel to the water surface, gas bubbles rising more rapidly
than the oil droplets. This leads to the possibility of bubble-droplet contact. On the other hand, a fluid flow
pattern is established around a moving gas bubble that tends to deflect oil drops. This reduces the
possibility of contact.
Theoretical studies have indicated that contact efficiency (i.e. the fraction of oil droplets in the path swept
by the bubble that actually contacts the bubble)is highest when the gas bubbles are small and the oil
droplets large. Oil droplet sizes can be increased by the use of deoilers (coalescence) and
polyelectrolytes. The gas bubbles in commercial flotation cells range in size from 300-1000 µm. They are
generally smaller in saline water (>36 g/l NaCl equivalent). The size of bubbles can be reduced by the
use of foamers.
iii) Bubble-droplet attachment
Successful flotation requires that the oil droplet attaches itself to the gas bubble, and remain so until the
bubble reaches the surface of the flotation cell. This process is extremely complex as it involves
hydrodynamics and surface. Film drainage and rupturing processes are involved, similar to those related
to droplet-droplet coalescence (see Section 2.2.3). The use of foamers usually has a beneficial effect on
the attachment process.
2.6.3 Filtration
Various types of filtration processes are being used in E & P operation, primary for solids removal from
water prior to injection. Only in few cases is filtration being used treatment of oily water, the main
disadvantage being that even small amounts of oil in water can incapacitate ('blind') a filter fairly rapidly,
and only relatively low throughputs are achievable. The application of filters in deoiling systems should
therefore be limited to 'polishing' of relatively small amounts of produced water, when a high water quality
is required for reinjection purposes.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 62

In summary, the following filtration processes are available.
– Granular media filters, with the media bed consisting of typically sand, or combinations of
anthracite/garnet or anthracite/sand on a suitable support bed. It is claimed that downflow sand
filters can be used for removal of oil (up to about 200g/m³) from production water, but practical
experience has indicated that sand filters are less suitable for this duty, particularly when heavy
or waxy crudes are involved. Backwashing procedures are often ineffective leading to frequent
replacement of the media. Backwashing with hot surfactant solution is suggested, however, this
presents a disposal problem for the resulting oil/water emulsion.
As a guide, for dual media (anthracite /garnet) filters, manufacturers claim that 100g/m³ oil in
water can be handled. However, a value of maximum 30g/m³ may be more realistic for relatively
trouble free operation, especially where heavy oils are involved.
Other media than conventional mineral particles can also be used for filtration. An example which
has been applied to oil field waters is the Hydromation deep bed filter (see Chapter 6) which uses
crushed black walnut shells. The media is water wetted and is therefore claimed to be particularly
suited for removing oil and solids from production water since entrained oil is easily removed from
the media. In a recent trial with produced water as feed the media. In a recent trial with produced
water as feed (BEB,Germany,1984) influent oil content of 50-70 g/m³ were reduced consistently
to 5 g/m³.
– Precoat filters have found extensive application in removing the final traces of suspended oil from
production water prior to softening and conversion into stream for thermal recovery projects. The
oil content in the feed to the filter must be less than 15 g/m³ and ideally less than 10 g/m³, since
these filters have a low tolerance for oil.
– Cross-flow membrane filters, the feasibility of which for removing dispersed oil and/or solids from
produced water, was investigated by KSEPL. Cross-flow filtration is characterised by a (turbulent)
flow parallel to the filter surface, with the permeate flux perpendicular through the membrane,
which should result in a reduced accumulation of particles on the filter surface. Filters tested were
capillary membrane filters, made of microporous polypropene. Experiments showed a rapid
decline of the permeate flux, however. In other test oil breakthrough was observed after a short
time of testing. In view of the low ratio between permeate and feed flow rates, a maximum
operating temperature of 60 °C and the low flux values of the operating level, it was concluded
that the potential of porous membranes for application within E & P is low at the moment.
– Cartridge filters are used for all type of source water, either as polishing filters downstream of
media filters, or in place of media filters, or in place of media filters Although no specific data for
oily water applications are available BSP observed (1983) in a filtration field trial with completion
fluids that PALL 10µm cellulose filters plugged rapidly in the presence of some oil/condense.
The 35 µm polypropylene filters subsequently employed were also adversely affected but
appeared to be more resistant to oil contamination. In principle cartridge filters should be
considered unsuitable for oily water application.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 63

3 SAMPLING AND TESTING FOR DEHYDRATION BEHAVIOUR
3.1 Introduction
Static settling tests for analysis of the separation behavior of a water-in-oil emulsion are required for a
variety of reasons, as mentioned below:
• The quick and comparative screening of various demulsifiers.

• Performance monitoring and/or trouble shooting of existing facilities.
• Establishing guidelines for design and/or operating practices of dehydration equipment of new
projects.
Dehydration test related to the first two objectives are usually carried out in the field either on-site (bottle
tests) or in the (field) laboratory, using fresh, actually produced emulsions. In all types of dehydration test,
representative emulsion or crude oil samples are required, for which a carefully designed sampling
programme needs to be defined. This is discussed in more detail in Section 3.2.
Laboratory dehydration tests are sometimes conducted to establish the following information:
• The minimum temperature required for dehydration of the crude oil.

• The time required for dehydration (provided an effective demulsifying chemical is added in
sufficient quantity).
• The final water content of the oil after dehydration.
• The quality (i.e. oil content and oil droplet size distribution) of the separated water.
Findings of such laboratory test resulting in a recommendation for a new demulsifer need to be
confirmed by a field trial.
The representatives of emulsion dehydration behaviour as observed in the laboratory in static settling
tests, for the behaviour of actual emulsions under field conditions, is the most critical aspect for the
interpretation of results of laboratory dehydration tests. Testing of dehydration behaviour in relating to
performance monitoring and/or trouble shooting can be done reliably (subject to correct sampling and
sample preservation) since these tests are usually done in a fields laboratory using actually produced
emulsions.
It has been attempted, in support of facilities design for new project, to carry out laboratory tests on
artificial emulsion. Results from such laboratory test are not, however, directly applicable in practice
since the condition under which emulsions occur in the field cannot be adequately simulated in the
laboratory. In order to obtain design parameters from laboratory dehydration tests, correlations are
required between behaviour of laboratory-made emulsions and that of corresponding emulsions actually
encountered in the field. Such correlation are currently not available. However, only in a few cases have
comparisons been made between laboratory and in-field behaviour of emulsions. Aspect of
representativeness of laboratory test results are discussed in more detail in Section 3.7.
Currently, a databank containing results from comparative studies on laboratory-made and in-field
emulsion characteristics does not exist, and more work on establishing correlations between laboratory
dehydration behaviour and of corresponding actual emulsions is required. In the absence of a practicable
translation of artificial emulsion behaviour to field behaviour, design parameters for dehydration
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 64

equipment have therefore had, until now, to rely and to be established on empirical (local) field
experience and on comparison with performance of facilities encountering are presented in Chapter 7.
Deoiling tests, i.e. the screening of the most effective deoiler chemical to break an oil-in-water emulsion,
are usually carried out in the field with actual o/w emulsions. Once a suitable deoiler has been identified,
field trials are required to confirm the findings of the test programme in actual production conditions.
Deoiling tests can also be carried out in the laboratory, using crude oil and artificial formation water. Apart
from investigating various types of deoiling chemicals for their effectiveness for various to overtreatment
and water systems, their cost, toxicity and sensitivity to overtreatment and demulsifiers (used in
dehydration), the solubility of the crude oil water can also be determined. This latter aspect is of
importance for the disposal of produced water, which has to meet certain criteria for maximum (total) oil in
water, as set by legislation. This matter is discussed in more detail in Chapter 4, together with
additionalaspects of deoiling.
3.2 Formulation of a sampling programme
Sampling of produced fluids:
• for troubleshooting purpose:

• when considering de-bottlenecking of existing facilities;
• during the planning stages of new facilities
is becoming more and more important. Indeed, the lack of appropriate sampling locations is seen as a
major shortcoming in the development of the minimum facilities concept for offshore installations.
Consequently the provision of adequate sampling facilities for performance monitoring cannot be
overstressed.
Dehydration tests, either carried out in the field or in the laboratory and/or analysis of actually produced
emulsions, require the formulation and planning of a carefully designed sampling programme and explicit
specification of its objectives.
A sampling programme in relation to performance monitoring or trouble shooting of existing production

facilities can be defined in a relatively simple and straightforward manner. Depending on availability and
suitability of sampling points, samples can be taken at various points in the system (e.g based on analysis
of the flow scheme for points of (re)emulsification due to pressure drops or turbulence) and subsequently
be analysed for their static oil/water separation behaviour and droplet size distribution.
The definition/formulation of a sampling programme for crude oil, water and/or emulsions in support of
new facilities design or to establish operating guidelines, requires a more careful planning and
specification of its objectives. While from a viewpoint of securing information a minimum programme for
sampling can be relatively quickly considered as justified and necessary, it is the anticipation of specific
potential problem areas which should determine the amount and type of samples to be taken.
The actual sampling requirements will strongly depend on the following aspects:
• Is it a completely new development or is it an additional project in an area with similar/comparable

developments and similar fluid characteristics?
• Is it an offshore or onshore development
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 65

• Production of light (more than 30° API) or heavy (less than 15° API) crude?
As to the first aspect mentioned above, when oil/water separation facilities are to be designed for a
development in an area with more fields already on production, with more or less similar production
conditions and with known facilities performance, a sampling and testing programme can be very limited,
or even be left out altogether (e.g. North Sea fields which produced mainly light oils).
The second aspect is obviously most critical for the definition of sampling requirements when it concerns
an offshore development. Here space and weight limitations are of great importance for the design of
facilities and modifications/additions to existing facilities are extremely costly, or they may not be possible
at all. Moreover, samples may only be available from a single early exploration well, which consequently
stresses the importance of correct sampling and storage of samples. In an onshore development
modifications/additions to facilities can be made easily, and sizing of facilities is of much less concern.
Moreover, when potential problem areas are suspected from initial testing, field trials can be carried out
much more conveniently. Therefore the formulation of a sampling programme for an onshore
development is much less critical than for an offshore project.
In general, the separation of water from light oil emulsions is much quicker and easier than from those
involving heavy oil (note: an exception to this is the light oil from the S.W. Ampa field, Brunei). Therefore
a sampling /testing programme can be rather simple for light crude oil, while a more extensive programme
is required with heavy crudes, where more problem areas potentially exist.
In summary therefore, the formulation of a sampling programme needs to take into account all of the
aspects mentioned above. The specification and objectives of a sampling programme should be clear and
explicit and be dictated by considerations of "need-to-know" rather than "nice-to-know".
3.3 Surface sampling of oil/water mixtures.
3.3.1 Sampling considerations

Laboratory testing required to obtain design parameters of facilities for new fields must often be
performed with well samples recovered during Repeat Formation Test (RFTs), drillstem tests or
production tests. Often these samples are relatively old and contaminated and results of any subsequent
testing are critically dependent on the way the sample was obtained, handled and stored.
As mentioned in Chapter 2, wax can affect the dehydration behaviour of emulsions considerably. In
orderto obtain a representative crude oil sample, sampling should take place from a point where the
temperature of the oil has not yet dropped below the Wax-Drop-Out-Point of the crude oil. Otherwise wax
precipitation may have taken place upstream of the sample location, resulting in an oil sample containing
too little wax or having lost its heavy (high-melting point) wax components. If a crude oil sample is taken
from a drum already in storage, the drum should be heated to a temperature above the crude's Wax-
Drop-Point and the contents be homogenised thoroughly prior to taking a sample.
When sampling crude oil and/or emulsions for dehydration tests, care should be taken that they are free
of any contaminants, either resulting from, for example, residues of mud cake/mud filtrate, workover
fluids, diesel oil, corrosion inhibitors, demulsifiers or either additives. When taking a sample from a newly-
drilled or worked-over well, sufficient clean up must be allowed before an emulsion sample is taken.
If oil and water are flowing in slug flow through the pipeline, the sample taken should be sufficiently large
to ensure that several of these slugs have been sampled. It is important to ensure that sufficient samples
are taken to allow a repeat analysis, if required.
It is an old axiom that the result of any test procedure can be no better than the sample on which it is
performed. Therefore detailed attention must be given to the method of sampling to ensure that a
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 66

representative sample is obtained. Account must be taken of the variability of the sampled fluids or
emulsion with respect to time, area, depth and rate of flow and samples should be obtained that meet the
requirements of the sampling programme. Furthermore, samples should be handled in such a way that
they do not deteriorate or became contaminated before they reach the laboratory (see Section 3.3.4).
For further general considerations and recommendations on sampling, reference is made to ASTM
D4057- Manual Sampling of Petroleum and Petroleum Products, and to ASTM D4177-Automatic
Sampling of Petroleum and Petroleum Products.
As a final comment, the need for adequate training of personnel taking any hydrocarbon samples is
stressed. It is essential that such personnel be fully familiar with the sample system requirements for the
specific sample being taken. Local procedures for taking samples should be strictly adhered to,
particularly when sampling crude oils, since considerable volumes of H 2S may evolve.
When sampling systems known to contain sour crudes then reference should be made to latest version
PTS 60.016.
3.3.2 Sampling points

Obtaining a representative sample of the contents of a line transporting a mixture of oil and water requires
great care unless a uniform emulsions has been formed. If a uniform emulsion has been formed, oil and
water flowing in a horizontal pipeline will separate to some degree, forming an oil/water profile. A sample
taken from a single point on the circumference of the pipeline will in general not be representative of the
average pipeline content. A method to overcome this problem is to follow the API recommendation of
sampling via a section of vertical pipeline from the centre of the flow, using a probe as shown in Figure
3.1.
Fig. 3.1 – API recommendation for sampling froma vertical flowline.
Recent research at KSEPL on watercut sampling from multiphase flowlines has resulted in guidelines for
representative sampling from horizontal flowlines. It appears that at sufficiently high mixture velocities (of
around 1 m/s or higher), samples taken at the centre of the flowline or at the three o'clock position on the
circumference, give the best results. Both a sample taken from the top and the bottom of the flowline, give
very poor results. From a limited number of test it was also concluded that much higher mixture velocities
are required for representative sampling from mixtures flowing in the so-called annular mist flow regime
than are required in the bubble or slug flow regime.
It should be mentioned that depending on the objectives of a sampling exercise, a sample representative
of the overall composition of the mixture may not be required, but rather a sample that is representative of
the in-situ properties of the mixture in a flowline. In such a case localised sampling with a retractable
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 67

probe at various heights in the flowline needs to be done. This is discussed in more detail in Section
3.3.3.
When the objective of a sampling exercise is to determine where in the flow process emulsions could be
formed, a fact finding survey can be performed. Such a survey should include a careful analysis of the
flow scheme by considering each unit in the transport process of the crude, from the producing zone to
the eventual emulsions treating plant where oil and water are separated. Any point in the crude handling
system which forms a restriction to flow and thus may create a significant pressure drop will cause
agitation of the oil and water and is a possible point of emulsion formation.
Note: In many cases there is a lack of sampling points in dehydration facilities to allow a proper survey to
be undertaken. It is therefore of great importance to review design drawings of new facilities with
special emphasis on the number of sampling points and their locations.
3.3.3 Sampling methods and equipment

In general, sampling of fluids can either be done under atmospheric conditions or under pressure.
Atmospheric sampling, e.g. into a calibrated glass cylinder, has the advantage that the oil/water
separation behaviour can be observed immediately after sampling. Atmospheric sampling of pressurised
streams will, however, cause re-emulsification or additional emulsification of the oil/water mixture by the
pressure drop across at the sample cock, resulting in a non-representative sample. Sometimes the
sampling line is cooled resulting in a much smoother sampling stream, thus reducing the degree of
additional emulsification.
Re-emulsification can be, and commonly is, avoided by keeping the entire sample under line pressure
during sampling. For this purpose steel pressure bottles with full bore valves at their either end are
suitable. Control of the sampling rate is effected by adjustment of a needle valve installed downstream of
the bottle. The bottle must be flushed at the sampling rate with at least twice its volume before being
closed and disconnected.
Flushing is not necessary when using sample bottle provided with free floating pistons, e.g. the "constant
pressure sampler" supplied by Welker Engineering. The Welker sampler is described in some detail in
Appendix 3.1.
Prior to sampling, the piston is forced against one end of the sampler by charging it with a liquid or an
inert gas. The sample is than admitted to the other end of the piston by withdrawing the charging liquid or
gas at a controlled rate. The piston of the Welker Engineering sampler is provided with an indicator rod as
a means of visual observation of the sampling rate.
The disadvantage of the above pressurised sampling methods is that the (important) initial period (10-15
min) of the separation process cannot be visually followed, bearing in mind that relief of pressure to
atmospheric and subsequent sample transfer into a transparent measuring cylinder often takes a
minimum time of 15 minutes.
To overcome the time lag between sampling and visual observation of the sample with the available steel
sampling bottles, a transparent pressure sampling bottle, with a working pressure and temperature of 50
bar and 60 °C respectively. The oil/water separation behaviour under static conditions can be followed
visually immediately after sampling under the prevailing line pressure. After the initial oil/water separation
(initial period of settling) has been reached (or if this does not take place at all), the sampler is
depressurised and the sample is transferred to an atmospheric vessel for further behaviour.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 68

When sampling "stable" emulsions, steel pressure bottle can be used. When observations of the initial
period of settling is required, sampling should preferably be carried out using a transparent pressure-
sampling bottle. In each case however, sampling must be done under iso-energetic conditions, by taking
care to ensure that the mixing energies in the sampling tube and main line are more or less equal, thus
avoiding changes in the droplet size distribution of any emulsions present (see point 2 below).
Prior to actual sampling from horizontal flowlines where an oil/water profile exists, samples should be
taken at different levels of the cross section of the line, using a retractable sampling probe (Fig. 3.2 ). This
allows the average behaviour of the pipeline (cross-sectional) contents to be described.
Fig. 3.2 – Possible sampler installation
The recommended procedure for sampling from a horizontal flowline, particularly when a transparent
pressure-sampling bottle is available is as follows:
1) Stream profile determination
Before actual sampling for on-line stability tests, establish the stream profile by isokinetic sampling at
various heights in the horizontal pipeline using the probe and the transparent bottle. Isokinetic (i.e.
withdrawal rate equal to the velocity prevailing in the line) sampling is meant to avoid disturbances of
the normal flow pattern inside the pipeline. The procedure to follow is identical to that for actual
sampling (see point 3 below). In pipelines smaller than 4 inch, it may be difficult to establish the
profile accurately. Stream homogenisation can be obtained with an in-line mixer, but with the risk of
additional emulsification. In such a case it may be better to sample a vertical part of the pipeline. In
the case of slug flow, the representativeness of one sample is questionable and repeated sampling is
recommended.
2) Establish optimum sampling rate
In principle, the sampling rate should be iso-energetic. This rate can, in most cases, be chosen
between minimum and maximum sampling rate of 0.5 and 4.0 L/min, respectively. However, to
minimise the fluid residence time in the sampling system (sample line + sample bottle) when
sampling low mixing energy environments it is recommended to select the highest rate possible
(not exceeding 4 L/min) without creating re emulsification. To establish the minimum possible
sampling rate without creating additional emulsification in the sampling line, samples should be
taken at an increasing sampling rate (starting with iso-energic) until an increase in emulsion stability
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 69

is observed in the static settling test. This may become apparent by an increase in the initial period
of settling and/or initial residual watercut of the oil phase or oil content of the water phase.
As an example, the iso-energetic sampling rate through a 12 mm (½") sampling tube is given in Fig.
3.3 as a function of the main line throughput for various main line diameters.
Fig. 3.3 – Iso-energetic sampling through ½” sampling tube as function of main line throughput for
various main line diameters (viscosity < 5 mPa s).
3) Sampling for on-line stability tests
Select (a number of) sampling heights h (with the bottom of the pipeline as reference), depending on the
oil/water profile. It is recommended to analyse all oil/water mixtures encountered, i.e. including "apparent"
dry oil, water-in-oil and oil-in-water emulsion, and "apparent" oil-free water.
3.3.4 Sample handling and preservation

Complete and unequivocal preservation of samples is a practical impossibility. Regardless of the sample
nature, complete stability for every constituent can never be achieved. At best, preservation techniques
only retard chemical and biological changes that inevitably continue after sample collection.
The dehydration behaviour of a crude oil or emulsions can be very sensitive to "ageing". In general,
ageing refers to all chemical and physical changes that take place in a freshly produced sample, with
time. In emulsions samples these changes reflect the time dependency of surfactant adsorption to
interfaces, and the rearrangement of the complex structures found at the interface. In addition, the crude
oil itself can change when left in contact with air, as a result of oxidation processes, even at relatively low
temperatures (room temperatures). It is therefore imperative to prevent contact of the sample with oxygen
as much as possible, not only during storage but also during laboratory dehydration tests (see also
Section 3.5).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 70

In general crude oil and/or emulsions samples should be processed as soon as possible (within 24 hours)
after sampling. If it is not possible to perform dehydration tests with the samples straight away, they
should be stored in glass containers under a nitrogen blanket, in the dark and at a temperature of
approximately 5 °C. Freezing will tear the interfacial film of emulsions by the formation of ice crystals, and
should be avoided. The water used for make-up of the emulsion in the laboratory should be de-aerated. If
sampled formation water is to be used for make-up of emulsions in laboratory tests, it should not come
into contract with oxygen, and be stored under a nitrogen blanket.
3.4 Analysis of actually produced oil/water mixtures
3.4.1 Samples characterization

The objectives of a sampling programme can be directed at:
• On site dehydration tests, in connection to performance monitoring of existing facilities and/or

establishing (changes in) treatment requirements of a production stream (screening of
demulsifiers/deoilers). Here sampling is aiming at obtaining a representative emulsion sample.
• Establishing parameters required in support of new facilities design or when further laboratory
test with the samples are planned. Sampling in connection with this objective is directed at
obtaining an uncontaminated crude oil sample.
Depending on these objectives, various analyses of samples taken are required.
i) When samples are taken in relation to the first-mentioned objectives, the first step in sample
characterisation is usually to identify whether the emulsion (if present) is a water-in-oil
(normal) emulsion, or an oil-in-water (reverse) emulsions. A simple test to establish the type
of emulsion is to observe whether the emulsion will wet or be substantially absorbed on a
piece of blotting paper. An oil-in-water emulsion will be absorbed while a water-in-oil
emulsion will not. A better method to identify the type of emulsion is to test its dispersability in
water and a light hydrocarbon such as petroleum spirit or kerosene. The reverse emulsion
will disperse in the hydrocarbon. The most reliable method is to measure the electrical
conductivity of the emulsion. The conductivity of a water-in-oil emulsion will essentially be
that of the continuous phase which is much lower than that of water or brine which would be
predominant in an oil-in-water emulsion.
A produced sample will, in general, contain a certain amount of free water in addition to an
emulsion of water-in-oil. The sample is then further characterised by the following
parameters:
• The amount of free water as a percentage of the total liquid volume sampled.
• The amount of dispersed water in the oil as a percentage of emulsion volume.
• The oil content of the free water.
• The stability of the water-in-oil emulsion (characterised by its oil/water separation
behaviour as a function of time and demulsifier dosage).
• Droplet size distribution.
In order to allow investigation into the cause of the emulsification, a list of data to be
recorded together with the sample description is given in Table 3.1.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 71

Table 3.1: Characterisation of produced emulsions
Method of sampling:
Oil characterisation
Water characterisation } see Section 3.5.2
for well samples : well characterisation : Tubing length (TV/AH)
Tubing size
Minimum restriction -ID/Depth
Production rate
Drawdown
FTHP
FTHT
∆P choke
Oil/water ratio
Gas Liquid Ratio (GLR)
Gas Oil Ratio (GOR) natural
Lift method
Lift depth
GLR including lift gas
For pipeline samples : predominant lengths and sizes pressure drops (at, for examples, control
valves) upstream of the sampling point flow regime (mist flow, slug flow,
stratified flow etc.)
characterisation emulsion : % free water + oil content
% emulsified water in the oil phase settling behaviour of the emulsified

water with and without demulsifer (see also Section 3.5.5.).
ii) Sampling in support of new facilities design/selection, including simulations of emulsions

transport through (subsea) pipelines, will generally be directed at obtaining (dry) crude oil
samples. These samples will then be used in further more elaborated laboratory testing
for the make-up of artificial emulsions. Various parameters of the samples taken need to
be determined locally, also for sample identification if they are to be used in further
laboratory testing elsewhere. Samples to be sent to a remote laboratory for further testing
will eventually be analysed more comprehensively upon arrival (see alsoSection 3.5.2).
The same precautions with respect to sample handling and samplepreservation should
be taken during transport of samples, as described in Section 3.3.4.
The following analyses should be carried out locally after sampling:
• Water content of the sample.

• Density of the oil at sample temperature and one other temperature.
• Kinematic viscosity of the samples at sample temperature and one or two more
temperatures.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 72

• Chemical composition of the water phase, if present (major cations, anions and pH).
• Salt content (NaCl; mg/kg).
• Parameters of interest - asphaltene content, wax content, cloud point and pour point of
the oil, and H 2S content (safety reasons).
Further properties which are also important for the emulsifying and coalescing behaviour of the emulsion,
are the oil/water interfacial tension, viscosity and elasticity. However, these properties are difficult to
determine and need the use of sophisticated measuring equipment and skilled analysts. Therefore these
analyses cannot usually be done in the field laboratory.
3.4.2 Dehydration tests with actually produced emulsions

3.4.2.1 General
Settling tests with actual emulsions are carried out with one or several of the following objectives:
i) To screen and/or select emulsion breakers.
Often laboratory tests are required to select from a large number of available chemicals the most
effective one(s) for a given emulsion. To obtain reliable conclusions it is required that
representative, untreated with demulsifiers, emulsion samples be used and that the test
temperature be adjusted to that expected to prevail in the field. Consequently the most reliable
results are obtained from on-site testing with fresh emulsions samples. On-site tests are also
required to confirm the findings of laboratory dehydration tests in particular related to demulsifiers
dosage. In existing facilities it is common practice to invite manufacturers of oil field chemicals to
screen their emulsion breakers on site. The method used for the screening of demulsifiers is the
bottle test (Section 3.4.2.3).
ii) To establish the oil/water separation performance of the existing facilities.
In cases of upset in the treatment of produced fluids a trouble-shooting exercise can be carried
out whereby samples are taken, with continued demulsifier injection into the production stream, at
various locations in the facilities and analysed for their oil/water separation behaviour and/or
emulsion characteristics. Based on the results of such an exercise, corrective action can then be
taken.
Occasionally, the oil/water separation performance of existing facilities has also been determined
to investigate whether performance can be correlated with facilities design rules (Stokes` Law) or
the performance of a laboratory model of the particular unit under scrutiny (e.g. a Wemco unit).
3.4.2.2 Outline of dehydration testing

Static settling tests with actual emulsions can either be done directly on-site, or in the field laboratory
where more advanced analytical techniques may be available. Except in cases where dehydration
behaviour of emulsions is to be studied after injection of demulsifier into the production stream as being
used at that time (performance monitoring), stable emulsions, i.e. not treated with demulsifier injection
into the wellstream to be sampled, is stopped in time such that untreated emulsions can be sampled.
The stability of an emulsion is characterised by its oil/water separation behaviour at a certain

temperature, as a function of time and demulsifier dosage. The sampled (stable) emulsion is transferred
into a calibrated settling tube and placed in a water bath at a certain temperature. When the emulsion has
reached this temperature, demulsifier is mixed through the emulsion. This can be done either by shaking
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 73

the bottle or tube by hand or by mechanical shaker. The oil/water separation behaviour is then followed
visually with time, and is characterised by the rate of water separation, the build-up of an interfacial
emulsion layer and the water content of the top crude oil layer immediately after sampling and after the
bulk of the water has separated (10-15 minutes). Separated water samples can be taken at the same
time of crude oil sampling, for oil-in-water content determination. If required, photomicrographs can be
taken of the emulsion droplets for later analysis (see Section 3.4.3.5).
A schematic presentation of the procedure is shown in Figure 3.4. Further details on procedures and
analyses of dehydration behaviour are given in Section 3.5 where standard laboratory dehydration tests
are discussed in more detail.
Fig. 3.4 – Schematic presentation of dehydration testing.
An example of the static settling of an actual emulsion sempled at the High Pressure (HP) separator inlet
of a North Sea platform is shown in Fig. 3.5.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 74

Fig. 3.5 – Static settling of an emulsion taken at HP separator inlet.
When a sample has been taken with the transparent pressure sampler, the oil/water separation taking
place in the sampler is observed visually during the first 15 minutes. After that period the sampler is fully
depressurised, and its contents emptied into a separation funnel, after which oil and water are separated
from each other and, together with other measurements, the long-term settling behaviour of the remaining
oil-in-water is determined.
By installing provisional facilities for injecting demulsifier into the sampling line, the dehydration behaviour
of actually produced emulsions can thus be studied in the field as a function of:
• temperature
• demulsifier dosage
• production rate
• location in facilities
3.4.2.3 The bottle test

The test procedures briefly outline in Section 3.4.2.2 refer to the analysis of dehydration behaviour of
actually produced emulsions in the field (laboratory) as a function of various parameters. However, for the
quick screening of demulsifiers and demulsifier dosage the bottle test is often used on-site. The bottle test
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 75

is a simplified version of the static dehydration test and it aims at qualitative results for comparison
purposes.
The use of on-site bottle tests to determine the most suitable chemical for dehydration (and deoiling), is
fairly well standardised, and it is common practice to allow representatives for the best demulsifier. The
recommended chemicals may then be field tested against each other and compared with the chemicals
already in use.
It is good practice to evaluate the proposed products in your local Production Chemistry laboratory. The
suppliers of demulsifiers are sometimes somewhat biased towards the performance of their own products.
Because of the extreme selectivity of the chemical compounds in use as demulsifier or deoiler, bottle
tests should be done with care and precision. They should be carried out on fresh, uncontaminated
emulsion samples. Any chemical addition upstream of the sample point must be suspended for long
enough to clear the line before sampling.
Outline of test method:
If the sample contains free water, the excess should be removed.
100 ml portions of a fresh emulsion sample are poured into graduated 200 ml screw cap bottles and
treated with the required quantities of demulsifiers. The chemicals are dispersed by shaking the bottles by
hand. The bottles are allowed to stand, preferably at the settling temperature prevailing in the field and
the quantity of water settling out as a function of time is recorded. The presence and appearance of a
sludge layer between the separated oil and water is noted. At the end of the settling period a portion of oil
sample may be withdrawn for Basic Sediment and Water (BS&W) determination. Alternatively the bottles
may be reshaken and the settling behaviour observed once more. The latter results give an indication of
the re-emulsification tendency of a particular demulsifier.
Selection of the most effective demulsifier chemicals is effected in three stages:
i) The ratio test
This test is carried out with the demulsifier currently in use or, in the case of a new field
development, one or more "broad spectrum" demulsifiers. The chemical dosage is varied to
establish the ratio of demulsifier to emulsion required for successful dehydration.
ii) The screening test

The screening test is used to screen a large number of demulsifiers at the dosage established by
the ratio test.
iii) The confirmation test
The screening test is used to evaluate three or four best chemicals. These chemicals are tested
at different treatment ratios, mixing times and settling temperatures. Residual BS&W content of
the crude, salt content (in case of export requirements), speed of water separations, appearance
of separated water and sensitivity to temperature, overtreatment and re-emulsification are
carefully evaluated.
The bottle test method is described in detail in Appendix 3.3.
In interpreting the results of bottle testing the most important factors to be considered are:
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 76

• The relative speed of water separation. A distinction should be made between a chemical which
shows a rapid separation but stops before all the water is released and a chemical which
releases water more slowly but gives a drier oil.
• The oil/water interface should be clean and clearly separated. Presence of a web or sludge at the
water line indicates a tendency for a layer of unbroken emulsion to build up at the water/oil
interface. Presence of such a layer in settling and storage tanks may cause operational problems.
• The relative lowest BS&W in the separated oil.
• The relative salt content of the separated oil depends on local/statutory requirement).
• The relative oil content of the separated water.
A suitable demulsifier can often be selected which both results in an effectively dehydrated crude oil,
and good/acceptable oil-in-water quality, thus obviating the need for application of a deoiler.
In addition conclusions may be drawn with respect to the location of the demulsifier injection point. If
a high mixing intensity is required then the chemical should be injected as far upstream as possible,
e.g. downhole or upstream of the choke. For a low mixing intensity, it is sufficient for the chemicals to
be injected at the plant.
3.4.2.4 Evaluation of the effectiveness of demulsifier dosage

In order to establish control over the effectiveness of the demulsifier injection system and thus avoid
shipments of 'off-specification' crude oil, it is desirable to have a check-point, and centrifuged (without
demulsifier), should indicate whether sufficient demulsifier has been introduced at the injection point in
order to obtain the required results in the settling or wash tanks.
The treated crude oil can remain in a pipeline system for a period of many hours and in some systems,
days.
To control and check the effect of the demulsifier treating ratios subsequent to an extended retention
time, a check-point close to the settling or wash tanks should be chosen. Samples taken from this point,
at 2 to 4 hourly intervals, can be analysed for water/emulsion content by the 'centrifuge-method' (Latest
version of ASTM 1796 IP 75) without the addition of demulsifiers. These tests indicate that whenever free
water and no emulsion is shown in the centrifuge tube, the water will settle quickly in the settling or wash
tanks and clean shippable oil will result.
If, however, little free water but mainly emulsion (including yellow coloured stable emulsion) is shown in
the centrifuge tube, it is unlikely that water will settle out in the receiving tanks, despite long settling times
(> 24 hours). In this case the demulsifier injection ratio should be increased until the checkpoint samples
reach the required condition.
Whenever the centrifuged sample shows a fair amount of water as well as dark brown loose emulsion,
the water carried by the crude oil system may settle in the settling or wash tanks provided sufficient
settling time is available.
The checking method described has proved of practical value in oil fields because of its simplicity.
Sampling, heating and centrifuging can be carried out by the operator/assistant.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 77

3.4.3 Common test methods for analysis of dehydration behaviour
3.4.3.1 Introduction
This section gives a brief description of the various methods of direct relevance to the analysis of oil/water
separation processes. Most of these tests can be carried out in field laboratories. Further methods
relating to dehydration and deoiling analyses are summarised in Appendix 3.2. Details andoperating
instructions are given in the referenced literature.
Most of the tests are standardised by the American Society for Testing and Materials (US) and the
Institute of Petroleum (UK) who issue updated versions of the testing manuals on an annual basis.
Laboratories should make certain that the latest versions of the standard are available by taking a
subscription on the section of interest.
3.4.3.2 Determination of free water

Values of free water are obtained by simply allowing a sample to settle in a graduated glass cylinder and
visually observing the separation of clear water.
A distinction is made here between the free water determined for an untreated produced oil-water mixture
and a mixture that has been treated with a demulsifier (destabilised emulsion). To determined the free
water of an untreated oil-water mixture, a settling time of 10 -15 min is recommended for 30°-45° API
crudes. For heavier crudes, a longer settling time may be required. In Figure 3.6 an example is shown of
oil/water separation behaviour in a transparent pressure-sampling bottle.
When the settling behaviour of destabilised oil-water mixtures is studied, free water is defined as that
water which separates from the mixture within 1 minute of sampling. At later times the effect of the
destabilisation of the emulsion will be noticeable, the separated water of which is not considered initially
free water. A typical example of dehydration behaviour of artificially made, destabilised emulsions is
shown in Fig. 3.7.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 78

Fig. 3.6 – Example of oil/water separation behaviour of a sample taken with the transparent sampling
bottle.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 79

Fig. 3.7 – Laboratory dehydration tests on artificial, destabilised emulsions.
3.4.3.3 Determination of water and sediment in oil

ASTM D4007 and IP 359.
Determination of water and sediment in crude oil by centrifuge method.
A 50 ml sample is diluted with an equal volume of water saturated toluene in a graduated conical
centrifuge tube (2 centrifuge tube). A small quantity of demulsifier is added. The sample is preheated in a
bath to 60°C and then centrifuged in a heated centrifuge at the same temperature for 10 min at minimum
600 rcf. Record the final volume of water and sediment in each tube. Express the sum of the two
admissible readings as the percentage by volume of water and sediment.
The centrifuge method for determining of water and sediment in crude oil is not entirely satisfactory. The
amount of water detected is almost always lower than the actual water content. When a highly accurate
value is required, the revised procedures for determination of water by distillation (ASTM D4006, IP 358)
and sediment by extraction (ASTM D473, IP 53) must be used. These are discussed briefly below.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 80

ASTM D4006 and IP 358.
Determination of water in crude oil by distillation.
The sample is heated under reflux with a water-immiscible solvent which co-distils with the water in the
sample. Condensed solvent and water are continuously separated in a trap, the water settling in the
graduated section of the trap and the solvent returning to the still.
ASTM D473 and IP53.
Determination of sediment in crude and fuel oils by extraction.
An amount of a representative oil sample, contained in a refractory thimble, is extracted with hot toluene
until the residue reaches constant weight. The mass of residue, calculated as a percentage, is reported
as 'sediment by extraction'.
ASTM D1744.
Water in liquid petroleum products by Karl Fisher reagent.
This method is intended for the determination of water in oil at very low concentrations (50 -1000 ppm).
The sample to be analysed is titrated with Karl Fischer reagent to an electrometric end point. H 2S and
mercaptans interfere and 2 corrections must be applied. See also ASTM D4377 "Water in crude oils' (Karl
Fischer) titration.
Method IP 356 is a modification of the test method. Increased sensitivity is achieved by using a potential
difference electrode system to indicate the end point and by using a special titration cell which can be
totally sealed and rapidly 'conditioned' to the end point prior to analysis.
3.4.3.4 Determination of oil-in-water

Over the years a number of different methods for the estimation of oil in water have been published. The
methods consist basically of a solvent extraction stage, followed by the determination of the oil content of
the extract by solvent evaporation and weighing of the residue (gravimetric method) or by absorbance of
visible light for infrared radiation (colorimetric and IR methods).
Details on determination of oil in water are discussed in Chapter 4.
3.4.3.5 Determination of droplet size distribution of emulsions

Basically there are two systems to determine particle size distributions of emulsions:
• Analysis of a microscopic image(image scanning).

• Transport of particles through a detection zone where each particle is detected, counted and sized
(zone sensing).The two most important techniques are electrical and optical zone sensing.
These system are briefly discussed below.
3.4.3.5.1 Image Scanning

An image obtained with an optical microscope can be photographed and the droplets counted and sized
"by hand". This is a lengthy and tedious procedure since at least 300 droplets must be counted for a
statistically significant droplet size distribution. Alternative measuring technique whereby the sample is
isokinetically extracted from the pipeline by a probe inserted through a packed gland and photographed
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 81

under pressure in a cuvette (Fig. 3.8). The droplet size distribution is determined from the photograph
using the "IBAS" interactive image analysis system. "IBAS" is a commercially available fully automated
system which works out the drop size distribution from the photograph placed under a video camera.
Fig. 3.8 – Schematic of the system for photographing the droplets of the dispersed phase in an emulsion.
It is recommended that operating departments in OPUs establish a file of photographs of emulsions taken
at various points in the production system. They may provide useful reference information when trying to
find the cause of a plant upset. Qualitative study of the pictures may pin-point locations if
(re)emulsification (broken valves if beam pumping units, etc.).
3.4.3.5.2 Electrical zone sensing

The electrical zone sensing technique was developed by Coulter Inc. Droplets (or particles) suspended in
an electrolyte passes the orifice, the change in resistance between the electrodes is recorded as a
voltage pulse. The amplitude of this pulse is proportional to the size of the droplet. The pulses are sized
and counted and thus a droplet size distribution is obtained. The method is only applicable if the
continuous phase if the emulsion is conductive. Its use is therefore restricted to oil-in-water emulsions.
With proper precautions the Coulter Counter model D can be used in the field. The other, more
sophisticated models must be permanently installed in laboratories.
3.4.3.5.3 Optical zone sensing

Optical zone sensing systems operate on the principle of light blockage. The droplets to be analysed are
suspended in a fluid with a refractive index different from that of the droplet themselves. In the detection
zone a light beam is directed at a photodiode. When a particle traverses the light, beam it momentarily
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 82

reduces the amount of light reaching the photodiode, thus causing a voltage pulse. The amplitude of this
pulse is proportional to the amount of light blocked by the droplet and therefore proportional to its
projected area.
A series of droplets passing through a light beam causes a train of pulses. Each pulse is sized and
counted by a microprocessor.
3.5 Standard laboratory dehydration tests
3.5.1 General
Laboratory tests with artificial emulsions to define treatment problems/requirements have often been
performed in the past. Whilst in specific instances such tests can provide valuable insight to a problem,
experience has generally shown the results to be unrepresentative when compared to actual field
conditions. The results of such tests should therefore be used with caution. This aspect is discussed in
more detail in Section 3.7.
Static settling tests carried out in the laboratory not located in the field, are usually done with artificially
(laboratory) made emulsions. Such tests are frequently carried out, mainly with the objective to obtain
design parameters for dehydration facilities of new developments, and to a limited extent for evaluation
purposes. The main design parameters required are the minimum residence time, minimum dehydration
temperature and achievable oil and water quality in terms of water and oil contents respectively.
In conjunction with such tests, emulsion viscosities can also be determined, in relation to pipeline design.
Here, evaluation of potential problem areas such as flowability, restartability and wax deposition, primary
as a function of temperature is required. Such tests are of particular importance for subsea developments
where produced oil-water mixtures are to be transported to a central platform for further processing. In
these tests also artificial emulsions are being used.
Since the results of laboratory dehydration tests are expected to depend to a large degree on the actual
procedure applied, a method was developed for "Standard Dehydration Tests". Standardisation and
reporting of the test procedures and conditions would allow effective comparison and evaluation of
laboratory and field tests, both for a specific situation and on a more global scale. The ultimate objective
of standardisation is to relate the character of an emulsion in terms of stability and dehydration behaviour
to types of crudes and water mixtures and production conditions in general.
A complete laboratory dehydration test consists of the following steps/aspects:
• crude oil sampling;

• handling of the crude oil sample in the laboratory;
• characterisation of the crude oil and water used for emulsion make-up;
• elimination of the temperature history of the crude oil;
• emulsification;
• demulsifier addition/selection;
• description of the oil/water separation behaviour
– effect of demulsifier concentration
– effect of temperature
– quality of the separated water
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 83

• optional : de-oiling of the water
effect of pipeline coalescence
behaviour of the velocity if emulsions
effect of desalting on dehydration performance
In the following sections some of the above topics are discussed in more detail. In Appendix 3.4 a
summary is given of the laboratory test procedures.
3.5.2 Crude oil and water characterisations and handling
For aspects/considerations on sampling of crude oil and water, reference is made to Section 3.3.
The origin of the oil sample and the manner in which it was obtained should be properly documented (see
also Section 3.4.1). Any observations made on the production during the sampling of the crude oil sample
(if the well was flowing steady, how long has the well been in production before the sample was taken,
could contamination of the crude oil with a workover or completion fluid have taken place, sampling
temperature, line pressure during sampling) are of value if the representativeness of the oil sample is to
be judged at a later stage.
When a crude oil has experienced a temperature below its Wax-Drop-out-Point, wax crystals can be
present, the size and amount of which depend on the temperature history of the crude oil. Since wax
crystals can affect the dehydration behaviour considerably, it is essential to heat the crude to above the
dissolution temperature of the wax, preferably to its original reservoir temperature and for at least several
hours to ensure the dissolution of the wax into the crude oil. In practice, heating to a temperature of 85°C
is considered to be sufficient. Heating should take place in closed containers, to avoid extensive losses of
the light ends, and under anaerobic conditions, to avoid oxidation of the oil.
The following "black oil" properties are (or are expected to be) of interest in conjunction with the
dehydration performance.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 84

When for instance, diesel oil is used in a well, either as spacer fluid or to kick off a well, contamination of
the oil sample with the diesel oil can be shown from the distillation curve.
For test methods of the properties, see Appendix 3.2.
In order to ensure that in the standard laboratory tests water is emulsified in the oil in a consistent way,
the oil used should not already contain any significant amount of dispersed water. If water is present in
the oil sample (often in the form of finely dispersed water droplets), this water should be removed from
the oil, preferably without the use of chemicals (for example, by centrifuge, vacuum distillation). A residual
water content below 1% is achievable and does not affect the test result significantly.
The chemical composition of the water should be analysed in order to provide the data to enable its
simulation in the laboratory and also to identify any contamination of the sample with, for instance, mud
filtrate and workover brine. The following ions are usually determined in such an analysis
If the analysis concerns the composition of a produced formation water sample, the pH and CO 2 content
should be measured as quickly as possible; i.e. immediately after sampling.
It is not always feasible/necessary to simulate the exact composition of the formation water in the
laboratory tests. Firstly the artificially made water in the laboratory tests should not be scaling and
secondly it appears that correct values of total dissolved solids (TDS), bivalent/monovalent cation ratio
and pH suffice. The trace components can be left out for all practical purposes. Scaling can be avoided
by adjusting the bicarbonate content/sulphate content.
As discussed in Section 3.3.4, in order to obtain results from standard laboratory dehydration tests which
give consistent and repeatable results, and therefore form a fair comparison basis for actual emulsions
(ageing), it is recommended that:
• Crude oil should be stored under a nitrogen blanket.

• All dehydration test procedures should be done under nitrogen.
• The water used for the make-up of the emulsions should be de-aerated.
Since it has been found that despite taking these precautions, the dehydration behaviour of crude oils
may still change with time, it is also recommended that dehydration tests should be done as soon as
possible after the crude oil has been sampled.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 85

3.5.3 Emulsification
In the standard dehydration test, 20% vol. de-aerated (artificially made)formation water is emulsified in
80% vol. crude oil at the required temperature, Tem. The emulsification temperature is usually taken to be
equal to the flowing wellhead temperature, but preferably above the cloud point of the crude oil. When T
em is chosen near or below the cloud point of the crude oil, the temperature history if the crude oil should
be taken into consideration (section 3.5.2)
The stability of the created emulsion depends on the emulsion preparation method (e.g. bottle shaking,
dynamic coalescer, high speed mixer, nozzle method). At present it is not known which method to choose
to create an emulsion which is most representative of an actually produced emulsion. For the time being,
pending the results of continuing studies, a high speed mixer is used to create emulsions, as this is a
simple and fast method. The high speed mixer used in the laboratory, equipped with a thermostatted wall
in order to keep the temperature constant during emulsification. Oil and water are mixed in the blender for
two minutes at high speed, usually giving mean droplet sizes of around 20µm. This method is considered
to yield conservative ("safe") results unless the field emulsion is extremely stable (see also Section 3.7.1).
3.5.4 Demulsifier selection and addition

Demulsifiers are selected and added to determine the best possible dehydration performance obtainable
for the emulsion under study under laboratory conditions. Service companies may be requested to
provide samples if effective demulsifiers for the particular crude oil under investigation. For this purpose
they will carry out tests following their own specific procedures which can be expected to differ from
company to company.
Recent work on the design and selection of demulsifiers for optimum field performance has indicated that
the demulsifiers tested gave optimum performance when the partition coefficient is unity. Thus it was
concluded that maximum performance of a demulsifier can be expected when its is equally soluble in the
oil and the aqueous phase. While little experience with these results exists at present, they should be
taken into account when selecting the proper demulsifier for field use, or when developing effective new
compounds.
For a demulsifier to be effective, it must be ensured that the demulsifier is homogeneously distributed
throughout the emulsion, while the initial characteristics of the emulsion should not be affected. This may
be a problem as the created emulsions may be rather viscous, and the amount of demulsifier to be
dispersed through the emulsion is often very small (10 µl demulsifier is to be dispersed through 200 ml
emulsion if a dosage of 50 ppm is required).It has been found that by mixing a 10% dilution of the
demulsifier in toluene through the emulsion with the Waring Blender at low speed for 10 seconds gives
acceptable results. However, in the case of very viscous emulsions of several thousand centipoises, the
problem of demulsifier mixing may still exist. In such a case low speed mixing for prolonged times may be
effective. The extra time is permissible since such crude oils usually dehydrate slowly (e.g. hours settling
time needed).
Before the demulsifier is added the temperature of the emulsion should be brought to the temperature at
which the oil/water separation performance is to be investigated.
3.5.5 The standard settling test

After the emulsion has been made at the emulsification temperature Tem, the emulsion is cooled to the
temperature at em which the oil/water separation process is to be stuied. When the emulsion has reached
this temperature, demulsifier is mixed through the emulsion. The mixture is subsequently transferred into
a calibrated settling tube, which is sealed off under a nitrogen blanket and left to settle at a constant
temperature. The amount of free water separated is measured as a function of time. After specific time
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 86

intervals samples of the oil layer (top, middle and bottom) are taken and analysed for water content with a
coulometric titration method. Any build-up of an emulsion (sludge) layer at the oil/water interface is also
recorded by measuring its volume; detailed procedures are given in Appendix 3.4.
From the amount of free water separated, the residual watercut of the overlaying oil phase is calculated
and plotted as a function of time. The residual watercut calculated in this way at a time X should be
similar to the between these values indicates sludge build-up at the interface. The calculations involved
are given in Appendix 3.5.
At the same time that oil samples are taken for water content analysis, water samples can be taken from
the separated water for oil content analysis. Oil content in water is standardly measured using an
established method. In future it may be necessary to analyse the water for aromatics, phenolic
compounds and halogenated compounds.
In the standard dehydration test programme, the dehydration behaviour is tested as a function of:
• demulsifier dosage (usually 25, 50, 100, 200 and 400 ppm)
• dehydration temperature (usually 20, 40, 60 and 80°C)
It is noted that other production treatment chemical such as corrosion/scale/wax inhibitors, drag reducers,
etc., can affect the effectiveness of certain demulsifiers (either beneficially or adversely). Compatibility
tests should be included in the demulsifier screening programme when it is known that other chemicals
will be used in the system under investigation.
3.5.6 Data processing

From the data obtained from a dehydration test a 'dehydration curve' can be obtained (Fig 3.9.). It has
been found that this dehydration curve can be adequately described by a three-parameter function:
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 87

Fig. 3.9 – Dehydration behaviour of some North Sea crude oil emulsions.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 88

The values of φ∞, b and n can be easily obtained by means of numerical curve fitting procedures. Some
results obtained with this procedure are shown in Figure 3.9.
If such facitlities are not available a suitable fit can also be obtained if φ∞ is estimated and b and n are
fitted wih a simple fitting procedure that can be done using a scientific calculator (Appendix 3.5).
A final evaluation sheet of a set of dehydration tests, suitable for storage in a data bank, is given in
Appendix 3.6.
3.5.7 The dynamic coalescer
The bottle test, as discussed in Section 3.4.2.3 is not capable of accurately simulating the degree of
mixing to which oil/water mixtures are subjected in the field. To simulate field mixing conditions in
pipelines in the laboratory more accurately and to study the effects of demulsifiers on oil/water mixtures
which have been subjected to well defined mixing conditions prior to the settling period, the dynamic
coalescer was developed.
It is stressed that the dynamic coalescer mixing conditions of gas free liquid-liquid system are simulated.
Therefore, translation/comparison of results obtained for certain mixing conditions to parts of the product
system where free gas is still present, cannot be done in a meaningful manner.
The instrument consists of two concentric cylinders, the inner one of which rotates while the outer one
remains stationary (Fig.3.10). The sample in the annular space is subjected to predominantly
laminar"Couette flow". By varying the speed of rotation the mixing intensity, i.e. the work done on the
emulsion per unit mass and unit time can be adjusted. The mixing intensity parameter can be calculated
from the rpm of the inner cylinder. In Figure 3.11 mixing intensity is shown as a function of rotational
speed. Since the length of the agitation period and the temperature can also be varied, the bottle test, the
demulsifier injection rate which will be required in field operations may be predicted fairly accurately. The
testing procedure is more time consuming than the bottle test and would normally only be applied for the
final evaluation of candidate chemicals for field testing.
The mixing intensity parameter concept postulates that dispersion and coalescence are only affected by
the amount of work done on the fluid, independent of the prevailing flow regime. This concept is currently
under review.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 89

Fig. 3.10 – Schematic drawing of dynamic coalescer with rotating inner cylinder.
Dynamic coalescer test procedure
400 cm³ emulsion is heated to the required temperature, the required amount of demulsifier added (1% or
2% solution in a suitable solvent) and homogenised by shaking for 30 seconds, after which the mixture is
transferred to the dynamic coalescer. The rotational speed is adjusted to obtain the desired mixing
intensity, which is continued for the desired mixing period. The mixing time used in the test should be the
same as the residence time of the emulsion in the pipeline, through an upper limit of 30 minutes is
recommended for practical purpose.
After treatment the mixture is transferred to a settling tube kept at the required settling temperature. At
regular intervals, up to a total settling time of, say, 24 hours, the water and sludge separation is recorded
and an oil sample analysed for water and/or salt content, thus enabling the effectiveness of the
demulsifier to be assessed.
The choice of demulsifier should then be made on the basis of the chemical which gives the highest % of
free water, the lowest % sludge and the lowest amount of water remaining in the oil, in the same way as
described for interpretation of bottle test results. In addition, economic factors should be taken into
account.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 90

Figure 3.11 – Relationship between mixing intensity and rotational speed.
3.6 Rontgen Scan (Tomograph) study
The main objective of static settling tests in the laboratory, using artificial emulsions, is to obtain design
parameters for dehydration facilities, the main parameters being residence time, separation temperature
and achievable oil and water quality. Continued effort is required to develop methods for predicting the
(field) emulsion character, for creating representative emulsions in the laboratory and for translating
laboratory results into field performance.
As discussed in Section 2.4.3, a dispersion band, present in a separation vessel between the oil andwater
phases, consists of two zones, viz. the sedimenting zone and the close or dense-packed zone. In the
sedimenting zone droplets collide and grow in size due to interdrop coalescence until they are large
enough to sediment into the dense-packed zone. Coalescence continues in this zone, but more
importantly, the droplets coalesce at the interphase with their bulk homophase
The decay of a batch dispersion with time to simultaneous sedimentation and coalescence at the
disengaging interface is shown schematically in Figure 3.12. Similar processes take place in steady-state
continuous gravity settlers. The quantitative description of such sedimenting and coalescence processes
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 91

would form the basis for establishing design parameters for dehydration facilities. However, due to
opaqueness of crude oil emulsions only the dense-packed/water (coalescing) interface can be monitored
during conventional settling tests. Other physical parameters determining the process are in most cases
impossible to measure.
Fig. 3.12 – Variation in heights of sedimenting and coalescing interface during decay of a batch
dispersion.
The introduction of the tomograph in dehydration/deoiling research has shown that tomographic data
obtained from static settling tests can give information regarding settling velocity, sludge build-up and
water content of a decaying dispersion, in a time and space domain. X-ray tomography allows the
construction of cross-sectional images of density variations within an object without affecting the process
under investigation. By measuring the line projections of a cross-section of an object under various
angles, a reconstruction of that plane (tomogram) can be made.
The experimental set-up for computer tomography (CT) is shown schematically in Figure 3.13.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 92

Fig. 3.13 – Computer tomography
A CT scanner consists of an X-ray source and an array of detectors mounted on a rotating frame. The
source and the detectors can rotate in a continuous manner around the object to produce a tomogram.
The time needed for one scan is in the order of seconds, which is short with respect to the separation
time of most emulsions. The attenuation data obtained is sufficiently accurate to allow transformation into
dispersed phase fraction (saturation) values. In turn, other quantities are derived from the saturation data
such as sedimenting velocity and volume flux of the dispersed phase. These quantities can then be used
to validate existing models or trigger the development of new models.
An example of the use of topographic data is the hydrodynamical problem of sedimentation for
concentrated systems which can only be described by numerically solving the continuity equations and
hydrodynamic equations of motion for a particular system. By applying X-ray tomography a reversed
approach can be followed because the variables in the numerical solution methods (saturation, settling
velocity) are now known quantities. Thus with the topographic information one can now solved the
hydrodynamic equations of motion for the physical parameters, e.g. the drag coefficient. These
parameters need further evaluation to describe/relate separation behaviour to emulsion/crude oil
properties (viscosity, droplet size.).
Another example of the information one can obtain from tomography is the detection of the build-up of a
dense-packed layer and the effect of a demulsifier on the coalescence behaviour of an emulsion. A
conventional bottle test only gives information about the separations behaviour of an emulsion with time.
Whether a dense layer is formed during settling is hardly detectable. The effect of a demulsifier is often
described in terms of shorter dehydration times only. If the same bottle test is done using the tomograph,
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 93

the build-up and break-up of a demulsifier, e.g. break-up and thickness of the dense-packed layer can be
studied in more detail.
This kind of information will be used to described the coalescence behaviour of dense-packed layers in a
quantitative manner. Such a description would then form the basis for obtaining design parameters for
separation facilities and for the prediction of emulsion characteristics.
3.7 Discussion on dehydration tests
3.7.1 Representativeness of standard laboratory dehydration tests.

As mentioned earlier, laboratory dehydration tests, usually performed with artificially made emulsions, are
done in support of new facilities design and/or to provide guidance for operational practices. Care must
be taken that a representative crude sample is obtained, the properties of which should not have been
altered during storage and/or transportation (Section 3.3.). However for such tests to be representative
ofactual field behaviour, two further stipulations are to be, but are mostly not, fulfilled:
i) The emulsion used in the laboratory tests should be representative of actual field emulsions.
This pre-requisite is difficult to fulfil as the stability of the emulsion actually produced
obviously depends on the circumstances under which it is produced, such as:
• natural flow or artificial lift

• pressure drop across the choke
• production rate
• water cut
• drawndown
At present, it is not possible to predict the stability of an emulsion produced under a certain
set of conditions, as listed above. Moreover, factors which enhance the stability of produced
emulsions, such as sand, wax or asphaltenes cannot be sufficiently accounted for in
laboratory dehydration tests.
In standard laboratory tests the starting point has, until now, been the creation of a
completely stable emulsion which does not separate any free water without the use of
demulsifying chemicals at any practical dehydration temperature. The picture thus obtained is
considered to be conservative with respect to the amount of demulsifier needed for full
destabilisation and to the residual watercut of the oil after dehydration.
Recent studies on dehydration behaviour of artificial emulsions using crudes from various
fields in Gabon showed that extremely stable emulsions were created using the Waring
Blender, as standardly used in the "Standard Dehydration Test", which did not show any
water settling after 24 hours, and only partial dehydration could be obtained with the addition
of demulsifiers. At moderate shear levels (hand shaking or mechanical bottle shaker) the
resulting emulsions were much less stable, which could be easily dehydrated to low residual
watercuts with demulsifiers. The tight emulsions created with the high shear mixer were not
encountered during actual production, and therefore it was concluded that these emulsions
are not representative of actual field conditions.
In another recent study, however, using Draugen (a new development in Norway) crude, it
appeared not possible to create stable water-in-oil emulsions with the standard procedure of
laboratory dehydration testing.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 94

More results on comparison of dehydration behaviour of artificial emulsions with that of actual
emulsions are required since only in few cases such comparisons have been made.
Depending on the outcome of such a comparative study, the procedure for creating
emulsions in the laboratory may have to be revised.
ii) The results of a standard laboratory dehydration test, in which the dehydration takes place under
static conditions, must be interpreted for a dynamic system in which the dehydration takes place
under flowing conditions.
This is of particular importance of the time needed for dehydration (i.e. the size of the
dehydration vessels for a certain throughput) is to be estimated. The rules on which such an
interpretation should be established (see also Section 3.6).
Finally, it should be mentioned that, as far as new facility design is concerned, any design on
fluid properties should recognise that fluid properties themselves can change in time due to
e.g. changes in GOR, amount and composition of produced water, presence of solids.
3.7.2 Interpretation of field vs. laboratory dehydration behaviour

Various studies have been carried out to establish the (degree of) representativeness of laboratory
derived dehydration performance data for in-field behaviour. In these studies the dehydration behaviour of
actually produced emulsions was compared with that of artificially made emulsions.
The main observations made, and conclusions drawn from these studies, are as follows:
• The effect of temperature on dehydration behaviour is comparable for both types (i.e. actual and
artificial) of emulsion. Therefore from laboratory dehydration tests a minimum temperature can be
defined above which rapid oil/water separation occurs without residual sludge being built up at
the oil/water interface.
• In the laboratory stable emulsions can be made from crudes which do not produce emulsions in
practice, and artificially made emulsions are much more stable than actually produced emulsions.
• The settling time (or residence time) needed for dehydration of artificially made emulsions is
conservative as compared to that required in practice. However, settling tests with actually
produced emulsions give realistic results provided sampling is representative and does not cause
additional emulsification.
• The final watercut of the oil and the oil content of the water after oil/water separation in a
laboratory using artificial emulsions are significantly different (sometimes an order of magnitude
higher or lower) as compared to actual system performance.
• General experience indicates that a higher demulsifier dosage is needed in laboratory tests as
compared to the dosage needed in the field.
• Water droplet sizes removed in dehydration vessels are significantly smaller than predicted by
Stokes' Law.
The above aspects indicate that result from standard laboratory dehydration tests cannot, in general, be
directly used to obtain design parameters for oil and water treatment facilities in the field. Before such
design parameters can be obtained from laboratory tests, correlations between the result of laboratory
tests and the actual oil/water separation achieved in the field with certain emulsions and certain sets of
facilities should be established.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 95

These correlations do not yet exist, however, and only in a few cases have comparisons been made
between dehydration behaviour of emulsions made in the laboratory and those encountered in the field.
More work on this subject is required and design parameters have to rely for the time being, on
comparison with or gauging against existing facilities processing similar/comparable confidence:
Therefore it is currently felt that only the following design parameters can be deduced from standard
laboratory dehydration tests with reasonable confidence :
• The minimum temperature necessary for dehydration.

• A rough indication of the time needed for complete dehydration (order of magnitude).
• An indication of whether residual sludge (emulsion) problems may be expected.
3.7.3 Selection of demulsifier chemicals

As discussed in Section 3.7.2, the residual water content of the oil phase and the oil content of the
separated water in a standard laboratory dehydration test may not be representative of the actually
obtained oil and water quality from an oil/water separation process. The oil and water quality in laboratory
tests greatly depends on the method used for the emulsification. However, for comparative purposes, the
evaluation of the effect of the various demulsifier on the water quality, the determination of the oil content
of the separated water and/or the water content of the oil phase after a standard dehydration test, is
considered to be of value.
The optimum concentration of demulsifier required in the laboratory is usually conservative, however.
Once an effective demulsifier has been selected and applied in the field, its effectiveness should be
verified regularly (with bottle tests for instance) in view of:
• the constant development of new and improved chemicals, which could achieve a more cost
effective solution to demulsification;
• the possible change in the character of the produced emulsions due to changing production
conditions (watercut, GOR, sand, scale, etc.) and/or a change in the crude properties themselves
with progressing reservoir depletion.
For lighter crudes a suitable frequency would be, say every 1-2 years. However, for heavy crudes,
particularly those associated with termal recovery operations, an increased frequency, say 2-3 times per
year, would be more appropriate.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 96

APPENDIX 3.1
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 97

;
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 98

APPENDIX 3.2 - SUMMARY OF ADDITIONAL METHODS RELATING TO THE ANALYSIS OF
DEHYDRATION AND EOILING BEHAVIOUR
In addition to the methods briefly discussed in Section 3.4.3 the following methods for determination of
various fluid properties are of relevance. For more detail information, the referenced documents should
be consulted, i.e. mainly the Annual Book of ASTM Standard for Petroleum and Petroleum Products.
ASTM D1298 and IP160
Density, relative density (specific gravity), or API gravity of crude petroleum and liquid petroleum products
by hydrameter method.
The sample is brought to the prescribed temperature and transferred to a cylinder at approximately the
same temperature. The appropriate hydrameter is lowered into the sample and allowed to settle. After
temperature equilibrium has been reached, the hydrometer scale is read, and the temperature of the
sample is noted. If necessary the cylinder and its contents are placed in a constant-temperature bath to
avoid excessive temperature variation during the test. Readings of density are being reduced to 15°C,
and of specific gravity and API gravity to 60°F, by means of international standard tables.
ASTM D445 and IP71
Kinematic viscosity of transparent and opaque liquids and the calculation of dynamic viscosity.
The time is measured in second for a fixed volume of liquid to flow under gravity through the capillary of a
calibrated viscometer under a reproducible driving head and at a closely controlled temperature. The
kinematic viscosity is the product of the measured flowtime and the calibration constant of the viscometer.
ASTM D97 and IP15
Pour point of petroleum oils.
After preliminary heating, the sample is cooled at a specified rate examined at intervals of 3°C (or 5°F) for
flow characteristics. The lowest temperature at which movement if the oil is observed is recorded as the
pour temperature at which movement of the oil is observed is recorded as the pour point.
ASTM D938 and IP76
Congealing point of petroleum waxes, including petrolatum.
A sample of wax is melted and a droplet is made to adhere to the bulb of a thermometer. Using a
prewarmed flask as an air jacket, the droplet on the bulb is allowed to cool at a fixed rate until is congeals.
The congealing point is observed as the temperature at which the droplet ceases to flow as the
thermometer is turned.
IP77
Salt content crude oil and petroleum products.
The sample is extracted with water in the presence of a solvent and a demulsifying agent in a TEL
extraction apparatus; the halides in the extract are determined volumetrically after the removal of
sulphide. The result is expressed as sodium chloride.
ASTM D3230
Salt in crude oil (electrometric method).

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 99

This method is based on the conductivity of a solution of crude oil in a polar solvent when subjected to
an alternating electrical voltage. The sample is dissolved in a mixed solvent when and placed in a test
cell consisting of a beaker and two parallel steel plates. An alternating voltage is impressed on the plates
and the resulting current flow is measured. The salt content is obtained by reference to a calibration
curve of current versus salt content of known mixtures.
ASTM D2500 and IP219
Cloud point of petroleum products.
The sample is cooled at a specified rate and examined periodically. The temperature at which haziness
is first observed at the bottom of the test jar is recorded as the cloud point.
This method covers only petroleum oils which are transparent in layers 38 mm in thickness, and with a
cloud point below 49°C (120°F); therefore it is rarely applicable for crude oils.
For dark oils, which are not transparent the Bondi method may be used. The sample is heated to a
temperature well above the expected cloud point (at least + 25°C) in a pour point/cloud point jar is placed
in an sir jacket in a thermostatically controlled bath, maintained at a temperature at lease 25°C lower than
the expected cloud point. A record is made of the temperature at 1 minute intervals. A plot of the
logarithm of the temperature versus time will show the cloud point by a break in the straight line,
indicating a slowing of the cooling rate by crystallisation heat release.
More than one break may be observed when distinctly different wax fractions are present.
IP24
Distillation of crude petroleum, preliminary distillation.
100 ml of the sample is distilled in specified glass apparatus under prescribed condition of heat input
and rate of distillation. The volume of distillates obtained at each multiple of 25°C is recorded, up to a
maximum of 300°C, when the distillation is stopped.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 100

UOP 46
Parrafin Wax Content of Petroleum Oils and Asphalts
Light, clear oils are analyzed as received. Heavily colored oils and asphalts are clarified by treatment with
sulfuric acid. The asphalt-free sample is dissolved in warm methylene chloride. This solution is chilled to
30° C and filtered through a cold fritted glass filter. The wax collected on the filter is removed with hot
hexane. The hexane is evaporated and the wax weighed.
ASTM D 3246 / ASTM D 3120
Sulfur in Petroleum Gas by Oxidative Microcoulometry
A sample is injected into a combustion tube maintained at about 800 °C having a flowing stream of gas
containing about 80% oxygen and 20% inert gas (for example, nitrogen, argon, etc). Oxidative pyrolisis
converts the sulfur to sulfur dioxide which then flows into a titration cell where it reacts with triiodide ion
present in the electrolyte. The triiodide thus consumed, is coulometrically replaced and the total current
required to replace it is a measure of the sulfur present in the sample injected.
ASTM 664
Acid value of dark coloured petroleum products, crude oils, bitumen involving potentiometric titron with
alcoholic potassium hydroxide.
IP 143
Asphaltenes* precipitation with normal heptane.
A quantity of the sample is dissolved in n-heptene and the insoluble material, consisting of asphaltenes
and waxy substances, is separated under hot reflux with n-heptane, and the asphaltenes are isolated by
extraction with toluene or benzene.
The extraction with benzene is not normally recommended because of the high toxicity of this material
and should only be used for referee purposes. In normal practice use toluene instead of benzene. The
precision of the method when using toluene has been found to be the same as when using benzene.
* Note:
Asphaltenes
Asphaltenes are defined based on their solubility, i.e. they are soluble in light aromatics (benzene,
toluene ) and insoluble in paraffins such as pentane, hexane, heptane, etc. The yield and the
composition of the asphaltenes precipitated depends on many factors such as the hydrocarbons
used, the precipitated depends on many factors such as the hydrocarbons used, the precipitation
time and the oil-solvent ratio. All methods give different results because they all precipitate a different
fraction of the colloidally dispersed particles present in crude oil.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 101

APPENDIX 3.3 - THE BOTTLE TEST
Apparatus and materials
• Separating funnels, 2 litres capacity

• 200 ml graduated screwcap test bottles
• 100 ml screwcap bottles for demulsifier stock solutions
• Hypodermic syringes 2 ml capacity, graduated in 0.1 ml increments
• Graduated pipettes or hypodermic syringes of 1 ml capacity graduated in 0.1. ml increments
• Volumetric pipettes of 5, 10 and 25 ml capacity
• A hand operated or electrically driven centrifuge provided with a head suitable for centrifuge
tubes of 10 ml capacity
• Graduated centrifuge tubes of 10 ml capacity
• A thermostatic bath, adjustable to the settling temperature prevailing in the field
• Solvent for demulsifier stock solutions.
Emulsion sample
Use fresh samples uncontaminated with demulsifier and other unwanted treatment chemicals.
Follow the sampling directions discussed in Section 3.3.

Test procedure
• Prepare 2% solutions of the demulsifiers to be tested by adding 2 ml of demulsifier (with a

hypodermic syringe) to 98 ml of the stock solution solvent and shaking. Make sure to avoid
contamination of one demulsifier by another by scrupulously cleaning syringes, pipettes and
glassware with solvent. Store the stock solutions in the dark and do not keep them longer than
two weeks. Do not use water to prepare stock solutions: most demulsifiers will be decomposed by
hydrolysis.
• Remove free water from the emulsion using the separating funnels. Determine the BS & W
content of the remaining sample according to standard test method to ensure that the emulsified
water content is representative for the field conditions.
• Pour 100 ml samples of emulsion into the 200 ml graduated test bottles. Using a graduated
pipette or hypodermic syringe, treat the emulsion samples with the required quantity of stock
solution (0.5 ml of 2% stock solution, added to 100 ml of emulsion corresponds to a treatment
ratio of 100 ppm). Initial ratio testing is usually carried out with treatment ratios if 100, 200 and
300 ppm, which are subsequently adjusted in the light of the first results. Always include a blank
test. Use clean glassware to avoid contamination.
• Shake the bottles by hand 100, 200 or 300 times or whatever is needed to disperse the
demulsifier thoroughly through the emulsion. Destabilisation can be observed by comparing the
colour of the treated emulsions with the blank. A stable emulsion is cloudly whereas a broken one
will appear brighter.
• Allow the samples to settle and observe the quantity of water separated as a function of time.
Note the presence and appearance of sludge layer between the separated oil and water
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 102

• On completion of the settling period the bottles may be reshaken 100 times and left to settle for a
second time. The results will give an indication of the tendency towards the reemulsification.
• Finally, a 5 ml sample of oil may be withdrawn with a volumetric pipette from near the oil/water
interface for determination of the BS & W content according to e.g. ASTM D96. A sample of the
separated water can be taken in a similar manner to determination of the oil content.
APPENDIX 3.4 - LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES FOR DEHYDRATION TESTS
Pretreatment of oil sample
• Bring the thermostatted mixer (Waring Blender model HGB-100) to the required emulsification
temperature (Tem).
• Add 50 ml (artificially made) de-oxygenated production water at temperature Tem
• Add 200 ml crude oil from tank at temperature Tem.
The above mixture should be heated to a temperature well above the cloud point of the (preferably the
reservoir temperature) for at least two hours in a closed container (to avoid light end losses) and under a
nitrogen blanket.
The above mixture should be subsequently well homogenized. After the heating the may be cooled to a
temperature still well above the cloud point, but sufficiently low to allow some oil to be taken from the
mixture without extensive light end losses.
Pretreatment of water sample
The water used for making up water-in-oil emulsions should be oxygen-free. A simple nitrogen purge is
sufficient. The chemical composition of the water must be the same as the composition of the produced
water. Water used in the test should be stored under nitrogen at the emulsification temperature in closed
(glass or plastic) containers.
Dehydration test
• Mix at high speed under nitrogen.

Note: Two minutes mixing times have often been used/recommended in the past. Experience has
shown that this is excessive and generates emulsions which are significantly more stable than
reality.
• Cool the created emulsion to the required settling temperature (Ts).
• Add the appropriate amount (usually 25, 50, 100, 200 or 400 ppm) of demulsifier (10 % dilution in
toluene) and mix for 10 seconds at low speed.
• Quickly transfer the mixture into a calibrated settling tube (at KSEPL the tubes used are 250 ml, φ
= 37 mm, H = 24 cm).
• Seal off settling tube and place the settling tube in a waterbath at the required settling
temperature Ts (usually 20, 40, 60 or 80 °C).
• Record: total liquid volume in the settling tube (V ml), amount of free water separated after t
seconds 'static" settling (x (t) ml), amount of sludge (emulsion) at the oil/water interface (a
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 103

considerable reduction in interfacial emulsion content can sometimes be obtained by enforcing
some liquid motion by rotating the settling tube rapidly a few times).
• When the bulk of the water has separated, take (with a syringe) small samples (0.1 ml max.) of
the phase at the top, middle and bottom of the oil phase at specific time intervals (15 min, 30
min,1 h,2 h, 12h,24 h).Analyse these samples for water content with a Karl Fisher titration.
• Note: The size of the syringe needle is an important factor in withdrawing samples of settled oil
for determination of residual water contents. Large diameter needles are more likely to give
representative samples of emulsions because they are less likely to preferentially draw instead of
water droplets.
• At the same time take a sample from the water phase, acidify it to pH = 2 and analyse for oil
content note the amount of water taken out of the settling tube).
• When the test are done with an actually produced emulsion, the original watercut is unknown and
must be determined afterwards.
APPENDIX 3.5 – CALCULATIONS REQUIRED FOR THE STATIC DEHYDRATION TEST
Dehyration curve
If the dehydration behaviour of an emulsion is investigated, the amount of free water separated from the
emulsion (x(t) ml) under static settling conditions is measured with time.
Suppose the total liquid volume in the settling tube is V ml. The total watercut is y %v (usually 10 %v in
case of laboratory tests). When x ml water has separated, the amount of water still contained in the oil
phase is given by:
y/100 V – x(t)
(t)= * 100 (%v)
V – x(t)
based on oil volume.
The values of φ(t) can be plotted against time, giving a ‘dehydration curve’.
Curve fitting
The experimentally determined points φi(t) can be fitted by a three-parameter function given by:
bt n
ρ(t)= ∞ ∞
When such computer facilities are not available, a reasonable estimate of the parameters can also be
obtained by estimating φ∞ from the experimental dehydration curve, and fitting b and n by means of
simple linear regression, available on almost any calculator.
For this purpose, equation 1 is rewritten as:
∞
ln b tn
(t)
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 104

(t) b tn
b and n are then given by:
∑ ln ti ∑ ln i
∑ ln ti ln i
n= N
∑ ln ti
∑ ln ti n
N
∑ ln i ∑ ln ti
b exp n
N N
Where N = number of data points.
With a correlation coefficient given by:
∑ ln ti ∑ ln i
∑ ln ti ln i
r
∑ ln ti ∑ ln i
∑ ln ti ∑ ln i
N N
Fits with correlation coefficient > 0.9 are considered sufficiently accurate.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 105

APPENDIX 3.6 – DEHYDRATION TEST REPORT SHEET

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 106

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 107

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 108

4 ASPECT OF DEOILING AND PRODUCED WATER DISPOSAL
4.1 Oil-in-water emulsions
4.1.1 General
The water produced from an oil gas well and separated in a dehydration process always contains some
hydrocarbons (and dissolved organic acids, see Section 4.2.3.1). These hydrocarbons are a dispersed
phase (oil-in-water emulsion) and dissolved in the water (mainly relatively low molecular weight
aromatics).
Like in the dehydration process, the separation of emulsified oil from water is, in principle, effected in
three steps:
• destabilisation of the oil-in-water emulsion by chemical treatment (deoilers);

• coalescence of the destabilised oil droplets by controlled agitation;
• separation of the oil and water phase by gravity.
In selecting the best performing demulsifier from the results of bottle tests (Chapter 3), the quality of the
water phase in terms of oil content is usually taken into account. Quite often both an effectively
dehydrated crude containing only little water, and a good/acceptable oil-in-water quality can be obtained
with a suitable demulsifier. In that case in the above treatment sequence for oil-in-water separation, the
first step, viz. destabilisation, can be left out and only coalescence followed by segregation of oil from
water may have to be promoted. During the coalescence step an additional chemical (deoiler) may then
be required in order to assist in the coalescence process.
Only in cases where very stable oil-in-water emulsions are encountered (heavy oil, high mixing
intensities), where very fine oil droplets in the water are present (deoiling equipment is designed to
remove oil droplets above a certain droplet diameter) and depending on the composition of the oil and
production conditions, is destabilisation by chemical treatment followed by coalescence and gravity
separation required.
Deoiling equipment is reviewed in Chapter 6 and its selection and application in Chapter 7.
4.1.2 Emulsification
Briefly the following mechanisms can cause oil-in-water emulsification:
• Stabilisation of oil-in-water emulsion is promoted by e.g. soaps of univalent cations such as Na+
+
and Li , and in some cases also by the demulsifier used such to destabilise water-in-oil emulsions. The
latter may occur when an overdose of demulsifier has been used. In other cases where a fast acting
demulsifier has been selected, oil-in-water emulsions may result requiring additional treatment by a
suitable deoiler.
• The use of corrosion inhibitors, in particular in gas production operations, can cause very small oil
droplets which do not separate from ambient water but remain very small dispersed in the water phase.
• High mixing intensities can cause very small oil droplets which do not separate from ambient
water but remain dispersed in the water phase.
• Increase of the pH, for instance caused by the escape of CO2 upon heating of crude containing
water with bicarbonate in solution, to the range of 8 -10 and higher, cause components of the water
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 109

phase, resulting in a reduction of interfacial tension. Low interfacial tensions facilitate emulsification of oil-
in-water and water-in-oil: less agitation or mixing intensity is then required to form emulsions.
• Stable oil-in-water emulsions may result when:
– NaCl concentration of the aqueous phase lies in the range of 0-30,000 ppm NaCl;
– the concentration of divalent cations is very low; however, this will also be dependent on the
actual water composition.
Stable oil-in-water emulsions are not normally obtained when the salinity is in the order of 100,000 mg/l or
higher. A notable exeption, however, is the Gannet crude (North Sea), with a formation water salinity of
150,000 mg/l, where clear residual emulsions were observed in bottle tests.
Oil-in-water emulsions may be effectively broken by the addition of:
• acids, which lower the pH of the system and which, depending on the stabilising compound, could
result in better deoiling;
• divalent cations, resulting in soaps that are unsuitable as stabilisers for oil-in-water emulsions;
• suitable surfactant (see Section 4.1.3).
4.1.3 Deoilers
As for a water-in-oil emulsion the stability of an oil-in-water (reverse) emulsion us affected by emulsifying
agents. In a reverse emulsion these emulsifying agents tend to be anionic in nature (i.e. the water soluble
part carries a negative charge), and they impart this negative charges cause electrical repulsion between
the oil droplets. The negative charges cause electrical repulsion between the oil droplet coalescence.
This effect is overcome by the additional of a reverse emulsion breaker (or deoiler) upstream in the
produced water treatment facilities.
Reverse emulsion breakers contain mixtures of cationic (i.e. positively charged) surface active agents and
polymers. The chemicals are dispersed in the continuous active agents and polymers. The chemicals are
dispersed in the continuous water phase and migrate to the oil droplet-water interfaces. The type pf
reverse emulsion breaker required for any particular system is determined by on-site laboratory tests
(bottle tests) and the dosage optimised for continuous application during subsequent field trails.
Two problems can result of an optimum dosage is not attained:
i) Underdosing
During steady state plant conditions underdosing may not be apparent. However, during plant
upsets (loss of separator interface levels, etc.) high concentrations of oil in the separator interface
levels, etc.) high concentrations of oil in the separated water can occur until steady conditions are
re-established.
ii) Overdosing
High levels of reverse emulsion breaker can have similar effects to overdosing with demulsifiers
except that the recovered oil from the produced water processing system will contain a high water
content. In addition, water processing system will contain a high water content. In additional,
gross overdosing can lead to over-neutralisation of the charges present on the dispersed oil
droplets (i.e. from negative to positive) causing re-stabilisation of the emulsion. Overdosing can
result in higher than normal oil-in-water levels being present during steady plant conditions.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 110

In conclusion, for effective dehydration and deoiling, careful control over the chemical dosage is
necessary for the continuous and efficient operation of the process facilities.
4.1.4 Mixing and coalescence

The additional of a deoiler chemical to the process should occur at a location where oil-in-water
emulsions are separated from the "dry" crude. If deoilers are added at an earlier stage in the process,
where the demulsifier is still present and acting, the combined presence of deoiler and demulsifier may
result in both chemicals to become ineffective, and (re)stabilisation of either o/w or w/o emulsions may
occur.
The point of deoiler addition should be selected such that sufficient mixing occurs for the chemical to
become effectively point may be required.
Once the oil-in-water emulsion has been destabilised, coalescence of individual oil droplet should be
promoted and improved as much as possible. This is sometimes done with the aid of a coalescer pipe or
by the use of coalescer units (Chapter 6).
Similar to the dehydration process, a certain amount of mixing energy is required to promote and optimise
coalescence. For deoiling, a mixing energy of 11,000-110,000 cm²/s³ (500-5000 psi/hr) is required to
promote efficient coalescence. This is a higher energy level (by approximately a factor of 5) than that
required for effective dehydration (see also Chapter 2).
4.1.5 Deoiling tests

Deoiling tests are mainly carried out to:
• screen chemicals enabling improvement of the deoiling of the water phase;

• test coalescing equipment in order to improve the oil/water separation process.
Experience has shown that deoiling test with oil-in-water emulsions representative for field conditions, are
difficult to perform. One of the reasons is the representativeness of the water sample in terms of oil
content and droplets size distribution. Droplets of in particular light oil dispersed in the water phase may
separate quickly and an oily water sample to be used for testing will become non-representative after a
relatively short period of time. It is therefore recommended to carry out deoiler screening tests and
coalescing tests directly in field installations. In this respect a bench model Wemco unit is available in the
market to perform such tests. BSP's experience is that it is a good machine to screen and rank chemicals.
4.2 Disposal of produced water
4.2.1 General
Production water is the total water discharged from the production process, which has been in contact
with produced hydrocarbons. It includes (flashed) formation water, but it can also be the result of the
mixing of formation water with various proportions of other waters (for instance during processing and
storage operations on a platform, or following subsurface breakthrough of water injected into the reservoir
for pressure support). Production water generally contains hydrocarbon in a dispersed (oil-in-water
emulsion) and dissolved phase, and organic components in varying amounts, not directly originating from
the produced hydrocarbons (see also Section 4.2.3.1.).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 111

Production water needs to be disposed of. Depending on the type of the disposal method and the oil-in-
water quality (both dispersed and dissolved oil), a further reduction in hydrocarbon content of the
production water is usually required in a deoiling process. With the currently applied deoiling techniques
in EP operations, only dispersed hydrocarbons can be reduced.
The methods which are available for the disposal of production water include the following:
b) Injection into subsurface formations, e.g. non-potable aquifers or hydrocarbon-bearing

reservoirs in support if a water injection scheme, or a water-based EOR scheme.
c) Discharge to surface water, where there is sufficient dispersion, e.g. open sea, coastal
waters.
For first mentioned disposal method, normal water injection considerations need to be taken into account,
and the allowable suspended oil concentration is dictated by plugging tendency of the reservoir could be
an attractive alternative. In some operations it may be possible to inject the separated oily water without
any further treatment (e.g. N. Oman), whilst in other cases only a few g/m³ of dispersed oil in the water is
allowed.
The degree of treatment of production water required in the case of surface disposal will be depend on
the quality of the dehydration water and on the legislation governing the water quality requirements for
disposal into the environment. In the absence of regulatory limits, environmental quality considerations
need to be taken into account. This latter aspect is discussed in more detail in Section 4.2.2.2.
Visible detection of oil-in-water is virtually impossible for low oil concentrations, as can be noticed from
the following table:
Table 4.1: Oil 'sheen’ guide
oil concentration (g/m³) Effect on water surface
0 - 30 Not visible
30- 60 Silvery sheen
60-100 Traces of colour
> 120 Bright colour
> 400 Dull colour
> 800 Dark colour
In all cases of surface disposal there are a number of quality criteria to be considered, such as
biochemical oxygen demand, salinity, heavy metals, and oil content. As to the last mentioned parameter,
the manner in which the allowable oil concentration is specified and the analytical method for estimation
of oil-in-water content are critically important for monitoring and control of oily water disposal. This is
discussed in more detail in Section 4.2.3.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 112

4.2.2 Water quality requirements
4.2.2.1 Downhole injection
When disposal of produced water by downhole injection is considered feasible and/or desirable, careful
evaluation of the plugging tendency of dispersed oil in the formation and the effects of residual oil
saturation on the injectivity is required if injection under intentional fracturing is not allowed. To this end
core flushing test may be required to determine the allowable maximum suspend oil concentration and oil
droplet sizes. The results of such tests are also of importance for the selection and design of required
deoiling equipment.
Aspects which also need to be taken into account when downhole injection is considered include;
• Is filtration required and if so, what degree?

• Is mixing of produced water with injection water permitted/possible (formation of scale, bacterial
growth)?
When injection of disposal water under fracturing conditions is acceptable, more relaxed water quality
specifications can be tolerated.
For a detailed discussion on water injection and water quality requirements, reference is made to the
Water Injection Manual EP-63600, and the relevant references mentioned therein.
4.2.2.2 Surface disposal

For the disposal of production water into surface waters, the amount of organic and inorganic
components and, in particular, the amount of hydrocarbons allowed in the discharge water, is in a
significant number of cases governed by regulatory limits as set by national or regional authorities. In the
absence of such regulations, the impact of production water disposal on the environment needs to be
carefully assessed. It is clear, however, that the environmental impact can be very different depending on
whether production water is discharge into in-land lakes, rivers, estuaries or into the open sea.
In order to assess the environmental impact for each situation an environmental quality objectives (EQO)
approach should be followed. This is based on the capacity of the receiving environment to assimilate the
effluent rather than on fixed standards for effluent quality. The EQO approach involves the following
steps:
i) Agree/decide on the use of the receiving water

ii) Determine the distribution, fate and effect of potentially polluting substances. Aspects to be
considered are eco- toxicity, persistency/(bio)degradability, bioaccumulation/tainting.
iii) Set standards for the receiving water.
iv) Set effluent quality limits based upon the results of i), ii) and iii).
While the setting of EQOs should considered the task of national and/or regional authorities, the settling
of effluent quality limits and the specification of their analytical methods should be carried out jointly in
specifications/consultations between the company responsible for the discharges and the local
authorities. This is of particular relevance when regulatory limits on oil-in-water content are tightened, and
the applied deoiling facilities cannot meet such requirements, thus necessitating the
application/development of new methods. This is discussed in more detail in Section 4.2.5.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 113

In Europe contacts and discussions between governments and oil companies are maintained by the Paris
Commissions (PARCOM) with governmental representatives from countries around the North Sea and
the E & P Forum, with representatives of Oil Industry.
The EQO approach should be used to assess the acceptability of our aqueous discharges. This would be
based on a number of parameters such as:
• Flow volume; to assess the discharged volume against the receiving water.
• Flow velocities; to assess the potential for dispersion/dilution of the effluent.
• pH; this is restricted to a range between 5.5 and 9 in various countries (ASTM-D1293-78).
• Temperature; if there is a restriction for temperature discharge, it is normally limited to an
increase of maximum 5°C above background.
• BOD; biochemical oxygen demand, defined as the amount of oxygen expresses in mg/l,
consumed by micro organisms during stabilisation of organic matter under aerobic conditions
th
under prescribed conditions, usually over a five-day period and at 20°C (APHA P.483-15 ).
• COD; chemical oxygen demand, defined as the amount of oxygen, expressed in mg/l, consumed
under specific conditions in the chemical oxidation of the organic and the oxidisable matter
contained in waste water, corrected for the influence of chlorides (ASTM Test Method D-1252).
• TOC; total organic carbon, defined is the toal carbon content minus the inorganic carbon content
(ASTM-D-2579-78).
• TOD; total oxygen demand (ASTM-D-3250-77)
• Oil-in-water content (see Section 4.2.4).
• TSS; total suspended solids (ASTM-D-1888-78)
• Heavy metals (e.g. boron, mercury, etc.)
• Some chemical components and heavy metals; specifications from governments normally include
the determination of phenolics, nitrogen and sulphur.
• Salinity; too high salinity contrasts of production water with the receiving water can have toxic
and/or adverse effect on dilution/dispersion processes.
• Toxicity; to obtain an impression of the toxicity of a certain component or a composition of a
number of pollutants in waste water, fish or shrimp tests are most commonly used (ASTM-D-
1345.59). The toxic effect of an aqueous material is described by its LC50 value, which is the
lethal concentration at which 50% of the test organisms will die within a prescribed time (usually
96 hours). Location; tropical areas have higher rates of biodegradation than temperate areas due
to higher temperature and longer sunshine hours.
Some typical specifications for aqueous effluents are summarised in Table 4.2.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 114

Table 4.2 – Typical specifications for aqueous effluents
Parameter River (Refineries) Disposal Point Sea Sewer
Temperature (oC) 30 30 <45
BOD (ppm) 20 400 -
TSS (ppm) 30 - -
pH 5.6 – 8.5 - 6.5 – 9.0
Oil content (ppm) 10 Section 4.2.3.2 20
H2S (ppm) 2.0 - 1.0
The number of parameters that need to be checked before disposal varies depending on where the
production water is discharged. For offshore discharges only the oil-in-water content has been specified
by regulations so far, whereas for discharges into coastal water of rivers most or all of the above
parameters need to be monitored. The parameter common to all monitoring programmes is the oil-in-
water content. This parameter and its analytical method will be discussed in more detail in the following
sections.
4.2.3 Oil-in-water
4.2.3.1 Occurrence and environmental aspects
As mentioned earlier, production water is the total water from the production process which has been in
contact with the produced hydrocarbons. Since formation water has existed for a very long time in contact
with the minerals in the formation, it may be saturated with salts of organic acids, (e.g. acetic, proprionic,
butyric, acids, etc.). These compounds occur naturally in formation water in varying amounts, and their
occurrence may not be related to the formation water in varying amounts, and their occurrence may not
be related to the presence of hydrocarbons. In addition, formation water may contain soluble fractions of
hydrocarbons. When formation water comes to the surface and the pressure is released, some of the
dissolved gases flash off. In some cases, where there is a high concentration of bicarbonate ions, carbon
dioxide can be released, precipitating carbonates of alkaline metals such as calcium and producing
emulsions.
The organic components present in production water, which may consist of formation water alone, or a
mixture of formation and injection water, and small amounts of other waste water (e.g. from washing
decks, etc.) can be categorised into four groups:
a) Dispersed non-volatile oil, containing a proportion of light ends and hydrocarbon gases.
b) Light hydrocarbons dissolved in the water (mostly low molecular weight aromatics, naphthenic
acids, etc. and hydrocarbon gases).
c) Salt of organic acids or other acidic material dissolved in the water.
d) Relatively small, but possibly significant quantities of production chemicals (demulsifiers,

corrosion inhibitors, etc.)
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 115

As far as the environmental impact of the organic constituents of production water discharges is
concerned, indications are that any adverse biological effects are associated with the aromatic
compounds present in the oil. Of these, the lower molecular weight aromatics are appreciably soluble in
water whereas those of higher molecular weight are dissolved in the suspended oil phase.
In Table 4.3 the solubility of some hydrocarbons in water is listed. It can be observed that aromatics are
much more soluble than aliphatic components, with benzene (C6H6) having highest solubility of 1.7 g/I.
Table 4.3: Solubility *) of hydrocarbons in water (mg/l at 15°C)
Those components of oil which are dissolved in water, such as light aromatics, naphthenic acids, normal
paraffins, etc., as well as the non-hydrocarbon organic matter dissolved in water, are known to be readily
destroyed over a period of time by the bacteria present in natural waters such as the sea. Effects due to
dissolved organic components are therefore only likely to be observed in the immediate vicinity of the
discharge point.
Heavier aromatics are in the suspended oil phase, which is amenable to removal by conventional deoiling
processes.
The environmental impact of non-hydrocarbon components on production water discharges (including

heavy metals) has only recently been studied in a systematic approach. The results are insufficient to
demonstrate, both in general and individual cases, that the production water discharge causes no reason
for concern. There is, therefore, considerable scope for improved monitoring and recording of such
discharges by OPU's in line with PETRONAS Group Minimum Environmental Management Standards
Implementation Guide PTS 60.3006.
4.2.3.2 Regulatory limits

In formulating regulations for the control of effluent into the environment, among the parameters of
relevance as discussed in Section 4.2.2.2, the hydrocarbon content of the discharge water has been
considered the most prominent and critical parameter, and most regulations, in particular those prominent
and critical parameter, and most regulations, in particular those relating to offshore discharges, specify
oil-in-water limits only. In this respect legislation has tended to follow public and environmental demand.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 116

Legislation in the past has been directed at the avoidance of fouling of the surface of the sea. That is to
say, it has been concerned with suspended (i.e. insoluble) non-volatile oil, and oil-in-water limits as
specified by regulatory bodies were (intended to be) referring to dispersed oil-in-water.
In this respect it is to be noted that limits were developed essentially on equipment performance
expectations and not on environmental impact considerations.
In formulating limits for hydrocarbon levels in effluent water, authorities have, in a number of cases, also
specified the analytical method for determining oil-in-water. Several methods for this purpose are
available/suitable (see also Section 4.2.4.) which, however, may give results that are:
• not directly mutually comparable, and

• can be very dependent on sample handling and preparation.
These aspects are discussed in more detail in Section 4.2.4.
Various oil-in-water limits as currently applied in several countries are listed in Table 4.4, together with the
required analytical method, if specified. As will be discussed more extensively in Section 4.2.4, with the
analytical methods specified, including sample handling/preparation, these limits refer, however, to total
oil content, i.e. dispersed plus dissolved oil rather than to dispersed oil only. Regulatory limits are not
always explicit at this point and some confusion may exist on how to interpret specific oil-in-water limits.
In Western Europe the PARCOM has made recommendations for a target standard limit for 40 ppm
hydrocarbons in effluent water (based on equipment performance considerations), as determined by the
infrared method (Section 4.2.4.3.). This therefore, in principle, refers to the total amount of oil. The
PARCOM recommendation has been adopted by several countries, including the Netherlands and the
UK. In Appendix 4.1, the origin and development of the PARCOM standard is briefly reviewed.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 117

Table 4.4 – National oil-in-water limits
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 118

With significant variability if analytical results for oil-in-water determination possible (Section 4.2.4.5.), it is
required in several countries that discharges meet a monthly average and/or maximum for any sample
instead of a rigid limit.
The regulatory limits as currently in use in most countries refer to levels of hydrocarbons in effluent water
only. As discussed in Section 4.2.3.1, production water may also contain significant amounts of other
organic components which are of non-hydrocarbon origin, but are discharged into the environment with
the production water. Currently there is a tendency for regulatory limits for effluent water to be tightened
up, and possibly to also restrict the total amount of organic material (i.e. dispersed and dissolved oil, and
organic non-hydrocarbons) to be discharged. In such a case levels of TOC need to be
determine/controlled to comply with regulations. If such more stringent regulations would come into effect,
current deoiling facilities are not adequate and more advanced water treatment techniques may have to
be applied/developed.
4.2.4 Determination of hydrocarbons in water

The determination of hydrocarbons in water consists of a number of steps preceding the actual
measurement viz.:
• sampling;
• acidification;
• extraction with a solvent;
• clean-up/removal of polar compounds.
Each of this intermediate steps can strongly influence the outcome of the measurement and care should
be taken to avoid such interferences with the final result. In the following paragraphs these steps are
discussed in some detail.
4.2.4.1 Sampling
Sampling of mixtures containing two or more phases e.g. water and oil, is very difficult unless the mixture
is completely emulsified or in a very fine stable dispersion (see also Section 3.3).
In general, the larger the sample, the more likely it is to be representative for the average mixture
composition. However, for practical reasons, the usual sample size is about 1 litre. The smaller the
residual oil droplets, the more evenly dispersed they are likely to be. Care should be exercised to avoid
sampling the surface of a liquid (which is likely to be unrepresentative). "Isokinetic" equal linear velocity
sampling in mid stream is the best but rarely possible. The sampling line should first be flushed well and
the sample should be taken quickly. In practice, it is best to sample after a pump, or similar turbulent area
where the stream is well mixed.
For sampling points the PARCOM specifies the following locations:
i) Immediately downstream of the oily water separator, or separators if a number operate in parallel
or series.
ii) From, or just downstream of, a turbulent region.
Although it sounds obvious, it cannot be stressed too strongly that sample bottles should be scrupulously
clean and preferably of glass. Bottles on oily sites and operator's hands can have thin surface films of oil
or even detergent residues after washing, both of which can give rise to erroneous and high oil readings.
Bottles must not be rinsed with the sample as this can put an oil film on the bottle and give a false high
reading. The whole of the sample should be analysed and the bottle washed with solvent. Only glass or
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 119

inert plastic (such as teflon) stoppers should be used. Cork or other absorbent materials must not be used
unless covered with aluminium foil.
The person doing the sampling must be well trained and experienced, and be able to recognise a spoilt or
unrepresentative sample should this occur. Samples must be correctly labelled immediately after being
taken and any abnormal circumstances noted on the sample. Where the slightest doubt exists, the
sample should be thrown away and a new one taken in a fresh container.
The frequency of sampling obviously depends on the practicability at each site. Sufficient analyses should
be performed to give a representative average. At an adequately manned site, a frequency of sampling
and analysis of once per 12-hour shift is recommended to effectively monitor equipment performance
(unmanned sites have obvious problems if accessibility and are a special case).
PARCOM guidelines on sampling specify for platforms discharging continuously, at least 16 samples per
month, with samples to be taken at pre-arranged intervals.
4.2.4.2 Sample preparation

According to the PARCOM method, all samples are to be purged at a temperature (30°C) with a nitrogen
purge gas flow (approximately 1 l/min) for 45 seconds, through a sintered frit. This strips out any
dissolved gases, which might interfere with the measurement and thus give unreliable/unrepeatable
results, but leaves the quantities of dissolved hydrocarbons greatly unaffected.
i) Acidification
If not analysed immediately, it is common to acidify the sample to pH 5 or often pH 2 to preserve the
sample against bacterial action and/or to dissolve precipitated calcium carbonate which would cause
difficulties in separating the solvent phase from the water, Hydrochloric acid is used to avoid problems
with calcium sulphate. Acidification is also meant to improve phase separation when extracted with a
solvent.
Acidification of the sample has the problem, however, that it can liberate organic acidic material from its
salts which can then be extracted by solvent and give a reading in the tests method. This is of particular
concern with the most commonly used infrared method (ref. Section 4.2.4.3.). The concentration of these
organic components in formation water can be as high as 1000 mg/l. However, as these organic are
polar, they can be removed by passing the solvent extract through a suitable adsorption column, prior to
analysis. This step is essential to obtain a relevant indication of oil in water. Otherwise a result would be
obtained which may be more indicative of TOC.
ii) Extraction
Solvent
Commonly used solvents in the past have been petroleum ether, diethyl ether, chloroform and carbon
tetrachloride. Of these, petroleum ether and diethyl ether can be used in conjunction with a gravimetric
measuring technique but they are highly inflammable and somewhat dangerous. Chloroform, although
one of the best solvents and carbon tetrachloride are toxic; consequently both these solvents are being
phased out of used for human health reasons.
Where an infrared method is used,1,1,2 trichloro, trifluoroethane (such as Freon 113) is becoming the
preferred, and in many countries the only acceptable solvent. However, Freon has been included in the
EEC List of Dangerous Substances and some authorities believe that it can interfere with the ozone level
in the atmosphere. Moreover, further disadvantages of Freon 113 are its greater volatility and its
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 120

somewhat lower solvency for hydrocarbons. Where a gravimetric or colorimetric measuring technique is
used, 1.1.1.-trichloroethane (B.Pt. 74°C) or dichloroethylene may be used.
The total quantity of solvent used ranges from about 15 ml/l (CONCAWE) to 120 ml/l (ASTM) and the
number if extractions from 1 to 3, with 1 or 2 extractions being commonly employed.
Mixing
Good mixing is of major importance in the oil extraction procedure. Experience shows this step can have
a decisive influence on the final result achieved. Regarding the extraction of hydrocarbons from the
sample there is wide variation in the procedures as far as the mixing mechanism and time, the quantity if
solvent used and the number of extractions required.
Several methods involve shaking by hand, other methods prescribe shaking by machine or used if a
magnetic stirrer. The mixing time ranges from 2 minutes for hand shaking, to 60 minutes using a shaking
machine (Swedish method).
iii) Filtration/drying
To remove polar and most of the water which can be associated with the solvent extract, it is practice to
filter the extract. The solvent extract must be dry and it is normal to pass it through an anhydrous sodium
sulphate or similar drying column.
iv) Removal of polar materials
To remove polar material, especially acids liberated by acidification, which will interfere with the oil-in-
water determination, the solvent extract must be passed through a column containing a polar adsorbent
such as activated silica-gel (e.g. Florisil) or alumina. Such absorbents may also remove some aromatic
hydrocarbons of high molecular weight which have polar properties. If extraneous polar material is not
removed from the sample the result of the oil-in-water determination will be too high. When the
extraneous polar material is removed, possibly including some of the high molecular weight aromatic
hydrocarbons, the deviation from the true value of the oil-in-water will depend on the composition of the
hydrocarbons in the effluent sample.
The result may still be affected by the presence, if any, of non-polar compounds, different from
hydrocarbons, in the extraneous material. A quantitative prediction of the deviation cannot, therefore, be
made.
It is worth mentioning here that the PARCOM recommended IR method for analysis of hydrocarbons in
water did initially not include the step of removing polar compounds from the solvent extract. Only
recently have recommendations has been made by PARCOM's Working Group on Oil Pollution, to revise
the prescribed analytical method and to include advance removal of polar compounds prior to infrared
analysis.
4.2.4.3 Infrared analysis if hydrocarbons in water

The infrared (IR) technique is the most commonly used analytical technique for the determination of
hydrocarbons in water. The method has evolved in the course of time, both in technique and
interpretation. The most salient features of a number of published methods are given in Appendices 4.2
and 4.3. The large number of different methods shown there serves to illustrate difficulty and sometimes
confusion involved in properly defining oil-in-water content and its measurement.
Briefly, the method consists of an extraction with solvent and further preparation as derailed in the
previous section. Sample preparation is extremely important for the final measurement result, since any
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 121

compound with a C-H bond, whether oily or not, will give a reading. Therefore, to apply the method to
determine the oil-in-water content, all other organic components which will increase the analytical result
and which are not related to the hydrocarbon content of the water, need to be removed (e.g. by
contacting with Florisil). It should also be clear that the IR method measures total oil content, since no
distinction is made between dispersed and dissolved oil.
The extract obtained is then made up to a standard volume which us scanned in an infrared
-1
spectrophotometer (e.g. the Horiba OCMA 200) in the range 3400 to 2500 cm , with the absorbance
measured at one or more of the following wavelengths:
3.38 µm (2959 cm-1) - CH3 groups

3.42 µm (2924 cm-1) - CH2 groups
3.30 µm (3030 cm-1) - CH groups (aromatic)
The next step in the analytical process is to convert the measured absorbances into an analytical result.
The most direct way consists of comparing the absorbances with those of a calibration solution, for which
use can be made of:
• "known oils ",such as those recovered from the gravity separators in a water treatment system.
Such separated oils do not necessarily reflect the mixture of hydrocarbons in the effluent finally released,
particularly where further treatment stages, such as air flotation and biotreatment, are included, however,
it is the closest approximation to the composition of the oil practically available.
• a "reference oil", consisting of a defined mixture of hydrocarbons such as benzene, isooctane and
cetane (see also Appendix 4.2). When the hydrocarbons in the water to be analysed have a group
composition similar to that of the reference oil, then the accuracy that can be obtained in this way is good.
However, the mixture selected may be quite different from the hydrocarbons being measured.
In a significant number of cases, and also in the PARCOM recommended IR method, the absorbance is
measured at only one wavelength (2924 cm-1) which is the characteristic absorption frequency of the
mostly dispersed aliphatic hydrocarbons.
In this respect it should be mentioned that in the presence if a high proportion of aromatic hydrocarbons,
the accuracy of these measurements is effected, resulting in erroneous oil content readings. The limits of
application of the "reference oil" in the IR method is given in the Dutch NEN method, which states that it is
not applicable when the aromatic content is such that the ratio between the absorbances at 3.30 and
3.42 µm is greater than 0.23, and only a qualitative expression of the oil content can then be derived.
An alternative to the used of "known oil" or "reference oils" is the use of typical specific absorption
coefficients (absorptivities) for calibration purposes. This makes the evaluation, within limits, independent
of the composition if the unknown hydrocarbon mixture in the water.
This way of calculating the analytical result does not directly account for carbon atoms fully substituted by
group other than hydrogen atoms, as these carbon atoms do not absorb in the IR. Such structures are
present in many hydrocarbons. In order to overcome this problems, correction factors have been
developed, but they are empirical and do not necessary apply to all the hydrocarbon mixtures, that may
be present in effluents. The problem does not exist if "known oils" are used as calibrated material.
Although the IR technique may be less appropriate for detection of aromatic hydrocarbons than some of
the other more sophisticated techniques, its ability to cover the whole range of hydrocarbons is
unmatched by techniques which could be considered to be within the normal scope of a laboratory on an
offshore platform. It is a quick method, which is used; its minimum determinability is around 0.1-0.2 mg
"oil" per litre of waste water.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 122

4.2.4.4 Other methods for analysis of hydrocarbons in water
The following summarises the most commonly used other analytical techniques for oil-in-water
determination.
i) Gravimetric method
The sample is extracted with a solvent which is filtered to remove solids, water and salt. The solvent is
evaporated under standard conditions and the residue is weighed. Dissolved gases do not interfere.
However, the gravimetric method generally results in lower values of oil-in-water than the IR method,
mainly because of inevitable evaporation losses.
The method needs care, takes some time and needs steady conditions where an analytical balance may
be used. It therefore needs a shore laboratory and is usually impractical on a platform. However, it is a
fundamental analysis-one weigh so many milligrammes of oil extracted from so many milligrammes of oil
extracted from so many litres of water-and is independent of calibration problems.
ii) Ultra violet fluorescence spectrometry
Aromatic compounds and those with conjugated or pseudo-conjugated double bonds present in oil,
fluoresce when exposed to suitable ultra violet light. The fluorescence may be related to the total oil
content if the proportion of aromatics and similar compounds is constant. This is usually not so but should
be with dispersed crude oil from a single well or single formation.
iii) Visible spectrum colorimetry
The solvent extract is either measured for absorbance in the visible light region or is directly visually
compared with (freshly) made up samples of the particular oil in the solvent. This latter method is easy
and quick to perform and can be quite accurate for a particular production water containing relatively high
oil contents.
The method has the advantage that dissolved gases and many other non-oily organic compounds, being
colourless, do not interfere. Other advantages are that it is not usually necessary to acidify the sample;
solvents containing hydrogen can be used; it is not normally necessary to filter, dry or pass the sample
through an adsorbtion column. However, the coloured components in crude oil are very easily absorbed
on surface and lost.
The equipment is simple and cheap and portable and is suitable for use under difficult conditions. This
method is used in the North Sea and some areas of the Middle East and Africa.
iv) Chromatography
The sample is extracted with a suitable solvent (n-pentane) and injected into a gas chromatographic
column, which separates hydrocarbons in order of boiling point. Gas chromatography gives a detail
picture of the composition of a sample and may be applied for special studies on individual oil
components, but not on a routine basis (time-consuming). The main disadvantage of this method is that
high boiling components are not detected (boiling point > 350°C) as they are not carried through the
column. The sensitivity of the method is 0.1 mg/l for oil; for single components less than 0.01 mg/l.
4.2.4.5 Variability of analytical results

Measured oil contents of a given treated effluent discharge by any particular precisely defined method
can vary for the following reasons:
1) Variations in the actual oil content.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 123

2) Variations due to unrepresentative sampling.
3) Inherent scatter in the analytical method.
4) Lack of skill or care on the part of the analyst.
5) False high values due to slightly oil sample bottles.
6) False readings due to error in calculation, confusion between samples, biological degradation, etc.
Of these, only 1) affects the environment. Outside the immediate vicinity of the discharge joint, the load
on the environment due to 1) is related to the long-term average, provided that the scatter is not too great
in relation to the volume of the receiving water.
The errors introduced by 3) and often 2) and 4) can be minimised by averaging over a large number of
results provided the system is operating steadily. False readings due to 5) and 6) can often be spotted by
eye or by a statistical analysis of the results.
The truest effect on the environment is obtained by eliminating phase readings under 5) and 6), where
possible and by averaging a large number of the remaining results. This is recognised in several
countries where discharges are required to meet a monthly average instead of a rigid limit, thereby not
being allowed to exceed maximum limit.
4.2.4.6 Measurement of dispersed oil

Currently installed deoiling facilities in EP operations are only effective in removing/reducing dispersed
oil-in-water, and dissolved hydrocarbons are left unaffected. It should be realised, however, that with the
analytical methods most commonly applied for the determination of hydrocarbons in water (i.e. the IR and
gravimetric methods) the total amount of hydrocarbons in water is measured, i.e. both dispersed and
dissolved oil.
In order to obtain a measure of dispersed oil in discharge water, which is also indicative of the
performance of deoiling equipment, the response of the analytical method to an identical sample in the
absence of the substance which it is desired to measure, i.e. the dispersed oil, should be measured. The
background response is called a "blank" and must be subtracted from the response of the whole sample.
It is important to carry out the blank determination on a real sample, and not just the reagents or even on
a pseudo sample made from pure laboratory reagents. In the case of oily water, the most convenient
approach to a background reading is to filter the sample through a suitable fine filter to remove the
suspended oil, and the filtrate thus constitutes the sample for the blank measurement.
4.2.5 Discharge of production water from gas/condensate platform

As discussed in Section 4.2.3.2 most regulatory limits for allowable oil-in-water content refer to dispersed
oil only, or in the absence of explicit guidelines, they have been interpreted in that sense. As said before
(Section 4.2.3.), from an environmental point of view, the dispersed oil with relatively heavy molecular
weight aromatics dissolved in the oil droplets in the effluent water is generally considered to be the main
pollutant.
Currently installed deoiling facilities in E & P operations are designed for/capable of removing or reducing
the amount of dispersed oil.
The most commonly used analytical technique for oil-in-water determination (also specified by regulatory
authorities) is the infrared technique which measures both dispersed oil plus dissolved oil (i.e. total oil),
provided the organic non-hydrocarbons (polar compounds) are sufficiently removed from the sample.
Since most crudes contain relatively small amounts of soluble components (low molecular weigh
aromatics) which could contribute in the order if up to 10 mg/l to the oil-in-water readings of the IR
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 124

method, discharge water from oil platforms has generally been able to meet regulatory limits with the
currently installed conventional deoiling facilities.
During production of gas, condensate is also produced together with (condensed) water. This condensate
is characterised by a relatively high content of lower aromatics (up to 30% in volume). These aromatics
are much more soluble in water (in particular benzene) than the aliphatic hydrocarbons in the condensate
and therefore, they contaminate the production water disproportionately. Effluent water from
gas/condensate platforms therefore contains significant quantities of dissolved hydrocarbons (up to
several hundreds of ppm) which are not removed by conventional deoiling facilities. Analysis if a sample
from such production water by the IR method would therefore result in a very high reading of
hydrocarbons in water.
The above situation is aggravated by the use of corrosion inhibitors in gas production operations, which
promote the formation of very fine emulsions (which are difficult to remove). Moreover, corrosion inhibitors
are not efficiently removed from the sample together with the polar components, by an adsorbent (e.g.
florisil), thus giving a reading in the IR analysis.
Recently, concerns have been generated by the intention of authorities in some European countries (a.o.
the Netherlands) to implement the PARCOM recommendation for a limit of 40 mg/l oil in effluent water
also for gas/condensate platforms. The PARCOM recommendation also specifies the IR method for
analysis of discharge water.
The above intentions could create serious problems for the Industry since it is clear that this target limit
cannot be attained with the equipment presently installed. Only by installation of additional extensive
and/or expensive equipment of unproven performance offshore to remove both free and dissolved
hydrocarbons, could the above limit be achieved. As far as the analytical method for monitoring of
production water for hydrocarbon content is concerned, it is mentioned that the IR method as
recommended by the PARCOM is unsuitable for this particular case, since the aromatic to aliphatic
hydrocarbon ratio is too high (> 0.23, ref. Section 4.2.4.3.) thus resulting in erroneous oil-in-water values.
As far as implementation of the PARCOM recommendation for gas/condensate platforms is concerned

and its relevance for environmental considerations, it should be realised that despite the apparent high
dissolved hydrocarbon content in effluent water, the total production water discharged into the
environment from gas/condensate platforms, is very small as compared to the total discharges from oil
installations. In this respect it is mentioned that the total volume of hydrocarbons discharged from gas
platforms in the North Sea is some 200 tons/year, compared with a total hydrocarbon input from
production water of around 3000 tons/year.
Following recent discussions (early 1988) between the E & P Forum and PARCOM's Working Group on
Oil Pollution, it was decided by PARCOM to maintain the 40 mg/l target standard for hydrocarbons in
effluent water for gas/condensate platforms, but to modify the analytical method. Recommendations were
made to ensure IR absorbances at two wavelengths, viz. around 2924 cm-1 (CH2 groups) and around
3030 cm-1 (aromatics) and to "correct" the results by subtracting the contribution from the aromatic
hydrocarbons from the total result. In this manner a measure is obtained primarily for the aliphatic oil
content of production water. In addition, gas platforms discharging less than 2 tons hydrocarbons per year
will be exempted from the 40 ppm oil-in-water limit. In all other cases the 40 ppm target standard will have
to be met. At the time of writing, the matter was still under discussion, however.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 125

APPENDIX 4.1
E & P Forum
The Origin and Development of the PARCOM
Provisional Target Standard
by A.D. Read, E & P Forum
Report No. 2.43/142
(prepared for presentation to PARCOM Ad Hoc Working
Group on Platform-14 December 1987)
Abstract
A short review of the development of the provisional target standard since 1976 covering:
• the equipment performance basis,

• the North American experience prior to 1976 that led to these performance expectations,
• the original emphasis on oil platform discharges, and
• the development of analytical/sampling procedures to help ensure uniform application.
1. Introduction
Although the history of the 40 ppm standard covers only 11 years, only a few individuals have maintained
an involvement throughout this period.
This short note has been prepared by one who has been able to follow developments throughout the
period-from 76-87.
Considerations involved in decisions taken as long as in 1976 cannot of course be regarded as
necessarily relevant in 1987. However, it may be useful for those now involved, to be aware of
some of the underlying principles and assumptions behind some of the decisions taken earlier.
2. 1976
2.1 The development of the provisional target standard began in 1976, two years prior to the entry into
force of the Paris Convention in 1978.
2.2. Although offshore gas production started in 1967, oil production did not commence until 1972. In
the summer of 1976 the only oilfields in production in the North Sea were Argyll, Auk, Dan, Ekofisk
and Forties. None of them were at that time discharging produced water. However in anticipation
of such discharges the UK Department of the Environment published at that time a report entitled,
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 126

'The Separation of Oil From Water for North Sea Oil Operations'. This contained information on the
characteristics, likely volumes and treatment possibilities for these waters.
2.3. The subject was taken up in June 76 at the third meeting of the IPARCOM Technical Working
group which decided that agreement should be reached on the quality of discharges from oil
production installations.
2.4 This decision prompt the UK and France to prepare in September 76 the following statement
(IPARCOM (76)(14)) for the consideration of other States.
'...our belief is that it is important that all new platforms should be equipped with the
best practicable means for separating oil from discharged water, and that this means
are corrugated plate interceptors or gas flotation units, or other equipment capable of
reducing the average oil content of a discharge to within the range of 30 to 50 ppm. It
is in this sense that we interpret the recommended provisional target standard of the
order of 40 ppm. Our joint acceptance of this proposal is without prejudice to our view
that the control of marine pollution by crude oil by environmental quality objectives is
preferable.'
2.5. The meeting of the Interim Paris Commission held in Dublin later that year considered the above
statement and the purposed target standard of 40 ppm was accepted as being achievable using
current technology. They agreed to adopt the interpretation of this recommendation contained in
IPARCOM (76) (14). (i.e. as stated above).
2.6 Thus at its inception the 40 ppm limit was:
(i) based on equipment performance expectations of oily water treatment technology,

(ii) not associated with a particular analytical and sampling regime,
(iii) based not on North Sea, but largely on Gulf of Mexico experience (where the analytical
method was and still is the gravimetric method),
(iv) developed in the anticipation of production water discharges from oil production platforms,
but,
(v) not explicitly or implicitly stated as applying to the much smaller discharges from the already
well established gas platforms-the numerous references to oil and crude oil (underlined
above) suggest the converse.
3. 1978
3.1 A composite report was submitted to the sixth meeting of the Technical Working Group
(TWGVI/4/1) entitled, 'Progress in Implementation of the Provisional Target Standards for
Discharges from Offshore Oil Installations'. This was prepared by the UK from contributions
supplied by the Danish, French, Netherlands and Norwegian administrations. The report in
addition to reporting the progress made by the various stages in implementing the standards also
highlighted the need for agreement to be reached on sampling and analysis aspects. Most of the
national reports concentrated on oil platforms although the contribution from Norway did make
reference to a 30 ppm monthly average limit being applies to the Frigg gas complex.
4. First Meeting of Paris Commission The Hague November 1978, (1st Annual Report p7 para 30):
4.1 The Commission confirmed its acceptance of a provisional target standard for discharges from
offshore oil and gas installations of 40 ppm. It acknowledged that the provisional target standard
was essentially an equipment performance standard and that the 40 ppm figure was therefore a
mean which was considered achievable using present technology for separating oil from
discharged water.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 127

4.2. It would appear that a decision taken in 1976 to develop standards for discharges from oil
production platforms emerged in 1978 as a decision to apply an identical standard to oil and gas
installations, without any formal consideration in the interim of the need fro or justification of the
application of an identical limit to the low volume discharges from gas installations.
4.3. It is clear that had the standards been developed on an environmental quality objective approach
(the preferred approach mentioned by the UK and France in 1976 (para 2.4 above), different limits
would have been introduced for the different type and magnitude of discharges from oil and gas
production installations.
5. Analytical and sampling Aspects.
5.1. The need for the provisional target standard to be associated with an appropriate sampling and
analysis regime was clearly apparent. In the selection of the approved analytical procedure the
equipment performance nature of the standard was recognised. An example of this approach is
contained in the Third Annual Report, p 3 para 15, where inclusion of the optional gas purge stage
was discussed:-
'15. At its Second Meeting the Commission had approved the methods of sampling and
analysis for implementing the provisional target standard of 40 mg/l for discharges form oil
and gas production platforms. Recognising that a nitrogen purge might be desirable in
samples containing high concentrations of low molecular weight hydrocarbon gases, some of
which have solubilities in excess of the 40 mg/l provisional target standard, the Commission
adopted the following modification to the agreed method of analysis:
(i) a purge of nitrogen of purified air can be employed at stage 6.2 of the agreed method of
analysis at the discretion of national authorities;
(ii) the purge conditions at 30° for a 1 litre sample shall.....
(iii) the purge shall only be employed on particular effluent streams which contain significant
concentrations of light hydrocarbon gases, i.e. where the introduction of such a purge will
result in a reduction of the perceived hydrocarbon concentration of in excess of 10 ppm.'
5.2 It will be seen that the concern at that time was with 'interference' from low molecular weight
hydrocarbon gases, but the problem of interference from water soluble polar substances was not
recognised or addressed.
6. Comparison of discharges from oil and gas installations
6.1. Subsequent information has indicated that the concentrations of hydrocarbons in aqueous
discharges from gas platforms can in some cases be relatively high compared with those from oil
platforms, the absolute quantities are much lower. When compared on an equivalent energy
produced basis (e.g. kg oil discharged/Mjoule energy produced) the inputs of hydrocarbons from
gas operations are seen to be only around 5% of those from gas platforms.
7. Concluding remarks
7.1 The standard since its inception has been based on the equipment performance expectations of
oily water separators designed to remove discrete oil droplets.
7.2 The sampling and analytical procedures adopted were intended to be compatible with the nature
of the standard. The method had to be adapted to avoid interference from certain low molecular
weight volatile water soluble species that were not removable by oily water separators. The use of
fluorosil column to remove interfering polar substances would seem to be a logical extension of
that approach.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 128

7.3. Little or no consideration was given in the early stages to the small discharges of low molecular
weight species from gas platforms although the standard was formally applied to them in 1978.
7.4. Should it be decided not to apply the 40 ppm limit to certain gas platform discharges provided that
the total quantity if hydrocarbons discharged did not say exceed x tonnes/yr a separate sampling
and analytical regime would need to be developed to measure the aggregate quantities
discharged.
7.5. It would seem consistent for PARCOM to consider separate and different standard for the small
gas platform discharges, based on similar principles to those used in setting the limits for oil
platforms.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 129

APPENDIX 4.2
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 130

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 131

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 132

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 133

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 134

5 DEHYDRATION EQUIPMENT AND PROCESSES
5.1 General principles
As discussed in detail in Chapter 2, the basic, principle of crude oil dehydration is the destabilisation by
chemicals of the demulsified water droplets, such that on collision under suitable circumstances they will
coalesce to form larger droplets and ultimately settle out into a discrete and separable water phase. The
application of heat to enhance the mobility and coalescence of droplets is often required when
dehydrating heavy, viscous crudes. In some instances dilution with a light distillate fraction may also be
considered.
Oil dehydration is adversely affected by the presence of gas. Gas bubbles will rise to the surface and
entrain water droplets. The net result of this process is that water droplets will have less chance to
coalesce and consequently it will take much longer for water to settle out. For dehydration processes
where water and oil are separated continuously, insufficient degassing will lead to high water
concentrations on the separated crude oil.
As to the effect of free gas on crude dehydration, laboratory data, supported by field observations,
indicate that minimal quantities of free gas (<5 per cent volume) degrade dehydrated crude oil BS&W by
a factor of two. Achievement of the same discharge BS&W as would be experienced in the absence of
gas would require a dehydration vessel size increase by a factor of five. It is to be noted, however, that
the presence of gas can enhance the deoiling of water (see Section 2.6.2).
In general, the following process steps can be distinguished in typical oil field dehydration systems:
i) destabilisation of the emulsion by injection of chemicals;

ii) degassing in a separator and/or degassing boot;
iii) heating (especially for heavy, viscous crudes);
iv) coalescence of small water droplets into larger ones;
v) settling of water.
Figure 5.1 – Typical dehydration process.
No single recipe can be given for all dehydration systems. The requirements on chemical treatment,
degasser performance and dehydration tank or vessel will be strongly dependent not only on the oil and
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 135

water properties, but also on the quality requirements for the crude and water leaving the dehydration
system.
5.2 Chemical destabilisation
5.2.1 Injection system requirements

The prime requirements for the satisfactory and efficient operation of a demulsifier injection system are
the following:
i) the injected fluid delivery should be continuous and dispersed, and not intermittent;
ii) delivery of a specific volume of fluid is made at a specific pressure rating, independent of
other variables;
iii) the pump operating range should be able to accommodate any change in flowrate.
4
The first requirement is important, since the ratio of oil to chemical is very large, in order of 10 :1,and
since in principle each droplet of the emulsion should be contacted by the chemical, good uniform
injection is required to produce adequate dispersion. Mixing of the demulsifier in the crude is promoted by
the degree of turbulence in the flow process, but nevertheless a continuous injection is required to
maintain destabilisation of the oil/water interface.
Other features which are desirable for an injection system are:
• facilities for (remotely) monitoring chemical usage, which should include

• an alarm system to indicate a low level of chemical in the supply tank,
• an auxiliary chemical injection pump on standby or on auto restart.
5.2.2 Demulsifier supply and storage

Demulsifier is normally supplied in 200 litres (55 US gallon) steel drums. Where consumption is large
enough, savings in transport and handling may be achieved by the use of bulk containers.
The purchase of concentrated demulsifier and dilution on site with a locally available solvent may also
save some transport cost, but on-site dilution is operationally unattractive and errors in the manufacturer
may cause serious plant upsets. Occasionally the macnufacturer may make a blending error and supply
an offspec product. It is therefore advisable to check the demulsifier efficiency on a regular basis. For that
purpose a suitable well (constant water cut) should be selected and Bottle Tests performed comparing
the new and old batches. This method is in use in BSP and PDO.
Although the drums containing demulsifier chemicals may simply be connected to the suction end of the
injection pumps, the use of proper suction tanks is preferred. Their size will be dependent on injection
rates and required top-up frequency and they should be elevated in order to maintain a flooded suction at
the injection pump. The bottom of the tank should slope with a drainage point for sediments at the lower
end and each tank should be provided with a gauge glass and a dipstick. In cold climates it is advisable to
install a thermostatted heating element to ensure that the demulsifier remains pumpable.
A modern production operation requires a variety of chemical products, mostly packed in drums, and to
be injected into the production stream (s) (demulsifiers, deoilers, corrosion inhibators, defoamers, oxygen
scavenger, etc.). As the markings on drums tend to disappear with time, especially during storage in the
open, the importance of neat and orderly storage of drummed materials cannot be overstressed.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 136

Field personnel should be instructed to make absolutely sure that the various suction tanks are loaded
with the correct products. To facilitate control it is recommended to restrict the number of demulsifier (and
other chemicals) in use as much as possible.
5.2.3 Location of injection points

As a general rule, the demulsifier should be injected as far upstream in the process system as possible,
ideally before the initial source of emulsion formation.
Usually a demulsifier will be more effective at higher temperatures. Therefore injection in a cooled section
of the flow process will be less effective. Care should be taken that the demulsifier remains stable at the
highest process temperature encountered. At the manifold of a flow station the temperature and mixing
conditions are usually still favourable, and this is the most common location for demulsifier injection.
It is possible to inject chemicals at the wellhead or even downhole. This is found useful mainly in gaslifted
wells and is practised e.g. in Nigeria and Gabon. However, if injection is required at the wellhead, then
each well must be supplied with chemical and an injection pump, which must be checked and maintained.
The pumps must be able to cope with varying flow rates and the tanks of the chemicals must be
periodically filled. In some situations this may not be practical due to terrain conditions, remoteness of
location or other local considerations.
5.2.4 Chemical injection pumps

5.2.4.1 General characteristics
Chemical injection pumps are relatively minor items of equipment in terms of the overall dehydration
system. They can be a major source of problems, the overall dehydration system. They can be a major
source of problems, however, since they are prone to failure and require regular and through
maintenance. Failure frequently involves plunger seals, suction/delivery valves, gas locking, cracked
diaphragms and blocked lines. Another common cause of pump breakdown is operation beyond its
specification. Selection of the correct pump for the job is therefore all important.
The most common type of injection pump is the positive displacement pump of the intermittent (plunger
action) type. In order to produce a continuous flow, plunger pumps have to be fitted with pulsation
dampeners. These dampeners are vessels pressurised with gas, which operate synchronously with the
pump plunger oscillations whereby they store and discharge part of the stroke volume. The gas cushion is
thus alternately expanded and compressed.
Pumphead valves are often seen as a major problem area of chemical injection pumps. Valve material
selected by the manufacturer on receipt of operator's data, should be suitable for the pumped medium.
Factors influencing valve type including flow speed through valve chamber and fluid data.
The standard valve design is the ball type valve. Spring or cam aided valves for closing/opening may be
required to reduce back flow losses and to help the washing away of solid particles. Spring loaded valves
may, however, cause adverse wear and metering problems. Mechanically operated valves are also
possible, giving a positive action by means of a belt drive.
5.2.4.2 Common pumphead types

There are various commonly used pumphead types, viz.:
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 137

• The plunger type head, which is the most economical for handling non-hazardous fluids. It does,
however, require a significant degree of monitoring of the plunger seal zone since it will never be
completely free from leakage.
• The bellows type pumphead is glandless and is therefore completely sealed from the pumped
fluid. This feature makes the pump suitable for dealing with hazardous or volatile fluids.
Maintenance with this pump type should be negligible. However, its major drawback is the
restricted pressure and delivery range available compared to the hydraulic diaphragm and
plunger type models.
• The diaphragm type pumphead, like the bellow type, is normally used for the pumping of volatile
fluids. The diaphragm material is plastic for normal mode operation, i.e. temperature less than
120°C and pressure less than 200 bar. Metal diaphragm will be used when operating outside this
pressure/temperature range. Plastic diaphragms tend to have a longer life than metal ones and
they last around 8-10,000 hrs. Diaphragm rupture sensors can be incorporated into the pump
alarm system. The diaphragm can be driven mechanically or hydraulically. The latter type, in
which the plunger activates the diaphragm by fluid displacement, is the most common type.
Basic data on some pumps that have been applied in Group production operations are given in Table
5.1. The data shown are not complete and there are other suitable pumps, e.g. Wallace and tiernan,
Lapp, etc.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 138

Table 5.1 – Chemical injection pump data
In general, all injection pumps should preferably be of the leak-proof type, with hydraulically operated
diaphragms, to prevent the inadvertent loss of process fluids.
5.2.4.3 Pumps specifications

The parameters shown in Table 5.2 are required by the pump supplier to ensure that specific features are
designed into the pumping system. A knowledge of the anticipated operating demands and conditions is
also useful to the supplier, and provision of this data will help to ensure an efficient system.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 139

Table 5.2 – Essential parameters for pump manufacturer’s use
Reference should also be made to the Standard Data/Requisition Sheet for Pumps and to PTS
31.29.12.93.
In general, fluid driven pumps need to be carefully sited of their exhaust is of flammable material to
atmosphere.
5.2.4.4 Example of a basic chemical injection system

A flow scheme showing the components of a basic chemical injection system suitable for a supplier is
shown in Figure 5.2.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 140

Figure 5.2 – Components of a basic chemical injection system (example).
The subject of atomised injection has not been fully researched by contractors or service companies and
as yet the use of this method has not been fully exploited. However, it is accepted that an atomiser head
producing finely dispersed chemical is advantageous, since a better distribution of the demulsifier is
achieved. The correct admixture of chemicals via an atomising device gives the best possible results, but
this requires the provision of equipment and the power necessary for the increased injection pressure.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 141

5.3 Batch dehydration
5.3.1 Operating principles

Probably the simplest way of separating a (destabilised) crude oil/water mixture is to route it directly to
storage tanks and allow the water to settle out whilst the crude is awaiting shipment. Batch dehydration
normally requires a minimum of three storage tanks. At any one time one tank is used for filling, the
second one for settling (12-24 hours) and the third one for draining off water and subsequent pumping of
oil. Each tank performs all of these operations in turn. In Fig.5.3 this batch process is shown
schematically.
Note that for some low throughput production systems, a "two tank concept" may be more cost effective.
In this case, systems design must accommodate filling and settling in the first tank while exporting from
the second.
Figure 5.3 – Batch dehydration process.
The following aspects are to be noted in this process:
• inject demulsifier as far upstream as possible;

• degas the oil/water/gas mixture prior to dehydration;
• avoid pumps for transport of the oil/water mixture, but use elevation differences, if possible;
• heaters are sometimes applied, particularly when dehydrating heavy crudes to break stubborn
emulsions.
Batch dehydration is widely applies either as the sole dehydration system or as a polishing process for
partially dehydrated crudes. Crudes are dehydrated in this process to 0.5% water in oil or better. Batch
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 142

dehydration is quite often acceptable/preferable as long as the watercuts are reasonably low. However, if
the watercut is above, say 10%, valuable tank space is tied-up with water storage, which may be
unacceptable from an economic/operational point of view. In that case a continuous dehydration process
(Section 5.4.) upstream of the batch tanks becomes desirable, using free water knock-out vessels
(FWKO), dehydration tanks or plate separators.
5.3.2 Settling tanks

Figure 5.4 shows a typical settling tank with bottom inlet and discharge
Figure 5.4 – Schematic of setting tanks
During the filling operation, the incoming fluid disturbs the settling process and may even cause re-
emulsification. On completion of the settling process, some unbroken emulsion is usually present
between the dry oil and the water. This "sludge" layer may consist of untreated emulsion because of
injection pump breakdown, abnormally tight emulsion caused by defective pump valves, incorrect
operation of gaslift valves, etc. The emulsion may further be stabilised by paraffin wax, corrosion
products, etc. and by a natural ageing process. This sludge will not normally break down with time. It
must be removed from the tanks and treated in a separate sludge treatment system which should be an
intergral part of each settling plant (see Section 5.7).
On draining, there will be two interfaces to consider when sludge is present, viz. the water/sludge
interface and the sludge/oil interface. At the start of the pumping cycle, the operator will normally adhere
to the following procedure:
i) drain water to the oily water treatment facilities;

ii) at the sludge/water interface, divert sludge to the sludge treatment plant;
iii) at the sludge/oil interface, start exporting oil.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 143

During the draining of water, contamination with sludge and/or oil may occur. This may then cause upsets
in the oily water system. KSEPL are developing means of interface detection by capacitance probes
(measuring changes in dielectric constant) for water/sludge and sludge/oil interfaces. The system is,
hewever, not yet proven for E&P operations. Nucleonic type (profiler) interface level measurement is also
available in the market; thus, expensive.

Summarising, the disadvantages of the bottom fill/discharge system are:
• During bottom filling, the disturbance of the settling process causes a reduction in effective
settling time and possible re-emulsification.
• The required deep drainage of the settling tank may cause poor quality drain water.
• At the start of the pumping cycle, sludge may be discharged.
• By pumping from the bottom, the wettest crude is discharged first, which amounts to another
reduction in effective settling time.
The above disadvantages can be overcome by equipping the settling tanks with a floating fill/discharge
line. With this system the disturbance during filling is greatly reduced. During discharging the cleanest oil
(from the top of the tank) is pumped and under normal conditions there is no need for deep drainage of
the water to avoid the discharge of sludge. Obviously accumulation of sludge as a result of process
upsets and natural causes may also occur when the tankfarm is equipped with floating suctions and
facilities to process the sludge will still be required.
From an operational point of view, settling tanks with floating suction/discharge lines thus have a distinct
advantage over bottom fill/discharge lines. Unfortunately, the floating suctions are mechanically sensitive;
jamming of the joint or of the sliding guide structure fitted to the inside of the tank roof may cause severe
damage and leakage of the joint may turn tank operation into bottom fill/discharge, unknown to the
operator. Current thinking is therefore in favour of the mechanically more reliable bottom fill/discharge
system, even through extra care must be given to sludge and waste water treatment.
5.4 Continuous dehydration
As the watercut increases, it becomes more attractive to remove water in a continuous process rather
than in a batch dehydration process, described in Section 5.3. The following types of
continuousdehydration equipment are commonly being used:
• separators
• dehydration tanks
• coalescers
The above-mentioned dehydration equipment will be discussed in the following sections.
5.4.1 Separators
Separators are prefabricated pressure vessels which are suitable for separating oil, water and gas (if
applicable). Typical designs are shown schematically in Fig. 5.5. For processing dead crude, or whenthe
operating pressure is above the bubble point, a liquid-liquid separator with no gas handling facilities can
be used, see Fig. 5.5a. If there is some residual gas, or when gas blanketing is installed, a (small)gas
handling capacity is required, see Fig. 5.5b. If simultaneous separation of oil, water and gas isrequired, a
three-phase separator fitted with a "schoepentoeter" inlet device (see Section 7.2.5) should be used, see
Fig. 5.5c. A separator can also be intended to separate gas only form the oil/water mixture, the separation
of which is achieved at a later stage, e.g. in settling tanks.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 144

Separators can be designed for 'free water knock-out' or 'dehydration' service. Both look similar in
appearance but, for a given throughput the dimensions of a vessel for dehydration service are necessarily
larger.
A separator designed for free water knock-out service will generally only remove free water from the feed
stream. The rest of the water will remain dispersed in the crude, typically 5-10% vol. for light crudes (r o <
850 kg/m³) and 10-20% vol. for heavy crude (ro > 900 kg/m³).
A separator designed for dehydration service will dehydrate crudes down to low water content levels,
typically 1-3% vol. for a liquid-liquid separator and 1-5% vol. for a three-phase separator.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 145

Figure 5.5 – Various types of a separator.
Separators can be fitted with a variety of internal devices which, depending on their duty, are meant to
minimize effects of turbulence, short-circuiting and gas break-out. Separator internals comprise the
following items:
• inlet devices
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 146

• flow distributors
• sand flushing system and sludge drains
• liquid outlet nozzles
• plate packs.
Additional level tapping are needed to measure level for increase water out in the feed. The internals
weirs in the separator shall be adjustable to accommodate more water in the future.
In Section 7.2.5.1 the selection and design of above separator internals are discussed in more detail.
5.4.1.1 Free water knock-out vessels

For many high watercut crudes the bulk of the water separates out quickly. It may be attractive to remove
the 'free water' at an early stage in the process as this will reduce load on downstream facilities, i.e.
pipelines, pumps, heaters and dehydration tanks.
The main design features of a FWKO are illustrated in Fig. 5.6. The feed enters the vessel through an
inlet diffuser which breakers the forward velocity and distributes the flow across the separator. Most of the
separation takes place in the dispersion band or coalescence zone at the oil-water interface. This band
should be maintained at (approximately) the vessel centre-line in order to provide the maximum possible
horizontal cross-sectional area for separation. Separated oil flows away from the dispersion band and
over a weir into a small compartment from which it is discharged under level control. Separated water
(free water) leaves via an outlet located just upstream of the weir and is discharged by interface level
control. The water outlet should be fitted with a vortex breaker to avoid entrainment of the dispersion
band.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 147

Figure 5.6 – Free water knock-out vessel.
If the crude contains some sludge (i.e. very stable emulsion) this could accumulate at the oil-water
interface and interface and hinder the oil/water separation process. Consequently, it is always advisable
to install connections at the interface to drain away any sludge to the sludge treatment plant, or dispose of
it into the oil stream. Drained sludge should not be recycled into the feed stream since otherwise a sludge
build-up will occur in the separator.
The FWKO shown in Fig. 5.6 is basically a two-phase oil-water separator, but with the facility to remove
some residual gas. In this case the inlet is at the centre-line so that the crude can be fed directly into the
active oil-water interface. However, alternative designs would have the feed line located above the liquid
level to avoid gas break-out during the dehydration process (see Fig. 5.5b). In the case of a three-
phasegas-oil-water separator, the crude also enters at the top of the vessel (above the oil level) so that
gas can be released (see Fig.5.5c). The size of the gas cap in a three-phase separator is usually much
larger thanin a two-phase liquid-liquid separator.
It is important to provide sampling facilities at all levels for physical verification and the different phases.
5.4.1.2 Plate separators

In the past decade there has been an expansion in offshore developments and many of these fields are
now producing substantial amounts of water. Dehydration offshore rather than at the onshore terminal, is
desirable from the point of view of reducing the size of pipelines and meeting pipeline specifications.
However, restrictions on the size and weight of offshore equipment requires that offshore dehydration
must be achieved in relatively small units.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 148

One way of increasing the efficiency and/or reducing the size of a separator is to install a plate pack.
Basically the objective is to promote laminar flow and to reduce the distance over which a droplet has to
travel before it meets a coalescing surface and is 'intercepted'. In a plate separator of the size of a free
water knock-out vessel, typically a water content in the crude oil at the outlet of 1-3% vol. can be
achieved.
Plate packs can be retrofitted to existing vessels where problems are being experienced in meeting the
design specifications. They are not suitable, however, for crude oils containing large quantities of sand or
wax since these will cause fouling problems.
Typical plate separators are shown in Fig. 5.7.
One of most commonly used plate pack manufacturers within Shell is Pielkenrood Water Company, the
Netherlands.
Figure 5.7 – Plate separators.
For processing dead crude, or when the operating pressure is above the bubble point, a plate separator
with no gas handling facilities can be used, see Fig. 5.7a. For high flowrate applications, say, in excess of
350 m³/hr, a split flow plate separator may be required, see Fig. 5.7b. In the case of the formation of a
relatively thick dispersion band in the separator which may hamper proper level control, a dispersion-
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 149

retaining plate can be fitted in the vessel after the plate pack, under which separated water and over
which dehydrated crude can flow. In this manner a relatively sharp oil/water interface is obtained at the
end of the vessel, thus allowing good level control.
When concurrent separation of oil, water and gas is required, a three-phase plate separator fitted with a
schoepentoeter inlet device should be used, see Fig. 5.7c.
5.4.1.3 Heater treaters

Heater treaters are designed to include in one unit several or all of the following elements:
• gas/oil separator
• free water knock-out
• heater
• coalescing section
• heat exchange
The units operate under pressure which conserves the light end of the crude oil and maintains API
gravity. They are compact and self contained, which is useful in inaccessible locations and where space
is limited, e.g. offshore. Heater treaters can be considered for dehydration of difficult emulsions or very
viscous crudes. They can be operated at temperatures high than 100°C.
Sizes range from 1 m diameter to 5 m with a throughput ranging from 50 bpd to 3000 bpd. A heat
exchanger for preheating incoming emulsion and cooling treated crude may be included. In general, the
vertical heater treater is used for treating small volumes of relatively light oils; horizontal units are used for
treating larger volumes and are more suited for heavy (viscous) crudes.
i) Vertical heater treater
A schematic of a vertical heater treater is shown in Fig. 5.8.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 150

Figure 5.8 – Vertical heater treater
After having been preheated through a heat exchanger, the mixture of oil, water, emulsion and gas enters
the top of the treater, which must be sized to separate gas from the inlet flow. If the treater is downstream
of a separator, this chamber can be very small. The gas separation section should incorporate an inlet
diverter and mist eliminator.
Liquids flow through the downcomer pipe to the treater, which serves as a free water knock-out section,
and water is discharged through the water outlet line. The end of the downcomer should be slightly below
the oil-water interface to promote coalescence of water droplets. Oil and emulsion rise over heater fire
tubes to a coalescing section where further coalescence removes more water, which settles to the
bottom. Treated oil is cooled and discharged to the storage tanks. Normally, sufficient pressure is
available to transport the oil from the unit to the tanks; a pump need not be required.
Detailed design of pressure vessels, including design of internals (many having patented features )
should be the responsibility of the equipment supplier.
The water level is maintained either by an interface level controller or by a water syphon operating on the
principle explained in Section 5.4.2.2.
Production volume capacity of a vertical configuration vessel is limited by its cross-section and the usable
size of its coalescing section, and also by the capability of its heating section. A pre-heater may be used
to reduce the load on the unit but still its capacity may be limiting. To meet higher production
requirements, it is most common to install parallel units with upstream facilities for free water knock-out
and degassing.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 151

ii) Horizontal heater treater
A schematic diagram of a horizontal heater is shown in Figure 5.9.
Figure 5.9 - Horizontal heater treater.
Emulsion, water, oil and gas enter, and free gas is released; the liquid flows downward, around a U-
shaped hood, to the bottom of the first section where free water is released. Free gas, in the upper
section, flows through the inverted U-shaped equaliser into the heating section. Degassed liquid rises
around the heater section, releasing entrained gas which is then joined by the free gas coming through
the equaliser and is discharged. Heated liquid flows over the baffle into the coalescencing and settling
section, shown as the right half of the vessel, where final removal of water occurs.
Vertical Flow Horizontal (VFH) systems are more efficient and can handle large throughputs than vertical
units. In general, a vertical flow horizontal unit will handle the same volume as three vertical units of the
same cross-sectional area. VFH units are more easily adapted to a specific type of production fluid. A
number of internal and external controls may be added to modify the basic process. Straightforward
control of the water level to modify the basic process. Straightforward control of the water level in the
coalescencing section is by an interface controller, but a water syphon may be used, just as in a three-
phase separator.
5.4.1.4 Electrostatic Precipitators

Electrostatic Precipitator/Desalter/Electrostatic Dehydrator Operating Principle
When crude oil is produced, it will contain salt and emulsion which will be present in the water. Therefore
the removal of the water will also remove the salt and emulsion.
A water molecule consists of a central oxygen atom that has a partial negative character ( and two
hydrogen having partial positive character . This results in a molecule that is electronically polar.
Normally the arrangement of the water molecules in the liquid phase is random. When water droplet
enters an high voltage electrical field, a dipole is created. A dipole exists when the ionic charges that are
inherent in a droplet are separated so that the positive ions move to one end of the droplet while the
negative ions move to the other end. When these dipoles are created the ends of droplets that are
positive are attracted to the ends of droplets that are negative. This electrical attraction results in
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 152

collisions between droplets. These collisions continue until the droplets coalesce large enough to settle
into the water phase of the vessel.
The conventional electrostatic field is an alternating field, powered by a voltage step up transformer. The
electrodes are suspended in the oil phase of the equipment by insulating hangers. The low voltage side
can be supplied to the voltage desired. Different high voltage taps are required to allow different voltage
gradients to be applied to oil to find the most optimum coalescing voltage.
Figure: Typical Electrostatic Precipitator Layout
There are three electrostatic forces available:
1. Dipolar Attraction
Electrical force produced by positive and negative centers on induced dipoles of water drops
2. Electrophoresis
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 153

Electrically induced movement of polar bodies in a uniform field toward closest electrode
3. Dielectrophoresis
Movement of polar bodies induced by a divergent electric field toward increasing gradient
Figure: Typical Electrostatic Process Configuration

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 154

5.4.2 Dehydration tanks
5.4.2.1 Operating principles
Figure 5.10 illustrates the operation of a typical design of a continuous dehydration tank. The emulsion
enters via an inlet distributor which spreads the flow across the horizontal cross section area. The oil
slowly rises up the tank and overspills into a collecting device. Water droplets settle against the upward
flow of the oil. Large droplets will have a net downward velocity and will settle into the water layer at the
bottom of the tank. Small droplets will have a net upward velocity and will be carried away with the oil
flow. The water level in the tank is maintained at a fixed height (usually 2.5-3 m) with a level control
devise to provide residence time for reduction of the oil content of the separated water. Most crudes will
be dehydrated down to 1-2% vol. residual water in a continuous dehydration tank.
Fig. 5.10 - Schematic of typical continuous dehydration tank.
In normal operation a high-water content emulsion layer of 0.5-1.5 m thickness builds up between the
water and the oil. By introducing the feed stream just below this "dispersion band" or 'coalescence zone"
the gentle movement introduced by the rising oil promotes active coalescence.
In normal operation, i.e. when the feed consists of destabilised emulsion, the thickness of the
coalescence zone will be more or less constant. Introduction of stable emulsion and sludge into the
system will hinder coalescence and upset the operation of the coalescencer zone, it is therefore advisable
to install a bleed line to withdraw part of the contaminated coalescence zone for processing in sludge
treatment facilities.
Daily temperature changes of the incoming emulsion may cause thermal currents in the tank which
should ideally remain undisturbed. Also temperature changes caused by exposure of part the tank wall to
sun or wind may have a detrimental effect on the operation of the tank. Insulation may be required.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 155

Gas evolution hinders the coalescence and settling processes. It is therefore essential that the crude
enters the tank degassed to atmospheric pressure. Arrangement to achieve this are discussed in Section
5.4.2.2.
In order to avoid shortcircuiting in the tank, it is advisable to have inlets and outlets as far apart as
possible. Basically there are two alternative configuration: a central inlet with peripheral outlets or a
peripheral inlet with central outlets. The latter arrangement (Fig. 5.10) is preferred since this allows the
feed stream to be spread over a large area, which is conducive for good separation. It is favoured that all
internal components are fixed, because floating and/or adjustable outlet devices are prone to damage
and failure. Furthermore, outlets should be fitted with vortex breakers to prevent entrainment.
The continuous dehydration tank has been in use for many years, originally it was thought that a "washing
action" of the water layer on the emulsion rising through it towards the oil layer was an essential part of
the process and dehydration tanks were referred to as "wash tanks". Since then, views have altered and it
is now believed that coalescence in the coalescence zone, as discussed above, is the essential features
of dehydration tank operation. The term "wash tank" remains, however, as part of the oil field jargon.
One of the most common problems with dehydration tanks is the build-up of an emulsion layer at the oil-
water interface. This layer typically contains water-in-oil emulsion, waxes, paraffin, sand or clay particles
and iron sulphide. If the layer becomes thicker than a few inches and the waxes harden, then action must
be taken to prevent an escalation of the situation.
Chemicals may be used to control interfacial build-up by applying surfactants to water wet the solids,
which then settle at the bottom of the tank. Paraffin solvent may be added to suspend the paraffin in the
oil.
Heat may be applied to the interfacial material either directly within the tank by pumping in hot oil or
alternatively, by withdrawing excess emulsion and heating it up in a separate sludge treatment facility. It
is therefore important in the design stage to consider this problem and install one or more connections at
the height of the oil-water interface level to enable withdrawal for treatment (see Fig. 5.10)
It is a serious mistake to recirculate an unbroken emulsion or waxy materials to the treating system. If the
first treatment is not effective, then there is little change that a second treatment will take any
improvement and the build-up of sludge will simply accelerate. Unbroken emulsion withdrawn from a
dehydration tank should therefore be treated in a sludge treatment plant (see Section 5.7.)
5.4.2.2 Tank design features

In the following sections various design features for tank internals are briefly discussed, e.g.:-
• gas boots
• inlet distributors
• oil collectors
• interface level control
• baffle plates
The preferred concept would incorporate the following design features:-
a) External gas boot, or if necessary, separate degassing tank/separator.

b) Peripheral (spinder type) inlet with central outlets to ensure full utilisation of tank cross-sectional area.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 156

c) Oil collector with serrated weir to ensure equal inflow distribution oil outlet nozzle requires vortex
breakers to avoid entrainment of gas.
d) Water outlet nozzle requires a hood and vortex breaker to avoid short circuiting and entrainment.
In Section 7.2.5.2 selection and design of tank internals is discussed in more detail, and concentrates on
design options mentioned above.
i) Gas separation using an external gas boot
The external gas boot or flume consists of a large diameter pipe extending to the top of the tank with a
large diameter gas section on top extending above the tank roof. The inlet emulsion line enters the gas
section about midway. The sole purpose of the boot is for gas separation before the emulsion enters the
wash tank. Normally, no internal parts are used inside the gas section; however, if more complete
separation is necessary, an impact angle or centrifugal ring can be inserted.
Figure 5.11.- External gas boot
ii) Gas separation using an internal gas boot
The inlet boot can also mounted inside the tank (Fig. 5.12) with the gas section resting on the roof. The
downcomer protrudes to near the bottom of the tank with a circular spreader installed at the bottom of the
pipe. This system can be troublesome if corrosion occurs in the downcomer and the untreated emulsion
goes directly, without being distributed, into the settling tank.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 157

Figure 5.12 – Internal Gas boot
iii) Inlet distributors
The purpose of the inlet distributor is to initiate good distribution and full utilisation of tank cross-sectional
area. Many different types of inlet distributors have been used in Group applications, with differing
degrees of success.
Current preference is for the 'spider' type distributor shown in Fig. 5.13. This design not only provides
distribution over a large area of the tank, but also imparts a rotational flow to the fluid. The legs of the
spider radiate from a central core connected to the feedline.
The number of spider legs will depend upon the tank diameter and they are sized for a flow velocity of
about 0.2 m/s further design details are given in Fig. A7.48.
Fig. 5.13 - Spider type spreader
Another type of spreader which has proved to be very efficient, consists of a main trunk line with several
laterals. These laterals are pipes cut in half longitudinally with the open half facing downward. This
arrangement spreads the incoming oil over a large cross-sectional area of the tank, yet is much more
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 158

simple to construct than a distributor with sufficient outlets to spreads the flow over the entire cross-
sectional are (see Fig. 5.14).
The bottom of the laterals are open so that any scale, rust, drilling mud or sand which enters with the oil
can fall freely to the bottom of the tank and be washed out with the waste water. In a spreader with holes
or other openings in the top of the pipe, the pipe can become plugged with debris.
Fig. 5.14 - Inlet spreader with lateral distributors
iv) Oil collectors
The type of oil collectors installed in a dehydration tank depends on the flow pattern of the oil at the top of
the tank. This is a function of baffle arrangement, if indeed baffles are installed at all. In large dehydration
tanks, without baffles, it is common to install a collector pipe at the oil level. This collector pipe extends
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 159

from the oil outlet point to the opposite side of the tank so that oil is drawn off equally from the section
through which it passes.
In any settling tank the lighter oil channels towards the outlet, leaving a certain section of the tank
opposite the outlet as dead space. In very large units, outlets are sometimes spaced equally around the
tank circumference to provide equal drainage from all parts of the tank. A further possibility in an
unbaffled tank is to install a collection pan for oil removal (Fig. 5.10). Clean oil simply overflows the lip
ofthe pan and is drained from a suction line connected to the pan.
Tanks fitted with baffles should have an outlet skimmer through fitted. This skimmer through consists of
an open-top box located inside the tank, surrounding the outlet connection (Fig. 5.15). It is welded to the
tank shell or to the shell and baffle plate. The top edge of the through can be flat or serrated. The device
will allow outlet oil to be skimmed from the very top of the settling section deriving full benefit from the
settling section's volume.
Fig. 5.15 - Oil skimmer in baffled tank
v) Interface level control
The water level in the tank is maintained by an interface level controller. This can be a water leg (syphon)
with a fixed spill point or an adjustable spill point, as shown schematically in Fig. 5.16. A water leg with a
fixed spill is the most trouble free. An adjustable type may be desirable, however, to raise the level of the
oil-water interface in the warmer months of the year. This will reduce the oil retention time and may be
done on the premise that the higher the emulsion temperature, the faster the settling is.
Oil-water interface control by adjustable leg is widely and effectively used by Shell Oil in their heavy crude
dehydration plants. Despite the very low density different between the water and crude oil, this
arrangement has proved to be fully reliable and effectively maintains the interface level at the set height.
If needed, the interface level can be adjusted by changing the elevation of the water leg, which contains a
flexible loop section. Drexelbook capacitance probes are used for interface level indication.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 160

Fig. 5.16 - Water legs for interface level control
vi) Capacitance Level Probes
A capacitor is formed when a level sensing electrode is installed in a vessel. The metal rod of the
electrode acts as one plate of the capacitor and the tank wall (or reference electrode in a non-metallic
vessel) acts as the other plate. As level rises, the air or gas normally surrounding the electrode is
displaced by material having a different dielectric constant. A change in the value of the capacitor takes
place because the dielectric between the plates has changed. RF (radio frequency) capacitance
instruments detect this change and convert it into a relay actuation or a proportional output signal.
vii) Conductivity Based level Profiler
The conductivity based profiler measures the electrical conductivity of the water/oil mixture surrounding
each sensor. Dispersed oil droplets are nonconductive compared to the surrounding water. The overall
conductivity will therefore decrease with increasing concentration of oil. The conductivity based profiler
sensors utilize the conductivity difference to measure the oil in water content. Sand build-up on the
bottom of the separator is measured using the same principle as oil in water measurements. A sensor
surrounded by sand will measure lower conductivity than a sensor in water. The profiler will monitor sand
build-up as it gradually increases in levels.
viii) Nucleonic Interface Level Profiler
A nucleonic interface level measurement system uses a nucleonic (radiometric) detector to detect the
difference in densities between product/fluid of multiple phases. As level from the lower phases rises, its
higher density attenuates more of the energy emitted from the nucleonic source. The resultant differential
is used to calculate the interface level. A nucleonic interface level measurement system typically consists
of a detector mounted outside the wall of a vessel and a sealed radiation source. The source is often
mounted in a dry insertion well inside the vessel close to the wall to minimize the radiation path length
and size of the source required.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 161

In addition to the use of syphons for interface level control, displacer type level detection instruments are
used for light/medium density crudes where interface emulsions are less of a problem. They have
recently been applied with good results for continuous dehydration of the land crudes at the Seria
Terminal in Brunei. In this respect it is mentioned that KSEPL are developing in dehydration/storage and
fuel tanks. This device relies on measurement of the difference in dielectric constant of different fluids.
Tests have been carried out a.o. in NAM and BSP, showing good prospects. Further work is ongoing on
testing in high P and T separators and on reducing the effect of fouling. The device is, however, not yet
proven/suitable for the E & P environment.
vi) Baffle plates
Gentle agitation is desirable while emulsion passes through the water layer, since this aids coalescence
of water droplets. Agitation, however, is not needed, nor desired, after the emulsion enters the oil section
and begins to settle. But there must be fluid movement throughout this settling section to achieve the full
benefit of the volume of the section. It has been proven by laboratory models that if there is a direct route
form the emulsion inlet to the oil outlet, then oil will channel through the settling section, leaving dead
areas in the tank which do not contribute to retention time. Retention time calculated form total tank
volume may be used to reduce the channeling effect. They should be designed to provide a long enough
retention time if fluid within the tank to achieve the required degree of separation (see also Section
5.4.2.3).
5.4.2.3 Alternative tank designs

The operating principles and design features of the simple, spreader type dehydration tank, were
discussed in Section 5.4.2.1 (Fig 5.10). Various alternative tank internal design are briefly discussed
below.
i) Rim discharged type (Fig.5. 17)
Radial flow characterises this type of construction where the emulsion enters at the centre of the tank
through a flow diffuser. The flow then exist the tank radially to a rim collector.
There are three main disadvantages with this type of tank design:
1) The flow in the central area of the tank is turbulent and does
2) The low flowrate at the rim of the weir means that great occurrency is required in the
construction of the weir to ensure even distribution through the tank.
3) The entry of the liquid at the bottom of the tank through the diffuser does not spread the
emulsion adequately enough to effectively wash the emulsion in the water layer.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 162

Fig. 5.17 – Rim discharge type dehydration tank
ii) Single baffle type
A single baffle extends from the wall to the centre of the tank. The flow enters on one side of the baffle
and exits immediately adjacent in the other side of the baffle. Although subsidiary baffles may be installed
to initiate desired flow paths, it is unlikely that full use of the tank volume is achieved. Its primary
advantage is that it is a simple and consequently low cost design. Flow entry occurs through a triangular
weir arrangement which is positioned normal to the fluid flow.
iii) Multiple baffle type (Fig. 5.18)
This design attempts to produce a long horizontal flow path. Only partial success is achieved as the
numerous reversals in the direction of flow disturb the settling process and lead to incomplete use of the
available tank volume.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 163

Fig. 5.18 - Multiple baffle type dehydration tank
iv) Creole type (Fig. 5.19)
This design is similar to the multiple baffle type in that it aims for a long horizontal flow path. The spiral
baffle arrangement gives better usage of tank volume and reasonably quiescent conditions. This tank has
been shown to operate successfully but is very expensive to construct.
Fig. 5.19 - Creole type dehydration tank
v) Spreader plate type (Fig.5.20)
This design of tank consists of a spreader plate located a few feet of the tank bottom. Incoming enters at
the centre of the underside of the spreader plate. Good flow distribution on the underside of the plate is
assisted by radial baffles. At the outer edge if the spreader plate a water wash will occur as the water
level in the tank is held above the spreader plate. The oil and water are drawn off from the centre of tank
above the spreader.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 164

Fig. 5.20 - Spreader plate type dehydration tank
Several features of this tank design are conducive to dehydration. Firstly, the oil/water interface area is
effectively doubled. As coalescence occurs mainly at the interface this is a useful feature. Secondly, good
distribution around the outer edges of the tank means the flow velocity is minimised and thus settling is
encouraged.
5.4.2.4 The concentric wash tank

The concentric wash tank (CWT) consists of an outer and an inner tank, both covered by one roof (Fig.
5.21). The operating principle is as follows.
Wet crude is introduced into the outer tank through two tangential pipes arranged 180° apart. As the wet
crude flows into the outer tank, free water droplets will settle to the bottom of the tank, where there is a
water layer. Gas evolved in the feed steam is liberated in the outer section. The large oil/gas interfacial
area and the substantial retention volume in the outer section ensures that gas liberation has proceeded
to completion prior to the oil moving into the inner tank. The outer tank therefore acts as free water knock-
out and degasser.
The oil carrying the residual water enters the inner tank via a number (typically 8-15) of separate nozzles.
A further 10-20 slots have been cut in the internal wall just above the tank bottom so that free water
settling out at the bottom of the outer tank can flow into the inner tank.
The oil-water interface in the inner tank is controlled at a level just above the oil inlet nozzles. In this way
the emulsion is gently agitated by the upward moving oil, which enhances the coalescence of water
droplets.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 165

The inner tank is insulated by the outer tank from wall thermal effects. Furthermore, temperature changes
in the incoming emulsion are neutralised in the outer tank. The settling process is thus unaffected by
convective currents which could result in potential thermal gradients and subsequent shortcircuiting.
The concentric wash tank has been extensively tested in a number if pilot trials in various operating
companies (NAM, BEB, BSP and SSB).the CWT concept has shown to be very effective on in particular
heavy, viscous crude streams. Entrained water levels in the oil outlet stream of 1-1.5% vol. can be
obtained.
The concentric wash tank has disadvantages:
1) The limited flexibility of the oil/water interface level. It cannot be raised indefinitely (to
accommodate higher water cuts, and thus more residence time for the water) otherwise the
outer tank will overflow. In addition, unless the inner tank is sufficiently strong, the inner tank
wall may collapse, as occurred in PDO.
2) If heating is required to dehydrate the oil, with rising water cuts the heaters may become
overloaded and a free water knock-out tank may need to be installed.
Large scale 8000 m³ (50,000 bbl) wash tanks have been in operation in Oman since 1982. Their
operating performance is satisfactory. In the meantime FWKO tanks have been installed in their Riman
and Marmul facilities. Following successful pilot testing on heavy crudes (11-20°API), Maraven
(Venezuela) are installing CWTs for their 11.8°API Tia Juana crude (124,000 b/d).
As an alternative to the concentric wash tank, the twin wash concept has been developed. This system is
based on the same principle as the CWT, but it uses two separate tanks for the (through) degassing/free
water separation and dehydration steps, respectively. The main attraction of this system is that it can be
constructed from existing fixed roof storage tanks, but not all the advantages of CWTs are attained. Twin
wash tanks have been used in Nigeria and the concept was recommended recently for a new dehydration
system at the Bonny Terminal (Nigeria).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 166

Fig. 5.21 – Concentric wash tank
• Partitioned concentric wash tank - PCWT (Fig. 5.22)
During trials with CWTs it became evident that the rotational movement in the outer and inner tank as
claimed by the original design did not occur. To promote the circular movement in these tanks and thus
reduce the risk of shortcircuiting between inlets and outlets, the partitioned concentric wash tank, as
schematically shown in Fig. 5.24, has been developed.
Good dehydration performance was observed during trials with a 160 m³ tank on very heavy (density 980
kg/m³), viscous crudes.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 167

Note: This PCWT concept has been installed at Maraven, but data on performance are not yet
available. It cannot, therefore, yet be identified as fully proven in operation and should not be
considered as a first choice design.
Fig. 5.22 – Partitioned concentric wash tank
5.4.3 Coalescers
The coalescence of destabilised emulsions, which normally takes place in pipeline and/or in coalescence
zones (dispersion bands) of oil-water separators or settling tanks, can be stimulated by the application of
coalescence media, by specially designed coalescer pipes, or by the application of an electrical field.
Actual oil-water separation then takes place in a subsequent settling section or settling tank.
In the following sections these coalescence promoters are briefly discussed.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 168

5.4.3.1 Coalescence media
Plant fibers are a suitable coalescer material for water-in-oil emulsions and many types if unitised
emulsion treaters are equipped with "hay sections". The chief drawback of these coalescer beds is that
they usually plug up after a short time with sediment, salt and wax, and then they have to be changed out.
Labour cost and the problem of disposal of used coalescer packs have so far prevented large scale
application of coalescer packs for crude oil dehydration.
However, media coalescence has more promise for the deoiling of effluent waters (see Section 6.5).
5.4.3.2 Coalescer pipes

In many cases mixing conditions in transport lines are of the required magnitude to promote coalescence.
However, when mixing conditions prevailing in an existing crude handling system are unsuitable to
achieve the required coalescer pipe can be considered.
Free design variables of a coalescer pipe are:
• pipe length
• pipe diameter
• number of pipes
The free design variables can be used to manipulate the following dependent variables, which are all
related to the total flowrate and which govern the flow regime:
• pressure drop across the coalescer pipe

• flowrate in wash pipe (overall flowrate is fixed)
• retention time
• mixing intensity parameter,ε
• flow regime
In this manner, by designing for conditions expected to be favourable for good coalescence, a piping
system may be planned. In the field, coalescer pipes are more commonly used, however, for coalescing
oil droplets dispersed in water, rather than for dehydration purposes. See also Section 2.4.4 for further
aspects of pipeline coalescence.
5.4.3.3 Electrostatic coalescers

Electrostatic coalescers are pressure vessels fitted with electric grid internals and are suitable for deep
dehydration of crude oil. The water content of the crude oil at the outlet is typically in the range of 0.1 to
0.5% vol. The units are relatively compact and therefore suitable for use offshore.
Typical electrostatic coalescer designs are shown in Fig. 5.23.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 169

Fig. 5.23 – Electrostatic coalescers.
Bulk oil-water separation occurs in the lower half of the vessel and relatively dry crude moves up into the
grid section. Deep dehydration occurs in the grid section due to the enhanced coalescence conditions
which are created by the action of the electrical field. Conventional electrostatic coalescers feature an AC
field whereas some of the later designs use an AC-DC field combination which have higher throughput
capabilities. Both types can handle feed watercuts in excess of 20% vol. Voltages of up to several tents of
kilovolt are being used. The energy consumption of electrostatic coalescers is relatively low and varies,
dependent on unit size, from 5-25 kW (excluding energy consumption required for heating of the crude).
A relatively recent development in electrostatic design is the bi-electric unit. In this case the feed stream
is introduced directly into two grid sections, effectively doubling the throughput potential. In practice,
however, throughputs of only 50% higher than the conventional design can be achieved. In this case the
watercuts of the feed stream should be limited to 10% vol., otherwise electrical short circuiting will occur.
Electrostatic coalescers are widely used in refineries for crude desalting (Section 5.5) and dehydration to
achieve very high dehydration efficiencies. There are also applications in the E & P field. However, the
units are sophisticated and maintenance of the electrical equipment has proven to be relatively difficult.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 170

KSLA have a research programme ongoing on compact separators, in which they are developing a
multistage electrostatic coalescer. Estimation of the comparative performance of this coalescer with
available coalescer types indicates that for dispersions that do not contain solids or form sludge, a
reduction in residence time by a factor of 10 is possible. Solids and sludge handling requirements may
roughly double the volume of the coalescer, thus leaving a reduction of a factor of 5. This reduction is
obtained by optimisation of the two necessary steps (electrostatic coalescence and gravity separation)
separately, and the use of better internals. Conventional electrostatic separators employ an upward flow
through the electrode/gravity residence time, yet a poor droplet separation. Furthermore, conventional
electrostatic coalescers have simple liquid distributors and scale-up characteristics, leading to much dead
space.
In the KSLA design, a downward flow of the oil and water mixture is utilised. Staging the electrodes
permits handling of higher watercuts as each stages has an electrical field optimal to the water
concentration. Fluctuations in the feed require a voltage control for the first stage only, leaving the full
efficiency of the subsequent stages.
In Fig. 5.24 a schematic is shown of the KSLA multistage electrostatic coalescer under development.
Fig. 5.24 - Two-stage electrostatic coalescer under development
5.4.4 Centrifuges
High-speed centrifuges have been used for many years for separating liquid-liquid dispersions, for
example in the separation of caustic solutions and oils in the soap-making process, recently in uranium
extractions, and many others. By enhancing both the settling and coalescence rates by increased settling
forces (up to 5000 g is achievable) centrifuges reduce the residence times considerably. Consequently
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 171

their sizes can be much reduced for a certain throughput, as compared to a conventional emulsion
treatment vessel of similar capacity. Centrifuges have so far not been routinely applied in E & P
operations, however, but they are being used for dewatering of refinery sludges.
The principle of separating a dispersion (and solids) in a centrifuge, is illustrated in Fig. 5.25.
Fig.5.25 - Particles trajectory through inclined rotating disks
The process liquid enters the separation channel at radius r 1 flows through the channel and leaves at r2,
before flowing to the outlet. Separation of water droplets and particles takes place as the liquid flows
through the channel with velocity w. The centrifugal force acts on individual droplets and imparts on them
the sedimenting velocity v, acting in the direction of the periphery of the bowl. The sum of these velocities
gives a resultant velocity v p, the direction of wich determines the path of the droplet or particle..
In order to be separated out, a particle must be deposited on the upper disk BB' before reaching B'. Since
the liquid velocity w along the disk surface is near zero, the particles or droplet reaching the underside of
disk BB', thus moves outward towards the periphery of the bowl under the influence of the centrifugal
force.
Fig. 5.26 shows a schematic of a solids ejecting disk separator. The machine comprises a frame
containing in its lower part a horizontal drive shaft with friction clutch and brake, worm gear and a vertical
bowl spindle and in its upper part the bowl.
The bowl is of the self-cleaning disk type with a water manoeuvred hydraulic operating system for
controlled solids particles discharged and is fixed on top of the spinder inside the space formed by the
upper part of the frame and frame hood. The frame hood carries the feed and discharge systems.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 172

Fig. 5.26 - Solids ejecting disk centrifuge
Separation takes place in the rotating bowl (generating some 5000 g forces). The settling depth is
minimised by a stack of conical disks (clearance ± 2-10 mm). Clean oil and the separated water are
discharged continuously under pressure (± 3 barga) by built-in paring disk pumps.
The solid sludge, accumulating at the periphery of the bowl is expelled in small portions at frequent
intervals with no interrupted of the flow of oil through the separators. Only sludge and a small proportion
of the separated water is ejected during the short period of bowl opening. There is virtually no oil loss.
The bowl can be arranged either as a purifier for oil with a high water content and some sludge (i.e.
sand), or as a clarifier for separating oil from sludge and small quantities of water.
Separators of this type are commercially available with capacities ranging from 1 to 200 m³/hr bulk feed.
Centrifuges could either be used as oil-water separators or as oil-water-solids separators. Both types
have been tested by NAM and the three phase decanter is successfully used as sludge thickener. A
centrifuge for oil-water separation was first tested 1982/83 by NAM and KSEPL on stable water-in-
condensate emulsions. Recently NAM also tested a centrifuge on a crude of about 20°API.
The operating performances of the permanent installation and the test units have been remarkably good.
In the recent tests, wet, degassed crude containing 6.8% (vol.) water was passthrough a 2 m³/h capacity
test unit. The dehydrated oil contained .3%(vol.) water, whilst the water contained 50-200 g/m³ oil. The
operating temperature was 40°C rather than the normal dehydration temperature of 70-80°C.
Economic considerations indicated that the centrifugal separation technique could result in savings of up
to 50% as compared to costs of a conventional onshore crude oil processing plant, with potentially much
higher savings possible for offshore operations.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 173

5.5 Condensate dehydration
5.5.1 Free (dispersed) water removal

The principles involved in the dehydration of condensate are basically similar to those for the dehydration
of oil. In general, condensate is more amenable to dehydration than oil due to its lower density and lower
viscosity.
When the dehydration specification is relatively "relaxed", the use of three-phase separators (see Section
5.4.1) will be sufficient. The design/sizing guidelines are the same as for crude oil dehydration (see
Section 7.2).
If the dehydration specification is "tighter" or where it is desirable to minimise the size of the separation
equipment (e.g. offshore) then plate pack internals can be installed in the separator (see Section 5.4.1.2).
The performance of a plate pack separator can be further improved by ensuring that the liquids are
completely degassed prior to entering the plate pack section. This can be achieved by having the plate
pack installed in a separate vessel downstream of a two-phase (i.e. gas/liquid) production separator. The
condensate and water leaving the production separator will be completely degassed. Gas breakout will be
prevent if sufficient static head, or cooling, is provided between the production separator and the plate
pack separator. Such a system can remove free water down to a level of less than 0.5% (v/v) if properly
designed.
For very deep removal of free water from condensate, typically down to 500 ppm(v), a cartridge type
coalescer system can be used. The units consist of a number of cartridge type fibrous coalescencer
elements. Commercial vendors, such as Peco and KnitMesh, supply units of this type. Experience has
indicated that vendors tend to be over optimistic when predicting performance of their units. This is due to
a number of factors, the principal ones being flow rate fluctuations in reality through the units and the
presence if corrosion inhibitor in the condensate. The best performance figures achieved to date is
dehydration down to 400 ppm(v) free water. The coalescencers are also sensitive to solids blockage, so it
is recommended to install a filter unit upstream of the coalescer.
5.5.2 Dissolved water removal

In most cases natural gas production is associated with liquid hydrocarbons and water. In some cases the
gas and condensate are transported together through a single export pipeline to processing facilities
onshore. When the gas contains carbon dioxide, it will be necessary to dehydrate both the gas and the
condensate to prevent corrosion of the pipeline.
When the condensate/gas ratio in the pipeline is low, it is possible to dry the gas in a glycol dehydration
system and remove most of the free water from the condensate prior to entry in the export pipeline. The
relatively large amount of remaining free water in the condensate. Provided that the gas has been
sufficiently "overdried", the water dew point of the gas will still remain below the minimum pipeline
temperature even after absorbing the additional water from the condensate.
When the condensate/gas ratio in the pipeline is large, there is insufficient gas available to absorb the
free water in the condensate. Consequently, free water will exist which will cause corrosion of the
pipeline. In this situation it is necessary to remove all the free (dispersed) water from the condensate prior
to comingling with the dried gas and entering the pipeline.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 174

Fig. 5.27 - Simplified process flow scheme for condensate dehydration
This method developed to handle this problem is as follows (Fig. 5.27). The gas is dried by conventional
means (e.g. glycol towers) and this dried gas is used as a stripping medium for the condensate. The
rewetted gas from the condensate stripping column is recycled back to the glycol tower. The physical
mechanism of this stripping process is that the dry gas strips out the dissolved water from the
condensate, which then allows the free water (which is present in the form of small droplets) to dissolve
into the condensate. This process continues until all the free water has dissolved into the condensate.
The limiting steps of this process is the mass transfer rate of free water from the droplets compared to the
gas-liquid interfacial area. The process can be accelerated by dispersing the water as possible should be
removed from the condensate by other means (see section 5.5.1) prior to the stripping process since:
i) it limits the required residence time (i.e. the number if stripper column trays and column height);
ii) it is also limits the required flow rate of the stripping gas (i.e. column diameter ).
A computer programme has been developed at KSLA for simulating this process, which also takes into
account water droplet size and residence time distribution of the condensate at the stripper column trays.
Contrary to the use of e.g. molsieves, this drying process operates continuously and can handle small
amounts of water droplets on a routine basis. However, the performance of the column is very sensitive to
the incoming condensate.
Furthermore, the recycling of gas from the condensate stripping column to the glycol dehydration system
results in the requirement of a larger glycol dehydration system. The cost implications of this should not
be overlooked.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 175

5.6 Desalting
The salinity of wet crude oil is determined by the salt concentration in the associated water and the
percentage of water in the crude. Salt in crude oil leads to corrosion of pipelines and fouling of heat
exchangers, and therefore purchasers/refineries set an upper limit on the salt content of the crude to be
processed (typically 72 g/m³). For some oil fields (e.g. Gabon) the salinity of the produced water so high
that the crude oil needs to be desalted in a process additional to the normal dehydration process, in order
to meet the crude export salt specification.
Salt is dissolved in the water phase and therefore if the percentage by volume of residual water and its
salt content are known, the amount of salt per unit of crude oil can be estimated from the equation:
K
crude oil salt content · Y g/m
where: K = salt concentration of residual water, g/m³
Y = residual water, % vol.
In a desalting process, the saline water contained in the crude is diluted with low salinity (fresh) water. To
reduce the volumes of fresh water required, the production fluids are first dehydrated.
A dehydrated crude is usually desalted in two steps:
• salty water in the crude oil is diluted by the addition of water (with low salt concentration)
upstream of a mixing device (e.g. pump);
• the crude oil is dehydrated again.
Typical desalting process flow schemes are given in Fig. 5.28. For very saline crudes, for which
largevolumes of wash required, the dehydrated water from the second stage dehydrator is recycled. This
is done to minimise the volume of required wash water and to make use of the heat absorbed by the
water.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 176

Fig. 5.28 - Desalting systems with and without recycle
It is important that the dilution water is thoroughly mixed with the crude oil. Adequate mixing is usually
provided by premixers and control valves. In such a mixing process best results are obtained when the
fresh water added to the crude is dispersed to droplets of about the same size as that of the original salt-
containing droplets. If this step is omitted mainly the coarse, fresh water droplets will be separated in the
subsequent settling stage. This results in inefficient desalination. The mixing intensity to be applied by a
mixing valve will depend on the required size of the droplets to which the wash water is to be dispersed,
and can be controlled by the pressure drop over the valve. A promising new development is the
application of static mixers downstream of the mixing valve, which promote more efficient mixing.
The emulsion droplets formed by the mixing valve may be too small for quick separation. Hence, these
droplets should get sufficient opportunity to collide and coalesce with the brine droplets, not only to obtain
sufficiently large droplets, but also to achieve an equal distribution of the salt over all droplets.
The required coalescence can be obtained by passing the fresh-water/crude emulsion resulting from the
mixing valve for a sufficiently long time through a coalescer pipe of suitable size. Mixing intensities in the
4
range of 2 x 10³ to 10 cm²/s³ (100 to 500 psi/hr) may be adequate for this purpose.
The longer the retention time of the fluid in the coalescer pipe, the more opportunity is given to the
droplets to coalesce to the maximum droplet size possible at a given mixing intensity.
The retention time that can be realised, however, will largely be determined by the available pumping
power. Thus, forcing 20,000 b/d of a 19°API crude oil (+ water) through a 6" coalescer pipe at a mixing
intensity E = 500 psi/hr will require a pressure of about 6.8 psi per 100 m of pipe (per 100 m of pipe T =
0.0135 hours).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 177

Obviously, to obtain coalescence in the coalescer pipe, the fresh-water/crude oil emulsion should be well
destabilised (by an effective demulsifier and a sufficiently high temperature).
The amount of dilution water required in a desalting process can be estimated from the following
equation:
K K Y
Dilution water required ·
K K E
(as % vol. of crude flow)
where: K1 = salt concentration of residual water (before desalting), g/m³

K2 = salt concentration of dilution water, g/m³
salt concentration of water in the desalted crude needed to give the required crude oil
K3 =
salt content, g/m³
Y= residual water, % vol.
E= empirical mixing efficiency (typical 0.5 to 0.6)
Desalting is a continuous process in which electrostatic coalescers are often used as dehydrators,
particularly in refineries. In refineries mostly stripped process water is used as dilution water while in EP
operations fresh water from lakes or rivers can be used, as well as salinity aquifer water. Care should be
taken that the dilution water is compatible with the production water to avoid scaling problems with the
equipment.
5.7 Sludge treatment
One of the most common problems in an oil/water separation process is the build-up of an unbroken
emulsions layer or sludge at the oil/water interface. This can be the result of upsets in the demulsifier
injection system, the presence of wax, scale, sand particles or corrosion products, or the occurrence of
zones of high mixing energy in the treatment facilities.
Where possible, the production of sludge should be prevented or reduced, primarily by treatment with
chemicals and/or application of heat. However, in many cases there may still be unbroken residues,
whatever the method of treatment that is being used. In such cases the sludge has to be removed from
the separation vessels and be treated separately and/or disposed of. Under no circumstances should an
unbroken sludge layer be recycled into the treatment process. There are numerous examples where
recirculation of sludge merely lead to a further accumulation in the separation vessels, thus aggravating
the problem.
Sludge treatment will depend on the method of disposal to be used, which will in turn depend on local
circumstances and governmental regulations. In offshore operations there are limited possibilities for the
treatment of sludge. Depending on the amounts of sludge formed, the best route for sludge disposal is in
the crude export. This allows dilution of sludge with the crude oil to perhaps a level that still meets crude
export specifications, or further treatment in onshore separation and treatment facilities. In this respect it
should be noted that currently there is no offshore production of heavy crude oil in Group operations, thus
reducing the (potential) problem of offshore treatment and disposal of sludge significantly.
In onshore operations a separate sludge treatment system is usually incorporated in a settling plant.
Sludges can originate from:
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 178

• settling and storage tanks;
• a crude desalting process;
• a waste water treatment process.
Upon removal and collection of sludges from the treatment facilities, usually the oily sludges are first
dewatered and when possible deoiled before disposal. In such processes the sludge can be treated
further with chemicals, with heat treatment, it can be centrifuged or it may be passed through a high
pressure filter press.
For the disposal of sludge residues there are three main routes available, viz.:
• Dumping or landfill
This has traditionally been a major route for the disposal of (refinery) sludges. Permission for dumping or
landfilling often depends on the classification of the waste: properties such as toxic, hazardous,
nonhazardous are considered. Sometimes this classification is based on the oil or heavy metal content,
its agitation temperature or whether it is volatile or reactive.
• Incineration
This is the second disposal route for dewatered sludges. When the amount of sludge to be incinerated is
too small for installing own facilities, incineration may be done by contractors or by a central incinerator
owned by industry/municipality.
• Land treatment of oily sludge

Land treatment of sludge is based on the biodegradation of hydrocarbons by micro-organisms that are
naturally present in the soil. It is a simple and cheap technique, but in some countries it is not allowed.
Food crops should not be grown on the land treatment, and if vegetation is allowed to grow, it should
rather be ploughed back into the soil.
5.8 Dehydration of heavy (<16° API) crudes
Group experience, outside North America, for the dehydration of heavy crude oils is based largely on the
concentric wash tank concept described in Section 5.4.2.4. In North America, a research programme
iscurrently being undertaken by Shell Oil. Preliminary conclusions are as follows :
For 3.0% BS&W discharge
Perforated baffle treaters, dehydration tanks, and desalters offer the most capital cost-effective means of
dehydrating 11° API to 16° API crude oils to the presently acceptable 3.0 BS&W level. Further, an 11°
API crude oil is best treated at approximately 120°C while approximately 90°C appears suitable for higher
gravity oils. Thus 11° API crude oils should be treated in perforated baffle treaters or desalters as
dehydration tanks cannot operate above 100 °C. Decanters begin to play a role for gravities higher than
13° API. Decanters are not recommended for this service as they will have high operating costs
(maintenance and horsepower) and lack oil field data. They may, however, become attractive offshore
(small size and weigh) and for sump oil treatment.
The capital cost for treating an 11° API oil is approximately twice that for a 13° API oil and six times that
for a 16° API crude. Operating coasts should not vary significantly as higher temperature systems will
employ heat recovery. The above thus can serve as a guide for selecting treating gravity for very heavy
oils (less than 10° API) that must be blended with light oil.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 179

For 1.0% BS&W discharge
This can be achieved most capital cost-effectively for 11° to 16° API crudes by desalters, flash
evaporators, and perforated baffle treaters. In all cases, the treating temperature should be 120°C to
150°C. Desalters appear most efficient with flash evaporators also feasible for 11° API crudes and
perforated baffle treaters becoming feasible for 16° API crudes.
An 11° API crude treatment requires approximately twice the capital cost of that for a 13° API crude and
five times that for a 16° API crude.
Desalters appear to be the preferred method of achieving the desired 1.0% BS&W. This applies to new
vessels or retrofits of existing dehydration vessels. Flash evaporates, as mentioned previously, will
increase the salt content of the crude that may incur a penalty to its value.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 180

6 DEOILING EQUIPMENT AND PROCESSES
6.1 General principles
The water separated in a dehydration process always contains some oil, the quantity of which varies from
several tens to hundreds of ppm oil-in-water. Depending on the nature of the disposal method, a further
reduction in the oil content of production water is required. Deoiling equipment is required for the
treatment of produced water prior to disposal or further process use (e.g. steam raising, water injection).
As mentioned previously, the removal of finely dispersed oil from production water is effected in a
number of steps similar to a dehydration process, viz. destabilisation, coalescence and gravity
separation. Except in cases of very fine/stubborn oil-in-water emulsions, only the last two steps are
required in a deoiling process.
Methods currently available for de-oiling can be categorised as follows:
6.1.1 Removal of suspended oil
The types of equipment for suspended oil removal are listed below, together with an indication of
expected performance.
System Suspended oil content (g/m³)
Gravity type
- Skim tanks 50-1500

- Skim pipes 50-1500
- API interceptors 50-100
- Separators 40-100
- Hydrocyclones 15-40
Gas flotation type
- Induced gas flotation 15-40
- Dissolved gas flotation 15-40
Filtration 10-30
Flocculation/flotation 5-20
The choice and performance of a deoiler system depends on the quantity/quality of the feedwater and on
the required residual oil concentration. In many E & P operations, a combination of the separation types
listed above is used to achieve the desired water quality.
The use of hydrocyclones, particularly for offshore applications where sufficient feedwater pressure is
available, has recently gained Group acceptance. They are now the preferred solution offshore
production water disposal.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 181

6.1.2 Removal of dissolved oil
Facilities for removal of dissolved oil have not yet been widely used in E & P operations. The main
process alternatives are:
• Biotreatment
• Activated carbon adsorption
• Steam stripping
The various process units are discussed in the following sections. It should be noted that, in many cases,
the most appropriate process option can only be selected after extensive field testing.
6.2 Gravity separators
6.2.1 Skim tanks

Skim tanks are often as first stage oily water separators. A typical design of a skim tank is shown in
Fig.6.1.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 182

Fig. 6.1 – Schematic of a skim tank
Skim tanks operate in a manner similar to continuous dehydration tanks, but here we are concerned with
the removal of oil droplets rather than water droplets. Oily water enters the tank via an inlet spreader.
Water flows to the bottom of the tank, and oil droplets rise against the downward water flow according to
Stokes' Law.
Large oil droplets will achieve a net upward velocity and will eventually reach the surface to form an oil
layer which is continuously skimmed. Small droplets will have a net downward velocity and these will be
carried away with the water flow. The 'deoiled' water leaves the tank via an adjustable syphon which
maintains the levels the tank at the right height for optimum skimming. The tank should be sized such that
droplets larger than approximately 150 µm are not entrained with the water phase. The oil concentration
in the water at the tank outlet will be dependent on the oil droplet sizes and the type of crude, and may
vary between 50 and 1500 g/m³.
The skim tank shown in Fig. 6.1 can also act as a buffer tank. In such a case, the tank is usually kept half
full, thus allowing for intermittent surges and inadvertent slugs of free oil in the incoming flow. Oil cannot
be skimmed continuously (unless a floating skimmer is installed), instead the oil is removed at regular
intervals by adjusting the levels in the tank and draining the oil through the oil outlet valve.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 183

Skim tanks simple and economical for primary oily water treatment. Space and weight requirements are
disadvantages, however, when considering offshore locations.
6.2.2 Skim piles

A skim pile is a long attached to a platform and extending below the surface of the water a series of
baffles that allow for gravity separation of the oil droplets. In an open sump without such baffles, only
separation of the oil droplets. In an open sump without such baffles, only those droplets whose diameter
is large enough that their vertical velocity overcomes the full downward velocity of the water discharge will
be able to rise to the surface. Fig.6.2 shows a cross section of a patented skim-pile design.
Fig. 6.2 – Skim pile flow pattern
Flow through the multiple series of baffle plates creates quiescent zones that reduce the distance a given
oil droplet must rise to be separated from the main flow. Once in the quiescent zone, there is plenty of
time for droplet-droplet coalescence, and the resulting larger droplets then migrate up the underside of
the baffle to an oil-collection system.
For intermittent or during period of no flow, oil droplets rise to the area of the quiescent zone, and became
trapped and protected from being swept back into the flow stream when flow is resumed. The net effect of
the baffles is to reduce this rise distances so as to capture smaller droplets. The action of the skim pile is
enhanced by coalescence that occurs as a result of the long retention times and low energy input.
Skim piles also provide a method for treating deck drainage. This flow, which originates either from
rainwater or washdown water, is oxygen laden. It is corrosive and irregular in flow rate. Thus, including it
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 184

in water treating equipment could cause upsets. Finally, this flow must gravitate to a low point for
collection and either be pumped up to a higher level for treatment or be treated at that low point.
Skim piles are excellent for this purpose. The skim pile can be protected from corrosion, and by design is
located low enough on the platform to eliminate the need for pumping the water. The skim pile is not
affected severely by large instantaneous flow-rate changes (effluent quality may be affected to some
extent, but the operation of the skim pile can continue), it contains no small passages subject to plugging
by scale build-up, and it minimises commingling in the process since it is the last piece of treating
equipment before disposal.
6.2.3 API oil interceptor

A standard API oil interceptor is shown in Fig.6.3.
Fig. 6.3. - API interceptor showing typical arrangement for two parallel basins.
The interceptor consists of a rectangular basin which is divided into a number of channels. Influent water
is distributed across the basin by a vertical slotted baffle and flows down the channels under conditions
approximating laminar flow. Oil droplets rise to the surface according to Stokes' Law.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 185

Floating oil is held within the interceptor basin by an oil retention baffle. As the oil layer builds up, it is
removed by a skimming device and flows into an oil slop pit along with some water. The slop oil is drained
from the pit intermittently baffle and leaves the interceptor over a weir.
API interceptors are usually designed to remove 95% of all droplets above 150µm. These units cannot be
expected to remove finely dispersed particles or emulsified oil.
APIs are not normally labour intensive in their operation, however, it is necessary to check and possibly
adjust the skimming levels once or twice per shift. If left unattended, the skimmings may entrain a
significant quantity of water which can lead to emulsification problems when slops are recycled.
It may be necessary from time to time to remove an accumulation of solids which builds up on the bottom
of the basin. The continued build-up of such solids will adversely affect the performance of an API.
Weight and space requirements are prohibitive for offshore application of API interceptors.
6.2.4 Plate interceptors

Plate interceptors were initially developed by installing a series of parallel plates into an API separator.
The maximum rising height of an oil droplet is reduced and the underside of each plates acts as a
coalescing surface. In practice it is preferable to incline the plates so that coalesced oil droplets can flow
upwards to reach the surface of the water and suspended solids can fall downwards to collect on the
bottom of the enclosing vessel (see Fig 6.4)
Fig 6.4 – Plate coalescence
The inclusion of plates effectively reduces the hydraulic radius and maintains laminar flow conditions at
significantly higher flow rates than with an empty vessel. An interceptor with plate internals will have a
greater efficiency in terms of oil removal than an API interceptor, and it can therefore be considerably
smaller to achieve the same performance. In view of its relatively small size a plate interceptor can be
enclosed to reduce evaporation losses/undesirable odours, or to prevent escape of explosive gases into
the atmosphere.
The performance of a plate interceptor can be varied by varying the plate spacing. In so far as there is a
standard, plate interceptors for effluent water clean up are often designed to remove about 95% of oils
droplets larger than 60µm, although the value of 60 µm can be varied by choosing different plate
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 186

spacings. The normal range for plate spacings is 20-40 mm. Larger spacings should be used when
fouling from suspended solids or wax build-up is a potential problem. Inclination of the plates is normally
in the range 45-60°, the steeper angles being employed when fouling from solids can be anticipated.
A number of designs for plate interceptors are available from various manufacturers, all operating on a
similar principle. Typical names are parallel plate interceptor (PPI), tilted plate interceptor (TPI) and
corrugated plate interceptor (CPI).
6.2.4.1 The corrugated plate interceptor (CPI)

A standard CPI is shown in Fig. 6.5. Water entering the CPI first passes through a trash rack for removal
of any coarse material and then flows over the inlet weir and through a corrugated plate pack where oil
droplets separate from the water.
Fig. 6.5 - Standard CPI
The deoiled water flows over another weir into the outlet channel. The oil moves up the plates and
accumulates at the surface where it is removed by skimming.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 187

The corrugated plate pack consists of a number of corrugated plates (usually GRP), which are stacked in
a parallel fashion with a plate spacing of typically 20 mm.
In order to save space (important offshore) or to reduce the cost of a unit (typically by 30%), the plates
can be installed in cross flow mode rather than downflow (or upflow, as preferred by some suppliers). The
different arrangements are shown in Fig. 6.6. The cross flow mode is particularly suited to installation in a
pressure vessel where the direction of liquid flow is across the vessel.
Figure 6.6 – Corrugated plate pace arrangements
The body of the CPI, shown in Figure 6.7, is constructed in concrete, which is typical for the treatment of
effluent water in land based installation.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 188

Figure 6.7 – Corrugated plate interceptor
Plate packs can also be housed in steel containers or pressure vessels allowing the use of a gas blanket
when operation must be carried out in an oxygen free environment (see Fig. 6.8)
During operation of plate separators it is often necessary to clean the plate packs. Suitable lighting
equipment should be installed.
Fig. 6.8 – Plate separators manufactured by ‘Skimmovex’
Commercially sized CPIs are capable of removing droplets larger than 50 µm. Although the efficiency of a
CPI depends on the nature of the feed, particularly the oil droplet size distribution, typical oil content
levels in the effluent are in the order of 50 to 100 g/m³.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 189

In tests at various offshore locations, it was demonstrated that a polypropylene mesh interceptor when
placed in the downstream section of a CPI, could substantially enhance the CPI's water treating/oil
removal performance, reducing an average effluent water quality of about 50 ppm oil-in-water to around
35 ppm. Problems with solids laden emulsion were experienced, however, and regular cleaning of the
fibers was required. Moreover, the flowrates tested were relatively low, and performance at higher
flowrates is currently not known.
6.2.4.2 The Natco Performax coalescer

CE Natco has introduced a deoiling device referred to as the Performax Coalescer (Fig. 6.9). It is not a
coalescer in the true sense of the word, but a form of plate separator, which in the 'standard' package is
designed to separate oil droplets of 60 µm (cf. the standard TPI). The plates are replaced by a plastic
matrix material which may be fitted in to conventional horizontal vessel, or retrofitted to existing vessels
using compression retaining rings. 'Blocks' of the matrix material are taken into a vessel through a
manhole and assembled into a continuous structure inside.
Care is required when treating oily water containing sand and wax particles, since fouling of the plates
may occur.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 190

Fig. 6.9 – Natco Performax Coalescer
6.3 Gas flotation units.
Gas flotation is the process by which oil droplets (and some solid particles) are removed from water by
attachment to rising gas bubbles. An oily scum forms on the water surface which is subsequently
removed by skimming. Commercial gas flotation units are categorized into two principal types by the way
in which the gas bubbles are generated:
i) Induced gas flotation units - bubbles are mechanically generated by the rotation of an impeller.
ii) Dissolved gas flotation units - bubbles are generated by pressure reduction of water which has
previously been saturated with H2S-free gas at an elevated pressure.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 191

In the case of treatment of production waters for re-injection, the absence of oxygen in the treated water
is normally essential. The produced water on arrival at the wellhead will be oxygen free and it is preferred
that it remains so, thus avoiding the necessity to include expensive oxygen removal equipment. In this
case the use of hydrocarbon gas or nitrogen to form the flotation bubbles is generally recommended.
6.3.1 Induced gas flotation (IGF) units.

Induced or dispersed gas flotation units are the most common choice for oil field use. They are normally
small packaged units which can be skid mounted (see Fig. 6.10). Because of their small size and low
operating weight they are particularly suitable for installation offshore.
Fig. 6.10 – Wemco depurator
Typical of induced gas flotation units is the Wemco depurator, which consists of four flotation cells
connected in series, each providing a residence time of one minute for the water at the manufacturers
recommended design throughput. The feedwater is usually dosed with 2 to 5 g/m³ of polyelectrolyte to
help improve the separation efficiency and produce a stable froth.
The operating mechanism can be described by considering one of the flotation cells, see Fig. 6.11.
Rotation of the star shaped impeller creates a region of low pressure. As a result, gas is drawn down the
standpipe and water moves in towards the impeller. At the foot of the standpipe water and gas are forced
into contact and travel outwards at high velocity through the disperser cage.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 192

Fig. 6.11 – Flotation cell
Shearing action across the disperser causes the formation of small gas bubbles. These bubbles rise to
the surface, picking up oil droplets on the way. At the liquid surface the gas breaks out, leaving behind a
froth layer.
The froth is lifted over the weir by paddles into a launder bin and the gas is recycled. The volume of froth
is about 5 to 8% of throughput and is usually spiked into an export crude stream or recycled through a
holding tank.
Operation with gas rather than air is often required to prevent precipitation of iron oxides and to avoid
bacterial and scaling problems. The amount of gas injected into the water is typically 8.5 m³(st)/m³ of
water per cell. This does not represent the amount of gas required from an outside source, it is the
recirculated flow. The amount of make-up gas is usually in the range of 0.05 to 0.10 m³(st)/m³ of water, or
just enough to maintain a gas blanket of 3-6 kPa above the liquid. When air is used, it is introduced at
atmospheric pressure. It is recommended that the gas flow in each cell can be individually adjusted from
outside.
Performance
Several Wemco units have been operated successfully in E & P locations since 1970. For many
applications, IGFs are used in combination (downstream) with some form of gravity separator and an oil
removal efficiency of 70 to 90% is then achieved. Typical figures for oil concentration in the outlet stream
are 20 to 50 g/m³ for an inlet stream with 100-500 g/m³ of oil. Some cases of low deoiling efficiency have
been correlated with waters having a high suspended solids concentration. This is probably due to solid
particles attaching to oil droplets or being enveloped in an oil film.
Since the Wemco is only partially successful at removing suspended solids, waters with a high solids
concentration of ten cannot be successfully deoiled to low levels.
Operating experience has been satisfactory although there are some common problems associated with
either poor control of the skimming rate and/or the formation of 'jelly like' deposits due to the overdosage
of chemicals. These problems appear to be aggravated by fluctuating feed conditions. Therefore it is
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 193

desirable to install buffer tanks upstream of the Wemco units to 'level out' fluctuations in flow and quality.
This is not always acceptable for offshore applications because of weight/space limitations.
The flotation cells are normally fabricated from carbon steel and internally lined. It is advisable to include
internal cathodic protection to ensure that corrosion can be controlled in the event of small areas of
coating becoming detached or eroded away. The area under the impellers is subject to high wear, and it
is advisable to install substantial sacrificial wear plates in this area. Facilities should be included for
obtaining samples from each individual cell and or flushing out solids which may collect in the base of the
cells.
The performance of a Wemco unit can be estimated from bench tests with a model flotation cell. Bench
testing can also be used to select suitable polyelectrolytes although optimum chemical dosage rates can
only be established by full scale test runs. It has been found that the performance of Wemco units can
sometimes be improved by addition of deoiling chemicals.
Alternative designs of induced gas flotation units
It is possible to induce gas into the water stream hydraulically, rather than mechanically as in the Wemco
unit described above. Water is recycled from the discharge compartment via a delivery tube which
extends through the standpipe in each of the flotation cells to within a short distance from the base of
each cell. The 'Hydrocell', typical of this design is shown in Fig. 6.12. Water pumped through this delivery
tube is deflected from the bottom of the cell and through a small opening between the tank bottom and
the standpipe flange. A venturi effect is created which induces gas into the liquid. It is claimed that the
reduced shear experienced in this design compared to the mechanical rotor design makes it suitable for
handling flocculated material. It is believed that this design is used successfully by other operators but no
experience is available within the Group with the exception of Shell Oil who have installed one recently
and are purchasing others.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 194

Fig. 6.12 – Hydrocell induced gas flotation separator
6.3.2 Dissolved gas flotation (DGF) units

In a dissolved gas flotation unit, the water to be treated is saturated with gas under pressure (typically
400-600 kPa). For effluent clean-up duties, air is often used leading to the commonly applied name
dissolved air flotation unit (DAF). When the pressurised water is introduced into a large vessel at (or close
to) atmospheric pressure, most of the dissolved gas is liberated (until equilibrium saturation is again
reached) in the form of fine bubbles, typically 30-120 µm diameter, which rise to the surface attaching
themselves to oil droplets on the way. A scum, typically 1% of throughput, is formed on the surface.
The total water flow can be saturated with gas, but in order to economise on pump sizing and energy
consumption it is normal to recycle only about 30% of the cleaned water back through the gas saturation
equipment, and then introduce this water together with the main stream into the flotation chamber. The
required recycle ratio and the operating pressure will depend on the nature of the effluent stream, the
flotation gas used and the temperature. It must be possible to dissolve sufficient gas to effectively float
the oil at the operating temperature. Examples of gas solubility versus temperature are shown in Figure
6.13
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 195

Fig.6.13 - Solubility of some gases in water
It is common practice to add ca. 2-5 g/m³ of polyelectrolyte to enhance the performance. Use of
polyelectrolytes ensures that the skimmings remain largely hydrocarbon (in contrast with the use of
inorganic flocculants). The oil forms as a scum on the surface of the vessel and its removed by scraper
arms to be normally recycled back into the process. The arrangement of a typical DFG unit is shown in
Fig. 6.14.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 196

Fig. 6.14 – Dissolved gas flotation unit
Dissolved air flotation units have been used for a number of years for secondary oil removal from effluent
waters. Several units are installed at Group refineries. However, attempts to use the DAF (alone) for the
treatment of production water have met with only limited success and in most cases only about 50% oil
removal could be achieved. The DAF unit can be used by itself, but for greater effectiveness it is used in
combination with inorganic flocculation. The process is then called flocculation/flotation
(see Section 6.4.2).
6.3.3 Tilted plate flotation units.

The tilted plate flotation unit (TPF) is an unusual design of gas flotation unit in that it is based on a tilted
plate interceptor with the addition of a dissolved gas recycle stream (Fig. 6.15). If a TPI is correctly
specified it can be graded (at some additional cost) to a flotation system at a later date if a more stringent
residual oil specification is eventually required.
The TPF has performed well in pilot trials with NAM to remove suspended oil and solids to a level of < 20
g/m³ from production water in the Schoonebeek field prior to injection of the water for disposal but yet to
be commercially proven.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 197

Fig. 6.15 – Schematic of a tilted plate flotation unit
6.4 Flocculation units
In water treatment the process of chemical flocculation is widely used for the removal of suspended oil
and solids and some dissolved substances. A flocculation unit usually consists of a mixing section
followed by a floc growth section. In the mixing section inorganic flocculants (typically ferric chloride,
aluminium sulphate or ferric sulphate) are rapidly mixed with the raw water to ensure homogenisation.
These chemicals destabilise suspended particles and encourage them to coagulate and form microflocs.
For optimum floc formation the pH should be in the range 5 to 9. In most cases pH control facilities may
be required, i.e. caustic or acid injection.
In the floc growth section polyelectrolytes are added to the water and gently mixed to promote
coalescence. The polyelectrolytes bind together individual micro flocs to form a relatively large spongy
mass which can be subsequently removed from the water by either sedimentation or gas flotation.
The flocculation process cannot be used in combination with the induced gas flotation process because
the high mixing intensity generated by the impellers would destroy the fragile precipitates.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 198

6.4.1 Flocculation-sedimentation
A standard flocculation-sedimentation unit is shown in Fig. 6.16. The raw water is injected with 10 to 50
g/m³ flocculant and then fed into a central mixing compartment. Here the water and flocculant are
mechanically mixed by an impeller. From the mixing zone the water flows into the floc growth region
where polyelectrolytes can be added. The water then proceeds to the sedimentation zone where the flocs
fall towards the conical bottom. Sometimes weighting agents, e.g. active silica, are added to make the
flocs heavier and thus improve the settling characteristics. Bottom scrapers move the settled floc into a
central hopper from which it is removed by gravity or sludge pumps. The clarified water rises out of the
settling zone and overflows into effluent launders at, or near to, the periphery of the unit.
Fig. 6.16 – Flocculation-sedimentation unit
In general, suspended oil removal efficiencies of 80 to 95% can be achieved. Good operation of the
flocculator requires a feed which is constant in flow, quality and degree of contamination. This can be
achieved by the installation of buffer tanks upstream of the flocculator. It should be noted that the settled
sludge bed can be easily upset by fluctuations in velocity.
6.4.2 Flocculation-flotation
The flocculation and flotation steps are normally carried out in separate units, as shown in Fig. 6.17.
Rawwater enter the mixing basin where flocculants are added (10 to 50 g/m³) and rapidly mixed to ensure
homogenisation. The water then spills over a weir into a much smaller floc growth basin where it is gently
agitated in order to obtain strong, large flocs. From this basin the mixture flows by gravity into the flotation
unit where the flocs are floated to the surface by air bubbles (for description of the flotation unit, see
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 199

Section 6.3.2.). The accumulated floc is skimmed by surface scrapers into a sump from where it is
removed by sludge pumps (sludge disposal is addressed in the following section).
The advantage in using flocculation-flotation instead of flocculation-sedimentation, is the overall reduction

in space requirements and chemical consumption (weighting agents not required).
Fig. 6.17 – Flocculation unit
The flocculation-flotation process is capable of achieving oil removal efficiencies of 80 to 95%, or even
higher. Consequently, the oil and solids concentrations in the treated water are often lower than 15 g/m³
and 2 g/m³ has been achieved. As with the flocculation-sedimentation unit, good operation requires
reasonable constant feed conditions and buffer tanks are therefore desirable. The clarified water from the
unit is suitable for media filtration without any further treatment.
6.4.3 Sludge disposal from flocculation processes

The problem of disposal of oily sludge containing inorganic flocculants should not be underestimated. The
volume of sludge can vary from 0.2 to 2.5% of the total produced water flow rate, typically comprising of
95 to 98% water, the rest being oil and solids. It is impractical to recover clean oil from this sludge,
therefore there is no alternative other than disposal
Small volumes of sludge can be disposed of by ponding or spraying. Larger volumes must be 'thickened'
by gravity, evaporation, centrifuges or filters and then disposed of by incineration or land farming. To
date, universally acceptable methods of sludge disposal have not yet been developed (see also Section
5.7).
6.5 Coalescers
Separation of oil droplets by API or CPI oil interceptors is often not sufficient to meet injection water
quality requirements. Plate pack separators become uneconomical if particles smaller than 50 µm have to
be removed from the influent. A possible solution to this problem is to coalesce the small droplets into
larger ones which can then be subsequently separated by gravity.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 200

In commercial units coalescence is achieved by feeding the water through a bed of surface active
(oleophilic) media - this may be fibrous or granular material which has an oleophilic surface or a
homogeneous oleophilic resin. The small oil droplets are attracted to the oleophilic surface where
coalescence takes place due to the close proximity of large numbers of droplets. The oil leaves the bed in
the form of larger droplets which can be easily separated by gravity. The gravity separation step can be
included in the same vessel or as a subsequent step.
The major problem is that the coalescing media becomes blocked with suspended solids since the bed
also acts as a filter. This can sometimes be avoided by the installation of a pre-filter, or by regular
backwashing. However, current experience is that coalescers can only tolerate a very low solids
concentration in the feed, of say, less than 5 g/m³.
A number of installations have been reported where coalescers are claimed to successfully remove oil
from tanker ballast water.
There are several proprietary designs of coalescers on the market; selected examples are briefly
discussed in the following sections.
6.5.1 Examples of commercial coalescers

6.5.1.1 Degremont coalescer
The Degremont coalescer consists of a tower which is packed with a bed of graded sand (Fig. 6.18). An
oleophilic surface is created on the sand particles by the continuous addition of polyelectrolyte chemical
to the feed. Regular backwashing of the bed is necessary to avoid plugging, and for viscous oils a
backwash temperature of about 40 °C is required to release the oil.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 201

Fig. 6.18 – Degremont coalesce
The manufacturer claims that the unit is capable of 90%+ oil removal. However, pilot scale tests carried
out indicated that these high efficiencies could only be achieved at the expense of a very high backwash
frequency.
6.5.1.2 Plenty Metrol coalescer (Fig. 6.20 Fig. 6.19)

Feedwater is pre-filtered to protect the coalescer against solids blockage. The coalescer itself consists of
about 10 coalescer cartridge. Oily water enters the base of the vessel and is distributed to the catridges
and flows radially outwards into the bulk volume of the vessel. Oil droplets, coalesced within the cartridge,
rise to the surface at the top of the vessel where they form a layer which is discharged by level control.
The manufacturer claims that this unit can be expected to reduce suspended oil content down to 5-10
g/m³.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 202

Fig. 6.19 – Plenty Metrol coalescer
6.5.1.3 KnitMesh DC coaleser (Fig. 6.20)

The KnitMesh DC coalescer contains a packing of coalescing filaments consisting of a combination of two
different materials, viz. one of low surface-free energy (such as plastic) and the other of high surface-free
energy (such as metal). Droplet coalescence is greatly enhanced at a point on a surface at which there is
a discontinuity of surface-free energy, a so-called 'junction point'. Therefore by making use of a packing
containing many such 'junction points', the separation efficiency is greatly increased. A further advantage
of dual material (DC) packing is that since the packing filaments are effective for both phases of the
liquid/liquid dispersion, the DC coalescer will continue to operate efficiently when the dispersion inverts.
The manufacturer claims the following principal advantages for the DC coalescer:
i) improve separation efficiency;

ii) higher flowrates permit significant reduction in vessel size;
iii) large cost savings in pressure vessels;
iv) efficiency maintained even with phase inversion of the dispersed liquid;
v) high percentage of voids gives smaller pressure drop.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 203

Fig. 6.20 – Diagrammatic layout of KnitMesh DC coalesce
For very tight emulsion (< 30 µm) KnitMesh market the DUSEC coalescer consisting of an array of
cartridges consisting of a selection of fibre materials formed in layers around a central perforated cylinder.
The outer layer is KnitMesh DC packing. The feed enters the centre of the cylinder and flows radially
through the coalescer similar to the Plenty Metrol coalescer (Fig. 6.19). The KnitMesh DUSEC cartridge is
designed to achieve phase disengagement within the outer layer of the cartridge, and no gravity settling
of separate droplets is required.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 204

KnitMesh coalescers have mostly been applied in a refinery environment but they have potential for E&P
applications.
6.5.2 Expandable fibrous bed coalescer

In recognition of the problem of blocking of coalescer beds with solid particles, KSEPL/TRC have
developed the expandable fibrous bed coalescer (Fig. 6.21). The unit consists of a bed of polypropylene
fibres which can be expanded during the periodic cleaning cycle to remove entrained solids, then
recompressed for their coalescence duty. The fibres themselves are permanently surface treated to
enhance coalescence. The large oil droplets are subsequently removed in a separate gravity interceptor.
Deoiling efficiencies can be as high as 95% depending on the chemical composition of the emulsion to be
treated.
In later work by TRC (UK) various modifications to the coalescer shown in Fig. 6.21 were developed.
These pertain to the surface treatment of the fibres and the provision of a low shear zone for releasing the
oil droplets.
The expandable fibrous bed coalescer has so far not been developed for commercial exploitation, and at
this stage potential applications appear to be limited to those of relatively small capacity.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 205

Fig. 6.21 – Expandable fibrous bed coalescer
6.5.3 Pipeline coalescers

In some cases where the water obtained in a dehydration process contains a very fine oil-in-water
dispersion (oil droplet sizes of 10 µm to less than 1 µm) which cannot be effectively separated in the
deoiling facilities, it can be considered to treat the oil-in-water emulsion with a deoiler. To further promote
coalescence of the destablised oil droplets, use can be made of a coalescer pipe system. The coalesced
oil droplets can subsequently be separated in e.g. a CPI unit.
Coalescer pipe systems for deoiling purposes have been installed in a few cases only, e.g. in Nigeria.
This system consisted of 500 ft, 4" diameter pipe and 1200', 6" diameter pipe, with residence times of
about 1 min and 6 min respectively, and a pressure drop of 22 psi over the system. The average deoiling
efficiency of the coalescer pipe system was estimated at about 40%.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 206

Critical parameters to be considered in the design of a coalescer pipe system are the mixing intensity
parameter and retention time. For a further discussion on pipeline coalescence reference is made to
Section 2.4.4.
6.6 Filters
The application of filters for the treatment of oily water has been limited so far, since filters clog up rapidly
even with relatively small amounts of oil whether or not in combination with solids. This restricts capacities
of filtration units to low values, and frequent cleaning/removal of the filtration medium is required. In
general application, filters in deoiling systems are limited to polishing only, when high water quality is
required for injection purposes. In BSP the DAF effluent (< 20 ppm oil) is filtered through dual media
filters which are backwashed with 'Nonidet LE' solution to present fouling and clogging. This has proved
to be very effective and reduce the oil content to less than 5 ppm.
In the following sections the various filtration processes are briefly discussed. Membrane filters are
currently not "proven technology" and they are not discussed since, furthermore, they have as
disadvantages:
• plugging and maintenance problems

• too low flowrates
• prohibitive capital and operating cost
6.6.1 Granular media filters

Granular media filters are backwashable filters which therefore operate on an cyclic basis. They are
frequently used for seawater filtration. Water is filtered through a media bed of typically sand or a
combination of anthracite/garnet or anthracite/sand on a suitable support bed
It is claimed that downflow sand filters can be used for removal of oil (up to about 200 g/m³) from
production water. However, practical experience has indicated that sand filters are unsuitable for this
duty, particularly where heavy or waxy crudes are involved. Backwashing procedures are often
ineffective, leading to frequent replacement of the media.
In general it is recommended that granular media filters can be considered for application in oily water
treatment when the oil content in the influent is less than 30 g/m³
6.6.2 Precoat filters

Precoat filtration offers the possibility of producing water of very low residual suspended solids content
with equipment operating at a high throughput for its size and weight relative to media filters. This
capability may be useful in some offshore designs. Precoat filters are normally only economically viable
for treating water which contains relatively low suspended solids (< 5 g/m³) or where very stringent water
quality specifications have to be met. They have also found extensive application in removing the final
traces of suspended oil from production water prior to softening and conversion into steam for thermal
recovery projects. Oil content in the filter feed must be less than 15 g/m³ and ideally less than 10 g/m³.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 207

6.6.3 Novel media filters
Media other than conventional mineral particles can be used for filtration. An example which has been
applied to oilfield waters is the Hydromation deep bed filter which uses crushed black walnut shells. The
media is water wetted and is therefore claimed to be particularly suited to removing oil and solids from
production water since the entrained oil is easily removed from the media. The principle of the design is
shown in Fig. 6.22 and is unusual in that the media is hydraulically removed from the filter vessel and
circulated through an adjacent small scrubber vessel where agglomerated oil particles are broken up,
allowing the oil and entrained solids to pass through a stainless steel mesh. Attrition of the walnut shell
media during backwash necessitates about 10% replacement annually.
Fig. 6.22 – Hydromation filter
Typical flux rates claimed are about 30 (m³/h)/m² for production water and 50 (m³/h)/m² for seawater.
6.7 Hydrocyclones
Hydrocyclones have recently gained Group acceptance and are now the preferred option for offshore
production water disposal. Cyclone separators have already found many applications, since a good
separation of small particles can be achieved with a short residence time. The separation performance
for solids/gas and liquids/gas cyclones and for solids/liquid hydrocyclones are well establish and many
design are available.
In liquid/liquid hydrocyclone has been developed with a special duty of removing small quantities of
dispersed oil from water and is being optimised for a low density difference, a dispersion with a lower
density than the continuous phase (i.e. oil-in-water dispersion) and a minimum shear to avoid droplet
break-up, the geometry of the liquid/liquid hydrocyclone differs substantially from the conventional
cyclone. Characteristic is the very long tapered section and the absence of a vortex finder in the swirl
chamber.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 208

In Fig. 6.23 a schematic diagram is shown of the BWN Vortoil. As can be seen from Fig. 6.23 the Vortoil
consists of four sections:
• a cylindrical swirl chamber

• a concentric reducing section
• a fine tapered section, and
• a cyclindrical tail section.
Separation is achieved by generating centrifugal forces, orders of magnitude higher (~ 1000 g) than
available in conventional gravity based separation equipment. A high velocity vortex with a reverse
flowing central core is set up by entry of the oily water through a tangential inlet into the cyclindrical swirl
chamber. The fluid is accelerated through the concentric reducing and finer taper sections of the
cyclone, where the bulk of the separation occurs, into the parallel tail section where the smaller slower
moving oil droplets are recovered. The lighter oil droplets migrate towards the lower pressure central
core where an axial reversal of flow occurs, resulting in the lower density oil enriched phase being
removed through a small diameter orifice in the centre of the inlet head (reject stream). The clean water
stream exits as the continuous phase from the downstream end.
The oil removal efficiency of hydrocyclone influenced by a number of factors such as:
• Density different - the greater the difference, the greater the potential for rapid phase separation.
• Mean droplet size - minimising high shear areas upstream of the hydrocyclone is important to
prevent droplet disintegration.
• Temperature – installation downstream of the first stage separator where typically 95% water
removal occurs, but upstream of any interstage or produced water coolers, affords best
performance.
• Flowrate - higher flowrate increase the intensity of the centrifugal separation forces. Too high
flowrates, however, may shear oil droplets and reduce the available pressure to drive the reject
stream.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 209

Fig. 6.23a – Vortoil flow profile
Fig. 6.23b - 35-mm Vortoil cross section (not scale; chamber length 6 ft)
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 210

Another important parameter affecting the performance is the reject ratio, which is defined as the ratio of
fluid reject as concentrated oily water from the upstream outlets, to the clean water underflow, expressed
as a percentage. As the reject ratio increases, so does the efficiency of separation, until it levels out at
around 1-2% reject ratio (see Fig. 6.24). Higher reject ratio may only yield a marginal improvement in
separation efficiency, but this is not normally justified/desirable since the rejected flow needs to be treated
again further downstream in the treatment facilities. Therefore this flow should be kept to a minimum.
Fig. 6.24 - Example of hydrocyclone efficiency vs. reject ratio.
Control of the reject is achieved by controlling the pressure drops in the system, i.e. that between the inlet
and outlet of the hydrocyclone, and between the inlet and reject stream. A control system based on total
flow/reject flow cannot be used due to metering problems with gas break-out which exists preferentially
with the reject stream.
A considerable degree of flexibility exists with the hydrocyclone liners which can be fabricated in either
single or four-in-one 35 or 60 mm units. This size refers to the diameter at the transition between the
concentric reducing and fine taper section of the cyclone. Additional units can simply be added as a
bolton expansion as watercut increases, or as an upgrade of the originally installed water handling
capacity. Hydrocyclones should be installed immediately downstream of the first stage separator, but
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 211

upstream of the separator level control valves to maximise the available pressure driving force while
minimising high shear areas which would cause droplet break-up.
Hydrocyclones need about 8-10 bar pressure differential between oily water inlet and reject outlet
streams. Feed pressures of 4-6 bar are acceptable but very limited turndown if individual cyclones is
available at these pressures. Hydrocyclones are in operation with differential pressures of over 35 bar.
For lower feed pressures pumped feed using low shear pumps of the progressive cavity type
(MONO/EEPEX) or twin helical screw pumps (Stothert & Pitt) must be used. These pumps are suitable for
increasing the feed pressure by up to 10 bar.
Various field trials have shown that oily water with oil droplets larger than 15-50 µm can be effectively
cleaned. The residence time in the hydrocyclones are in the order of 2-3 seconds, compared to the 5-10
minutes in plate separators. In view of their compactness, hydrocyclones are very attractive for offshore
applications.
Further detail on capacity and performance are given in Section 7.3.3.6.
6.8 Removal of dissolved hydrocarbons
Three possible processes for removal of dissolved hydrocarbons are briefly described in the following
sections, viz.:
• carbon adsorption
• gas stripping
• biological treatment.
These are briefly discussed below.
6.8.1 Carbon adsorption

Activated carbon removes organics by adsorption on its microporous surface. The pore structure can be
controlled in the production process; it determines the adsorption capability and rate. In treating oily
water, the effluent water is fed through vessels which contain up to 60 cartridges filled with activated
carbon.
The following problems may arise with this process:
• Fouling of the carbon by impurities in the production water, leading to plugging, and non-
adsorption if hydrocarbons.
• A substantial logistical and hygiene problem, especially when applied offshore, arising from
changing out the vessel contents and transportation of spent cartridges for regeneration or
incineration.
Carbon adsorption process should be applied only for polishing treatment. They require extensive
pretreatment of the effluent water, and there are prohibitive cost and space requirements for E & P
application.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 212

6.8.2 Gas stripping
Gas stripping of hydrocarbons can be achieved either by the use of steam or by air.
In steam stripping the dissolved hydrocarbons (with a boiling point of 70-80 °C) are stripped out of the
effluent water by stream formed by boiling off a few per cent of the effluent water itself. The vapour
leaving the stripping column will be hydrocarbons, together with an amount of steam. An air cooler
condenses the steam for recycling to the process, whilst the hydrocarbons are vented.
Air stripping is effected by blowing a large excess volume of air through a packed column in
countercurrent with effluent water, which strips the hydrocarbons out of the water. Effluent water is
directly discharged, and the hydrocarbons are vented along with the airstream to atmosphere.
Main disadvantages of the gas stripping method are:
• very high energy costs

• it causes air pollution
• facilities are prohibitively bulky and expensive.
6.8.3 Biological treatment

This process uses bacteria to remove dissolved organic contaminants (including dissolved oil). It should
be preceded by gravity separation and/or flotation units to ensure almost complete removal of free oil
prior to the biotreaters.
The water to be treated is contacted with bacteria and sufficient oxygen has to be supplied (aeration) to
activate biochemical reactions. There are two main biotreatment processes which can be applied.
i) Treatment in an activated sludge basin followed by a clarifier (see Fig. 6.25). In this process
the raw water is mixed with water containing a high concentration of bacteria and thoroughly
mixed and aerated. After allowing time for biodegradation to take place, the water is routed to
a settling basin where clarified water and water concentrated with bacteria flocs (activated
sludge) are separated. Part of the activated sludge is recycled into the raw water feed.
Fig. 6.25 – Activated sludge biotreater

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 213

ii) Treatment in a trickle filter followed by a clarifier. Here the water is sprayed over an activated
bed, of lava rocks for example. On these rocks bacteria will develop and basically the same
biochemical reaction occurs as in the activated sludge process. The trickle filter effluent
passes through a clarifier to remove bacteria flocs.
Biological treatment in E & P operations may not be practicable because of:
• prohibitive space and weight requirements.

• It will not usually operate because of high mineral concentrations.
• Possible sludge disposal problems.
• It requires skilled disposal attention.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 214

7 EQUIPMENT SELECTION AND DESIGN/SIZING GUIDELINES
Prior to the commencement of any design work on new or existing facilities, the need to thoroughly
discuss requirements and forecast throughput levels with production operations and petroleum
engineering functions cannot be overstressed. With regard to the forecasts it should be realised that
regardless of how carefully they have been derived the range of uncertainty associated with them will be
large. Probably the only guarantees that can be given are that the forecast will change and that once
water production has commenced the BSW will increase with time.
7.1 Introduction
The design/sizing of dehydration and deoiling equipment should, be based on a quantitative description of
the separation behaviour of two immiscible liquids from an unstable emulsion.
Generally, in deoiling processes relatively large quantities of water are handled, containing relatively
small amounts of oil (typically less than 2% vol.). The dispersion is therefore very dilute and the oil-water
separation process is well described by Stokes' Law. Consequently Stokes' Law can be successfully
applied for the sizing of deoiling equipment (Section 7.3). An illustration of how Stokes' Law can be
usedto size an oily water separator, is given in Appendix 7.1.
In most dehydration processes, however, the dispersed water phase is much more concentrated. In this
case we are not simply concerned with the separation of a number of individual droplets, but with a
swarm of droplets, where individual droplets will collide and coalesce. In these case, Stokes' Law cannot
describe the settling process, since a quantitative description would have to take into account processes
such as:
• Inter-droplet film drainage and droplet-droplet coalescence as a function of interfacial and bulk
parameters.
• Behaviour of an emulsion as function of concentration, turbulence, flow properties, droplet size,
etc.
Although a significant number of studies on these topics has been carried out, a quantitative description
of the separation process of a dispersion has proved to be extremely complex, and a simple and
practically applicable mathematical description of the coalescing mechanism has not yet been
forthcoming.
In December 1987 a research project started at KSEPL to develop procedures for predicting separator
performance based on readily determined physico-chemical properties of emulsions (see Section 3.6.).
As a second objective, the project aims to significantly reduce the residence time in oil/water separators
(by a factors of about ten), for the same or better efficiency, and to develop robust equipment not
sensitive to upsets in feed conditions. Timing of the project is such that major result are not expected
within the next few years.
In the absence of proper sizing rules for dehydration equipment based on a quantitative description of
emulsion behaviour, empirical rules have been developed and applied thus far. Consequently, the sizing
of individual pieces of equipment and the design of a system has heavily relied on laboratory/field testing,
existing (local) experience and to a large extent on the judgement of the designer. However, due to the
many uncertainties involved, many existing facilities are non-optimally designed/sized, often resulting in
off-spec crude oil and/or water, or excessive weight/space requirements.
Recently empirical design guidelines for oil field dehydration equipment were developed in SIPM based
on an in-depth review of operating experience in various Opcos and feedback from equipment
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 215

manufacturers. These guidelines are integrally taken into account in this Manual, and they are presented
in Section 7.2, together with various other considerations relevant to the design of dehydration
equipment. Selection and design guidelines for deoiling equipment is discussed in Section 7.3.
Whereas the selection and sizing of individual components can be done by using a set of guidelines as
given in this chapter, these components need to be put together and integrated into a system. For
system integration no single recipe can be provided and in the final analysis the choice of a particular
combination must rely rather heavily on the judgement and experience of the design engineer. Aspects
of system integration are discussed in Chapter 8 as well operational aspects/guidelines.
7.2 Dehydration equipment
7.2.1 Design approach

Most of the equipment sizing methods currently in use are based on either retention time or Stokes'
Law. In the first mentioned approach, equipment dimensions are chosen to provide sufficient retention
time or hold-up volumes for oil water separation to take place. This retention time criteria used, are
normally based on the results of settling tests or operating experience with similar crudes. When using
this approach it should be realised that optimum retention times will vary over the life of a field since the
BSW will normally increase.
As discussed in Section 7.1, Stokes' Law provides a means that can be used to size an oily-water
separator. The example shown in Appendix 7.1 indicates that separation capacity mainly a function of
horizontal cross-sectional area. This particular characteristic is supported by many practical
experiments. It can be concluded, therefore, that retention time alone is an unsuitable sizing criterion
since it only specifies a volume requirement and not a horizontal cross-sectional area requirement.
Indeed, equipment sized based on retention time considerations, is often wrongly sized.
As mentioned in Section 7.1, Stokes' Law cannot adequately described the dehydration
process(separation of a water-in-oil emulsion) since it is too simple to provide a proper description of the
coalescence mechanism. Therefore, in the absence of practical sizing rules based on quantitative
dispersion behaviour, empirical correlations have recently been developed in SIPM.
From extensive analyses of different types of dehydration unit in use in various Opcos, empirical
relations were established between two of the terms in Stokes’ Law, viz, Q/A (= flow ‚ horizontal cross-
sectional area) and Dr/h ( = density difference oil/water ‚ viscosity of the continuous phase). These
empirical relations are the following form:
b
Q ∆ρ
a
A η
with the coefficients a and b depending on the type of liquid and the dehydration performance. The above
relationship forms the basis for the sizing methods for dehydration equipment as discussed in Section
7.2.4.
The recommended design approach for dehydration equipment is then as follows:
• Determine reservoir fluid and production parameters (temperatures, pressures, viscosity,

flowrates, densities).
• Establish the duty of the equipment, i.e. the nature of the feed and required specification of
separated oil and water (Section 7.2.2.).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 216

• Select the most appropriate dehydration equipment for the established duty and conceptually
determine the treatment stages required to achieve the specifications (Section 7.2.3.).
• Run a process computer simulation to determine the number of stages and process design.
• With flowrates estimated in all relevant parts of the conceptual facilities from computer
simulations, size the equipment using the empirical sizing rules (Section 7.2.4.), taking
intoaccount the uncertainties associated with the long-term production forecasts.
• Design/select the internals and accessories (Section 7.2.5.).
• Design/decide on the required control system (Section 7.2.6.).
7.2.2 General design considerations
In order to arrive at an optimum design and sizing of dehydration equipment, a number of general
considerations need to be taken into account, which refer to the following aspects:–
Design conditions - flow rate

- temperature
Nature of the feed - density and viscosity

- emulsion stability
- droplets size distribution
- watercut
- gas fraction
Product specification - oil quality

- water quality
The above aspects are briefly discussed below.
7.2.2.1 Design conditions

Dehydrators are typically incorporated in process schemes for which there are different modes of
operation. During the life cycle of a field gross production and relative gas-water-in-oil compositions, i.e.
water cut and GLR, will change dramatically. The dehydrator design shall be based upon the operation
mode with the severest condition in terms of temperature and oil, water of gross flow rate. Having
identified the severest mode it is then necessary to add a margin to arrive at the design flow rate, This
margin should include allowances for overdesign, safety and surging.
Flow rate
'Severest' flow rates of oil, gas and water are usually well defined. They are directly related to production
forecasts or actual daily production rates. The margin to be added to arrive at the design flow rate is less
well defined and is dependent on the dynamic flow behaviour in wells, in upstream/downstream piping
and in associated process facilities; this as a result of e.g. multiphase flow in (long) flow lines, ambient
temperature variations, flow fluctuations, piping operations etc. Margins up to 50-75% are not
uncommon. However, an in-depth assessment of the define entire oil-gas-water processing system is
required to define the margin to be applied.
Temperature
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 217

A minimum temperature is often required to destabilise the emulsion and enable effective oil-water
separation. Bottle test results can be used to assess the minimum separation temperature.
Referring to Stokes' Law, it is obvious that the dehydration process benefits from higher temperatures,
since oil viscosities are reduced and density differences increase. However, this is often achieved at the
expense of fuel cost for heating and losses of hydrocarbon vapours. In offshore operations, well and
pipeline insulation can be beneficially incorporated for improved dehydration behaviour.
7.2.2.2 Nature of the feed

In addition to temperature and flow rate, the following parameters should be known.
Density and viscosity
The general settling characteristics of a destabilised emulsion can be roughly predicted from the density
and viscosity of both the (dry) oil and the water. In general light/low-viscosity crude oil are much easier
to dehydrate than heavy/high-viscosity crude oils (Stokes' Law).as densities and viscosities are largely
temperature dependent it is prudent that design figures are defined consistent with the "severest"
operating conditions (see also Section 2.5.2)
Emulsion stability
The stability of the crude oil-water emulsion depends on the effectiveness of the chemical and heat
treatment applied upstream of the dehydrator. In this respect it should be noted that laboratory and/or
on-site bottle tests should be carried out as standard practice in order to identify a suitable demulsifying
chemical and it determine the minimum temperature required for dehydration. Bottle test results can be
used by the equipment design engineer as a guide to the likely time required for separation and possible
emulsion problems, e.g. by comparison with similar tests for installed facilities with known performance.
Droplet size distribution
Droplet size is an important parameter in oil-water separation, settling velocity being directly proportional
to the square of the droplet diameter. In practice, however, it is difficult to predict droplet size
distributions (dsd's) and quantify the effect on dehydration performance.
The best approach would seem to describe the feed as having a "fine" or "coarse" dsd. Fine dsd's can
be expected immediately downstream of chokes, control valves and pumps. Coarse dsd's can be
expected at the end of long pipelines and flowlines.
Water cut
Separation of a destablised emulsion tends to proceed faster with increasing water cut. At high water cuts
much of the water may exist as a distinct phase, albeit contaminated with oil droplets, referred to as "free
water", the rest of the water remains dispersed in the oil.
Gas fraction
Gas break-out tends to disrupt the dehydration process. Nevertheless, with light or low-viscosity crudes
the simultaneous separation of oil, water and gas (three-phase separation) can be carried out
effectively. For heavy or viscous crudes, however, or where deep dehydration (0.1 to 0.5% BS&W) is
required, degassing should be carried out upstream of the dehydrator, or the settler should be operated
above the bubble point to avoid gas break-out.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 218

7.2.2.3 Product specifications
Oil quality
In the case of high water cut crudes it may be desirable to remove the bulk of the "free water" at an early
stage in the process in order to reduce the load on downstream facilities. In this case the dehydration
unit has either a relaxed water content specification (<10% vol), or no specification at all.
Most general purpose dehydrators are required to reduce water-in-oil contents to typically 1 to 5% vol.
This may be for feed to a pipeline or for storage purposes.
Deep dehydration to 0.1 to 0.5% BS&W is usually only required in case of set crude oil export
specifications with regards to BS&W and/or salinity. This is usually achieved by batch settling in storage
tanks prior to shipment. Alternatively, if space and weight are limited such as in offshore applications,
deep dehydration may be achieved by applying electrostatic coalescers.
Water quality
The main consideration is to avoid excessive contamination with oil. A typical water quality resulting from
a dehydration process prior to de-oiling is less than 2000 g/m³ oil in water for heavy crudes and less
than 500 g/m³ oil in water for light/medium crudes. Dehydration water generally requires further
treatment in dedicated deoiling equipment before disposal requirement are met. (see Section 7.3).
7.2.3 Equipment selection and application

The selection and design of appropriate dehydration equipment for a particular case depends on three
principal factors:
i) The feed, i.e. the nature of the crude and proportion of production water to be treated.
ii) The product specifications, i.e. the target residual water (dehydration) and oil content (deoiling).
iii) The location and operating philosophy.
When selecting dehydration equipment, and in particular when potential problems with separation of the
produced emulsions are expected, tests should be run to determine the best course of treatment and help
optimise operating conditions. Usually the simplest system is the most efficient and economical. Where
for offshore application space and weight requirements are critical, for onshore application the selection
of equipment may be guided more by considerations of simplicity (minimal maintenance requirements)
and robustness/dependability.
It should be noted that in one area dehydration may be limited to tankage at the export terminal, whilst in
other areas dehydration vessels in the field may be preferred. Unfortunately no single recommendation
can be made. However, most duties can be met by utilisation of one or more of the units listed below in
Table 7.1.
It should be mentioned that platform storage cells, which are widely used in the North Sea, in principle
could also be considered in the selection of appropriate dehydration processes and/or equipment. In
most cases, however, the decision on whether or not to construct a platform with or without storage cells
will be dictated by conditions and requirements other than those concerning dehydration.
As to new developments in dehydration equipment, it is mentioned that both centrifuges and

hydrocyclones are being investigated/tested for dehydration applications. Both types of equipment offer
the advantages of much reduced space/weight requirements with a performance similar or better than,
conventional equipment. While these devices are promising for future applications (hydrocyclones are
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 219

already being installed for deoiler purposes) further laboratory development and/or prolonged field testing
is needed to evaluate the operational performance and application potential of the systems.
Table 7.1 – Dehydration equipment selection guidelines
Equipment Application Comments

1. Free water For high watercut crudes where the bulk Final crude polishing to export
knockout type of water separates quickly quality can be carried out using
separators method
2. Dehydration type For low cut crudes where dehydration to Usually located downstream of
separators about 1-5% water is required FWKO separator (s) in offshore
applications
3. Heater treater Considered for dehydration of difficult Choice base on economic
emulsion or very viscous crudes arguments. Can be operated at
higher temperature than 100°C
4. Batch tanks General purpose. Use especially where Not a god choice for high water
plenty of tankage is available cut crudes
5. Dehydration General purposes. Particularly useful Careful design of internals
tanks with higher water cut crudes required to avoid channeling
6. Concentric Particularly useful for heavy, high water More expensive than the
dehydration tanks cut crudes conventional design and more
difficult to operate
7. Electrostatic Considered when deep dehydration is More sophisticated, hence more
coalescers required ( to about 0.5% water) potential problems. Short
circuiting problems. Research at
KSLA to reduce size and
increase efficiency/working range
up to 40% water cut
8. Centrifudes Suitable for deep dehydration and solids Field tested in NAM.
removal More trials required to prove the
Compact size system to be suitable for EP
Potential for offshore application operations
7.2.4 Equipment sizing

7.2.4.1 Sizing criteria
Flux rate
The capacity of a dehydrator is mainly a function of disengagement area at the oil-water interface. For an
"empty" unit the disengagement area corresponds to the horizontal cross-sectional area of the separation
compartment.
A well-designed dehydrator should sufficient horizontal cross-sectional area to produced crude and water
of the required quality under the maximum flowrate conditions. In this case, the flux rate (volumetric flow
rate ‚ horizontal cross-sectional area) should not exceed the volume recommended for the given feed
condition and required product specifications.
Reynolds number
Turbulence is created by the cross flow interferences with the settling process. The type flow regime,
indicating the degree of turbulence, can be calculated from the Reynolds number:
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 220

ρ·v·δ
Re
η
Where v = flow velocity
4× flow are
d = hydraulic diameter
wetted perimeter
Best conditions for separation are achieved if the flow is laminar. For an “empty” dehydrator this is usually
impractical, but an upper limit of Re = 20 000 for the oil phase is recommended. For a separator fitted
with plate internals, laminar flow conditions can be provided by appropriate spacing of the parallel plates.
Typical design values are:
a) for corrugated plate packs, Re £ 400.
b) for flat plate packs, Re £ 1200.
Gas-liquid separation
Design criteria for the gas-liquid part of three-phase separator can be found in the PETRONAS Technical
Standard (PTS 31.22.05.11, January 2010). These criteria are included in the three-phase separator
sizing routines given in this Manual.
7.2.4.2 Sizing method

It is important that all possible operating conditions are considered. Usually maximum net oil flow,
maximum net water flow and minimum temperature are the critical parameters. However, for three-phase
separators and plate separators, conditions at the maximum operating temperature must also be
considered to ensure that gas handling requirements are met.
The first step of the sizing method is to establish an allowable flux rate, Q/A, based on the value
determined for Dr/h, from the empirically derived relationships as introduced in Section 7.2.1. These
relationships are shown in graphical form in Appendix 7.2. The thus derived flux rates can then be
discounted by a factor to account for emulsion stability, product specifications, droplet size distribution,
etc. In some of the sizing routines shown in Appendix 7.2 upper and lower design limits are suggested.
These limits correspond to the following aspect:
Upper design limit
• relaxed BS&W specification (more than, say, 3%);

• no emulsion problems (droplet sizes in the range of 20-100 µm);
• coarse dispersion;
• little gas break-out.
Lower design limit
• tight BS&W specification (less than 3%);

• emulsion problems;
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 221

• fine dispersion (droplet size of less then 20µm);
• substantial gas break-out.
Sizing routines, together with relevant empirical equipment sizing curves, for the determination of
dehydration unit dimensions, are discussed in detail in Section 7.2.4.3.
7.2.4.3 Sizing routines

In this section sizing routines are given for the following pieces of equipment:
1) Liquid-liquid separator (Cg < 0.85) - fwko service
2) Liquid-liquid separator (Cg < 0.85) - dehydration service
3) Heater treater
4) Three-phase separator - fwko service
5) Three-phase separator - dehydration service
6) Liquid-liquid plate separator
7) Three-phase plate separator
8) Dehydration tank
9) Concentric wash tank
10) Electrostatic coalescer
All relevant Figures related to the sizing of the above pieces of equipment are given in Appendix 7.2.
It should be noted that equipment internals and accessories are discussed in Section 7.2.5,
whereasaspect of control and instrumentation are covered in Section 7.2.6.
In Table 7.2, the nomenclature as used in this Section, has been summarised.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 222

Table 7.2 – Nomenclature.
A Cross sectional area m2
Ah Horizontal cross section area (HXA) m2
Al Vertical cross sectional area (VXA) for liquid flow m2
Ag VXA for gas flow m2
Cg Gas fraction (=
D Vessel/tank diameter m
D i Inner tank diameter m
Do Outer tank diameter m
d Pipe diameter m
hs Height of surge volume m
L Length of vessel (tan‐to‐tan) m
Lp Length of plate pack m
qg Design gas flow m3/s
qo Design net oil flow m3/s
ql Design total liquid flow m3/s
qw Design water flow m3/s
(ql/A) Liquid flux rate m
(qo/A) Oil flux rate m/s
(qw/A) Water flux rate m/s
(qg/A) Gas flux rate m/s
t Temperature °C
U Velocity m/s
α Plate angle degree
Δ Plate spacing m
Δρ Oil/water‐density difference kg/m3
ρg Gas density kg/m3
ρo Oil density kg/m3
ρw Water density kg/m3
ηo Oil viscosity Pa.s
ηw Water viscosity Pa.s
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 223

7.2.4.3.1 Liquid-liquid separator in free water knock out service (including separator with small gas
handling facilities, i.e. Cg 0.85)
The following data are required:
q1, ρo, ρw, ηw
The sizing routine is as follows:
Step 1
Calculate ∆ρ = ρw -ρo and ∆ρ/ηw
Step 2
Find the maximum allowable liquid fluxrate (q1/A) from Figure A 7.2.1.
Step 3 Calculate the minimum required horizontal cross sectional area of the separation compartment:
Ahmin = q1/(q1/A)
Step 4
Select suitable vessel dimensions to satisfy A hmin. The vessel L/D ratio should be in the range 3 to 5.
Standard pressure vessel sizes are given in Figure A 7.2.2. For vessels fitted with a weir, the tan-to-
tanlength will be approximately one meter longer than the separation compartment, to provide sufficient
surge volume downstream of the weir.
7.2.4.3.2 Liquid-liquid separator in dehydration service (including separators with small gas handling
acilities, i.e. Cg 0.85)
The following data are required at the minimum operating temperature:
qo, q1, ρo, ρw, ηo, ηw
Step 1
Calculate the terms: ∆ρ = ρw -ρo, ∆ρ/ηo and ∆ρ/ηw
Step 2
Find the maximum allowable fluxrates (q 1/A) and (qo/A) from Figure A 7.2.1 and Figure A 7.2.3
repectively.
Step 3
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 224

Calculate the minimum required horizontal cross-sectional area of the separation compartment:
Ah = q1/(q1/A) m2
Ah = qo/(qo/A) m2
Select the highest value for Ahmin
Step 4
Select a vessel with suitable dimensions to satisfy the A hmin requirement. The L/D ratio should be in the
range 3 to 5. For standard pressure vessel sizes see Figure A 7.2.2.
For vessels fitted with a weir the tan-to–tan length will be approximately one meter longer than the
separation compartment, to provide sufficient surge volume downstream of the weir.
7.2.4.3.3 Heater treater.

Similar data is discussed in Section 7.2.4.3.2 are required. In addition, the following data are also
required
Inlet temperature : ti (°C)
Optimum operating temperature :t (°C)
Specific heat of crude : Cp (kJ/kg °C)
The sizing routine as follows:
Step 1 : Calculate the required heat input
H = qo ρo Cp (t – ti) kJ/s
Cp values for normal pour point crudes are given in Figure 7.1
Figure 7.1 – Heat capacity of normal pour point crudes

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 225

Step 2
Calculate the required horizontal cross-sectional area for the separation compartent as described in
Section 7.2.4.3.2 for a liquid separator in dehydration service.
Step 3
Select a vessel size which satisfies the above requirements from Figure A 7.2.4.
7.2.4.3.4 Three-phase separator in free water knock-out service.
The following data are required at the maximum and the minimum operating temperatures:
qo, q1, qg, ρo, ρw, ρg, ηo, ηw
Step 1
Calculate the following terms at the minimum operating temperature:
∆ρ = ρw -ρo, ∆ρ/ηw
Step 2
Find the maximum allowable liquid fluxrate (q1/A) for FWKO service from Figure A 7.2.1 The rest of the
sizing routine is based on the PETRONAS Technical Standard for gas/liquid separators.
Step 3
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 226

If stringent degassing is required, find the maximum allowable liquid fluxrate (q1/A) from Figure A 7.2.5.
Use ηo at the minimum operating temperature.
Step 4
If foaming is likely to occur, find the maximum allowable liquid fluxrate (q1/A) from Figure A 7.2.6. Use η0
at the minimum operating temperature.
Step 5
Calculate the minimum required horizontal cross-sectional, Ah, areas, of the separation compartment for
free water knock out, stringent degassing and foaming (steps 2, 3, 4):
Ah = q1/(q1/A) m²
Select the highest value of Ah above for Ahmin
Step 6
o g
Evaluate the term at the minimum design temperature.
g
Step 7
Find the maximum allowable superficial gas velocity (qg/Ag) from Figure A 7.2.7
Step 8
Calculate the minimum required vertical cross-sectional area above the maximum liquid level (LZA(HH))
for demisting purposes (see also Fig. A 7.5.1.).
qg
Ag qg /
Ag
Step 9
Select a vessel with suitable dimensions to satisfy Ahmin and Ag requirements.
It is usual to start with a LZA (HH) level at ± 0.6D, see Figure A 7.5.1. The vessel L/D ratio should be in
the range 3 to 5. Standard pressure vessel sizes are given in Figure A 7.2.2, as well as vertical cross-
sectional areas above 0.6D and below 0.5D.
The following checks are required to ensure that the operating levels are adequately positioned.
Check 1
Check that the schoepentoeter inlet device can be accommodated in the available gas cap:
height required = 1.5 d + 0.15 m
Calculation of the inlet nozzle size, d, is covered in Figure A 7.4.2.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 227

Height available = D - LZA (HH) m
or, if foam is expected:
Height available = D - (LZA (HH) + 0.25) m
Check 2
Check that the normal liquid level is adequately positioned, taking into account the various trip and alarm
settings (Ref. Appendix 7.5).
Check 3
For foaming crude, check that there is sufficient area available for gas flow when the foam level is at
maximum height (about 0.25 m).
7.2.4.3.5 Three-phase separator in dehydration service
The following data are required at the maximum and the minimum operating temperatures :
qo, q1, qg, ρo, ρw, ρg, ηo , ηw
Step 1
Calculated the following terms at the minimum operating temperature:
∆ρ = ρw -ρo, ∆ρ/ηo, ∆ρ/ηw for oil and water phases respectively
Step 2
Find the maximum allowable liquid and oil fluxrate (q 1 /A) and (qo /A) from Figures A 7.2.1. and A 7.2.3.
respectively.
The rest of the sizing routine is based on the PTS.
Step 3
Use ho at the minimum operating temperature.
Step 4
If foaming is likely to occur, find the maximum allowable liquid fluxrate (q1 /A ) from Figure A 7.2.6. Use ho
at the minimum operating temperature.
Step 5
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 228

Calculate the minimum required horizontal cross-sectional, Ah, areas of the separation compartment for
dehydration, stringent degassing and foaming (step 2, 3, 4):
Ah = q1 /(q1/A), qo /(qo/A) m²
Step 6
o g
Evaluate the term at the maximum design temperature.
g
Step 7
Find the maximum allowable superficial gas velocity (qg /Ag) from Figure A 7.2.7.
Step 8
Calculate the minimum required vertical cross-sectional area above LZA (HH) for demisting:
qg
Ag qg /
Ag
Step 9
Select a vessel with suitable dimensions to satisfy Ahmin and Ag requirements.
It is usual to start with a LZA (HH) level at ± 0.6D, see Figure A 7.5.1. The vessel L/D ratio should be
inthe range 3 to 5. Standard pressure vessel sizes are given in Figure A 7.2.2.
The following checks are required to ensure that the operating levels are adequately positioned.
Check 1
Check that the schoepentoeter inlet devise can be accommodated in the available gas cap:
height required = 1.5 d + 0.15 m
Calculation of the inlet nozzles size, d, is covered in Figure A 7.4.2.
Height available = D - LZA (HH) m
Height available = D - (LZA (HH) +0.25) m
Check 2
Check 3
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 229

For foaming crude, check that there is sufficient area available for gas flow when the level is at minimum
height (about 0.25 m).
7.2.4.3.6 Liquid-liquid plate separator
The following data are required at the maximum and the minimum operating temperatures:
qo, qw, q1, ρo, ρw, ηo, ηw
Step 1
Calculate the terms ∆ρ/ηo and ∆ρ/ηw for the oil and water phases respectively at the minimum design
temperatures.
Step 2
Find the maximum allowable oil and water fluxrates (qo/A) and (qw/A) from Figures A 7.2.8. and A 7.2.9
respectively.
Step 3
Calculate the minimum required horizontal cross-sectional area of the separation compartment for oil and
water flow
Ah = q / (q/A) m²
Step 4
Evaluate the term ρw/ηw for the water phase at the maximum operating temperature.
Step 5
Find the maximum allowable velocity through the plate pack, Umax, which provides laminar flow conditions
for the selected type and plate spacing, see Figure A 7.2.10.
Note:
i) A 20-40 mm plate spacing is recommended. 15 mm should only be considered if the feed is

clean.
ii) Flat plate packs are the preferred choice for high flowrate conditions.
Step 6
Calculate the minimum required vertical cross-sectional area for separation:
Avmin = q1/Umax m²
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 230

Step 7
Select a vessel with suitable dimensions to satisfy the
Ahmin and Avmin requirements. The vessel L/D should be in the range 3 to 5. For standard vessel sizes see
Figure A 7.2.2.
At this stage it may be found that the vessel diameter is too large. If so, there are two alternative courses
of action:
• alternative 1: consider a split flow design (see Fig.5.7b) in which case the vertical cross-sectional
area of the vessel can be halved;
• alternative 2: rework the design from step 4 using ρo/ηo rather than ρw/ηw as the design criteria. It
should be appreciated, however, that turbulent conditions will exist in the water phase and as a
result water quality will suffer.
Step 8
Once the size of the separator has been selected, the length of the plate pack can be determined from
the "rule of thumb" Lp = 0.25L (or for split flow type, Lp = 2 * 0.125L)
The following checks should be made to determine the critical oil and water droplet sizes removed:
Check 1
Check the critical water droplet size such that Lp ≥ cos∆ α · vU

Applying Stokes’ Law (App. 7.1) will result in:
.
∆ U ηo
dw · · 1.8 m
cos α Lp
Typically, dw < 100 µm.
Check 2
Check the critical droplet size:
.
∆ U ηw
do · · 1.8 m
cos α Lp
Typically, do < 60 µm
Plate angle is usually taken as 60°, see Section 7.2.5.1

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 231

7.2.4.3.7 Three-phase plate separator
The following data are required at the maximum and the minimum operating temperature:
qo , qw, q1, qg, ρo, ρw, ρg , ηo, ηw
Step 1
Calculate the terms ∆ρ/ηo and ∆ρ/ηw for the oil and water phases respectively, at the minimum design
temperature.
Step 2
Find the maximum allowable oil and water fluxrate (qo/A) and qw/A) from Figures A 7.2.8.and A 7.2.9
respectively.
Step 3 to 8 are based on the PTS.
Step 3
Step 4
If foaming is likely to occur, find the maximum allowable liquid fluxrate (q1/A) from Figure A 7.2.6.
Step 5
Calculate the minimum required horizontal cross-sectional area of the separation compartment for oil,
water flow, degassing and defoaming (step 1, 2, 3, 4 above)
Ah = q/(q/A) m²
Step 6
o
Evaluate the term at the maximum design temperature.
Step 7
Find the maximum allowable superficial gas velocity (qg /Ag) from Figure A 7.2.7.
Step 8
Calculate the minimum required vertical cross-sectional areas above LZA (HH) for demisting:
qg
Ag qg /
Ag
Step 9
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 232

Evaluate the term ρw/ηw for the water phase at the maximum operating temperature.
Step 10
Find the maximum allowable velocity through the plate pack, Umax, which provides laminar flow conditions
for the selected plate type and plate spacing, see Figure A 7.2.10.
Note:
i) A 20-40 mm plate spacing is recommended.15 mm should only be considered if the feed is clean.
ii) Flat plate packs are the preferred choice for high flowrate conditions.
Step 11
Calculate the minimum required vertical cross-sectional area for liquid flow:
A1 = q1 /Umax m²
Step 12
Select a vessel of suitable dimensions to satisfy the Ahmin, A1 and Ag requirements.
This is an iterative process. It is usually best to start with a LZA (HH) level at 0.6D see Figure A 7.5.1. The
vessel L/D ratio should be in the range 3 to 5. For standard vessel sizes, see Figure A 7.2.2.
At this stage it may be found that the vessel diameter is unacceptably large because of high liquid
handling requirements. If so, the design can be reworked from step 9 using ρo/ηo rather than ρw/ηw as the
design term. It should be appreciated, however, that turbulent conditions will exist in the water phase and
as a result water quality will suffer.
Once satisfactory vessel dimensions have been selected the length of the plate pack can be found from
the "rule of thumb", Lp = 0.25L
The following checks are required to ensure that the operating levels are adequately positioned:
Check 1
Check that the schoepentoetor inlet device can be accommodated in the available gas cap:
Height required = 1.5 d + 0.15 m
Calculation of the inlet nozzles size, d, is covered in Figure A 7.4.2.
Height available = D - LZA(HH) m
Height available = D - (LZA(HH) + 0.25) m
Check 2
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 233

Check 3
For foaming crude, check sufficient gas area is still available for gas flow when the foam level is at
maximum height (about 0.25 m).
The following checks should be made to determine the critical oil and water droplet sizes removed.
Check 4
∆ U
Check the critical water droplet size such that Lp ·
cos α vt
Applying Stokes’ Law (App. 7.1) will result in:
.
∆ U ηo
dw · · 1.8 m
cos α Lp
Typically, dw < 100 µm.
Check 5
Check the critical oil droplet size:
.
∆ U ηw
do · · 1.8 m
cos α Lp
Typically, do < 60 µm
Plate angle is usually taken as 60°, see Section 7.2.5.1
7.2.4.3.8. Dehydration tank
The following data are required at the maximum operating temperatures:
qo , qw, ρo, ρw, ηo, ηw
Step 1
Calculate terms ∆ρ/ηo and ∆ρ/ηw for the oil and water phases respectively.
Step 2
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 234

Find the maximum allowable oil and water fluxrates (qo/A) and (qw/A) from Figures A 7.2.3 and A 7.2.1
respectively.
Step 3
Calculate the minimum required horizontal cross-sectional area for dehydration and deoiling:
Ah = q/(q/A) m²
Step 4
Select a suitable tank size to satisfy Ahmin. Suitable standard tank sizes are given in Figure A 7.2.11.
7.2.4.3.9 Concentric wash tank

The following data are required at the minimum operating temperatures:
qo, ρo , ρw, ηo,
Step 1
Calculate the terms ∆ρ/ηo for the oil phase.
Step 2
Find the maximum allowable oil fluxrate (qo/A) from Figure A 7.2.3.
Step 3
Calculate the minimum required horizontal cross-sectional area of the inner tank:
Ahmin = qo/(qo/A) m²
Step 4
Select a suitable size for the inner tank to satisfy Ahmin Suitable standard tank sizes are given in
Figure A 7.2.11.
The diameter, Do of the outer tank is then calculated using the "rule of thumb":
Do = 1.3Di
7.2.4.3.10 Electrostatic coalescers
Electrostatic coalescers are proprietary devices and sizing will be done by the vendor. However, the
following procedure should be used as a check.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 235

Feed inlet water cut is usually restricted to 20% for AC and AC-DC units, and 10% for bi-electric units,
otherwise shortcircuiting of the grids may occur. It is not usual to consider water fluxrates since these are
nearly always satisfied.
The following data are required at the minimum operating temperatures:
qo, ρo, ρw , ηo
Step 1
Calculate the term ∆ρ/ηo for the oil phase
Step 2
Find the maximum allowable oil fluxrate (qo/A) from Figure A 7.2.12. Note that AD-DC and bi-electric units
have a higher rating than the conventional DC units.
Step 3
Calculate the minimum required horizontal cross-sectional area of the separation compartment:
Ahmin = qo/(qo/A) m²
Step 4
Select a suitable electrostatic coalescer to satisfy Ahmin. Suitable standard sizes are given in Figures A
7.2.13 and A 7.2.14.
7.2.5 Equipment internals and accessories
A survey of existing dehydration equipment in Group operations reveals a variety of internal devices and
accessories (baffles, spreaders, spiders, gas boots, etc.), many of unique design. This section covers
the design of preferred internals and accessories.
The internals of separators and tanks should be designed to minimise the effects of turbulence,
shortcircuiting and gas break-out. The preferred internals for each type of separator and tank are shown
in Appendix 7.3. Details of internals are shown in Appendix 7.4.
7.2.5.1 Separators (including plate separators)
Inlet devices
If there is no or little gas, the inlet device should direct the flow against the dished end of the separator.
The flow velocity through the inlet nozzle and inlet device should not exceed 1 m/s. If there is a small
amount of gas (Cg < 0.85) a half open pipe should be used. Design details are given in Figure A 7.4.1.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 236

Three-phase separators should be fitted with a "schoepentoeter" inlet device, which promotes early
degassing. Design details are given in Figure A 7.4.2.
Flow distributor
Perforated plates in the inlet section are recommended for flow distribution and "dampening" of slugs.
The flow distributor comprises two baffles with circular holes. The first plate should have a net free area of
3 to 10% and the second plate should have a net free area of 10 to 50%. The gap between the plates
should be about the same as the hole diameters. A perforated plate design is given in Figure A 7.4.3.
Sand flushing system and sludge drains
Vessels should be fitted with a sand flushing system and interfacial drains, otherwise bottom sediment
and residual sludge could accumulate and eventually hinder separation. A suitable sand flushing system
is shown in Figure A 7.4.4.
Liquid outlet nozzles

The flow velocity through a liquid outlet nozzle should not exceed 1 m/s. Outlets should be fitted with
vortex breakers.
Plate packs
Plate packs comprise a number of plates stacked in a parallel fashion. The plates may be flat, corrugated
or have some other profile. The actual design will depend on the vendor, see Figure A 7.4.5.
In order to avoid fouling of the plates with solids it is recommended that a minimum plate spacing of 20
mm and plate angle of 60° are taken for design. The base of the pack should stand clear of the vessel
bottom to allow solids to be flushed away.
7.2.5.2 Dehydration tanks

Upstream of a dehydration tank there should be a gas boot. If deep dehydration is required, consideration
should be given to the installation of a degassing tank. No degassing facilities are required upstream of
the concentric wash tank since the outer tank performs the degassing function.
In order to avoid shortcircuiting in the tank it is advisable to keep inlet and outlets as far apart as possible.
Basically there are two alternative configurations: central inlet with peripheral outlets, or a peripheral inlet
with central outlets. The latter arrangement is preferred because it spreads the feed across a large area,
which is conducive for good separation.
It is beneficial to introduce the feed stream just below the oil/water interface. The rising oil stream gently
agitates the interfacial emulsion layer which promotes coalescence. Velocities at inlet and outlet should
be kept low in order to avoid disturbances and turbulence.
Gas boot
Gas boots are designed to remove "free gas" from crude oil emulsions - the gas would otherwise disturb
the settling process. Gas boots are suitable for GORs up to 10 nm³/m³. Above this value a gas-liquid
separator sized according to the PTS is recommended. The downward liquid flow velocity should not
exceed 0.1 m/s. Design details are given in Figure A 7.4.6.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 237

Degassing tank
If thorough degassing is required for deep dehydration purposes then a degassing tank may be required
venting to atmosphere (or very low-pressure recovery system). In that case sizing is based on the PTS
criteria for stringent degassing. Design details are given in Figure A 7.4.7.
Inlet spider
Inlet spiders are designed to spread the feed equally around the tank periphery. The number of spider
legs required increases with the tank diameter. The flow velocity in the feed line and spider legs should
not exceed 0.5 and 0.2 m/s respectively. Design details are given in Figure A 7.4.8.
Transfer ports
The transfer ports in the concentric wash tank have the same function as the spider in the conventional
wash tank. The number and size of the transfer ports depend on the size of the tank and the flow rate.
Design details are given in Figure A 7.4.9.
Water outlet
The water outlet nozzle should be fitted with a hood and vortex breaker in order to avoid shortcircuiting
and entrainment. The flow velocity in the outlet type should not exceed 1 m/s. Design details are given in
Figure A 7.4.10.
Oil collector
The oil collector should have a serrated weir, this provides equal flow distribution even if the weir is
slightly off horizontal. The oil outlet nozzle at the bottom of the collector should be fitted with a vortex
breaker to avoid entrainment of gas. The flow velocity in the outlet line should not exceed 1 m/s. The
diameter of oil collector is arbitrarily taken at five times the outlet line diameter. Design details are given in
Figure A 7.4.11.
7.2.6 Control and instrumentation
For good operation of a dehydration unit proper setting and control of the liquid and interface levels is
essential. This section covers the various aspects of level control for separators and dehydration tanks.
7.2.6.1 Separators (including plate separator)

Level setting
For separator levels, see Figure A 7.5.1.

The best location for the interface levels is dependent on the following considerations:
• the superficial forward velocity of both the oil and water phases should be similar, otherwise
excessive shear will occur at the interface. Normally the ratio of velocities should not exceed 2:1;
• the interface level should be kept well away from the oil and water withdrawal points, otherwise
entrainment may result.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 238

In practice it is best to install a wide range interface controller. This allows normal interfacial level (NIL) to
be set at a low elevation during years of low water cut, and at a higher elevation during years of high
water cut.
For three-phase separators there should be sufficient gas area above the maximum liquid level
(LZA(HH)) for demisting purposes. Furthermore, the normal liquid level in the separation compartment
should not fall below 0.5D.
Level control requirement
The general level control requirements are given in Figure A 7.5.2. Vessel sizing (diameter)
shouldalways be checked against these requirements. For separators with gas separation facilities the
oil is usually withdrawn from a surge compartment downstream of the weir. In most cases a weir
located at approximately one metre from the end of the vessel will provide sufficient volume for control
purposes. However, for small diameter or high flowrate vessels a (relatively) large surge compartment
may be required. In these cases it may be more attractive to design the system with a flooded weir
(see Figure A 7.5.3.)
For liquid/liquid separators with a plate pack, in the case of the formation of a relatively thick dispersion
band which may hamper proper level control, a dispersion-retaining plate can be fitted in the vessel
after the plate pack, under which water and over which dehydrated crude can flow. In this manner a
sharp oil/water interface is obtained at the end of the vessel, thus allowing good level control.
For heights, see Figure A 7.5.4.
The need for low and high level alarms and oil-water interface low level trip are largely dependent on
operating philosophy. Installation may not always be required.
Level control system
The preferred level control systems for liquid-liquid and three-phase separators are shown in Figure A
7.5.5. The main problems are proper measurement and control of the interface.
The instruments used for interface level measurement in vessels are currently of the displacement type.
These are suitable for light/medium density crudes, with minimum ∆ρ requirement of 100 kg/m³. For
heavier crudes prototype capacitance devices have shown promise, but these are not currently available
“off the shelf”.
Interfacial level measurement devices should be installed inside the vessel and not on an external leg.
Level measurement is adversely affected by the presence of residual sludge and it is strongly advised
that interfacial drains are installed and used frequently.
7.2.6.2 Dehydration tanks
Level setting
For dehydration tank levels, see Figures A 7.5.6. and A 7.5.7.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 239

Best operation is usually achieved with the interface level between 2.5 m to 3.0 m from the bottom of the
tank. The free liquid level should be a further 5 m above the interface level. The maximum free liquid
level (LZA(HH)) should be more than 0.2 m from the top of the tank
Level control systems
Two alternative control systems are shown in Figure A 7.5.8. Both operate with a flooded weir. The
biggest problem is good control of the interface.
Displacement type instruments can be used for light/medium density crudes (ρo < 900 kg/m³). For heavy
crudes good results have been obtained with the water syphon, see Figure A 7.5.9.
7.3 Deoiling equipment
7.3.1 General considerations

The water separated in a dehydration process always contains some oil. Depending both on the nature of
the disposal method and existing regulatory limits, if applicable, a further reduction in the hydrocarbon
content of produced water is required.
The choice and performance of a deoiler system depends on:
i) the water quality at the inlet of the treating unit;

ii) the water quality required at the outlet of the treating unit.
For the characterisation of the influent water quality, it is necessary to know both the oil concentration and
the oil droplet size distribution associated with this concentration. Selection and sizing of a particular
piece of deoiling equipment should, in principle, be based on the relationship between oil content and
cumulative droplet size distribution, since its design is based on removal of a minimum size oil droplet. All
oil droplets with smaller sizes are thus left behind in the treated water, and so determine the deoiling
duties of the next piece of equipment in the treatment facilities and/or the oil content of the disposal water.
In order to assess the water quality both at the inlet and outlet of a water treatment unit, samples should
be taken for further analysis of oil content and droplet size distribution (see also Chapter 3). can be done
in installed facilities for e.g. troubleshooting purposes and/or when improvement in plant performance is
required either by adjusting/modifying the equipment, or by installing additional water treatment units. In
some cases samples for further analysis can be taken from a pilot plant, which is being tested prior to
installation of the actual water treatment plant.
When selecting and designing deoiling facilities for new developments, samples for droplet size analysis
are generally not available. Moreover, in practice it is difficult, if not impossible, to predict droplet size
distributions to be treated in the facilities, and to quantify the effect on deoiling performance. In such
cases the selection of deoiling performance. In such cases the selection of deoiling equipment can be
based on a comparison with the performance of facilities installed elsewhere in the region, and
processing more or less similar crudes. Such a comparison can be supported by further laboratory testing
of artificial emulsions using representative crude samples. While the translation of results from laboratory
testing to field conditions cannot be done reliably (as discussed in Chapter 3), indications can be
obtainedfor potential problem areas in the deoiling of produced water associated with a particular crude.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 240

A final choice of the required deoiling facilities of new developments is not always possible, however,
since initial emulsion properties are insufficiently known, and they may also change with progressing
reservoir depletion. Moreover, the use of chemicals in the production process (demulsifiers, biocides,
corrosion inhibitors) may stabilise an oil-in-water emulsion which is then very difficult to break. In such
cases facilities either have to be modified at a later stage, even replaced, or additional units may be
required to meet effluent quality specifications. While such modifications may not be problematic in
onshore treatment facilities, they may not be possible for facilities installed offshore. Here the initial
choice of a deoiling system is much more critical.
As to the water quality required at the outlet of the deoiling facilities, the manner in which the oil-in-water
concentration is specified (including the analytical method) is critically important for the selection and
design of deoiling equipment. All currently applied deoiling equipment in E & P operations basically relies
on simple gravity separation. With this method only the amount of dispersed oil is reduced.
Mostly a combination of gravity and secondary treatment (gas flotation/filtration, etc.) is being used to
achieve the required water quality specification. Treatment for removal of dissolved oil has so far not
been applied in E & P operations. More stringent legislation as to total oil-in-water content and/or total
organic carbon content in disposal water might, however, necessitate the application of such treatment
processes in the future.
As far as new developments are concerned, in the drive to limit space and weight requirements for in
particular offshore applications, hydrocyclones and centrifuges have been actively pursued during the
past few years. The first mentioned devices are now successfully being employed as a deoiler. The
application of centrifuges as a deoiler has still to be operationally proven/tested to assess their application
potential.
7.3.2 Equipment selection and application
In Table 7.3 selection guidelines for deoiling equipment currently applicable in E & P operations, have
been summarised together with some additional comments.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 241

Table 7.3 – Deoiling process selection guidelines.
Equipment/ Application Typical Advantages Disadvantages

Process performance
(outlet water g/m3)
Sea pump, caisson ‐ Extensive use 50 -1500 ‐ Simple and economical ‐ Performance monitoring
skim pile offshore maintenance and operation difficult
‐ Immersed system
‐ Excellent discharge to sea
Settling and ‐ In frequent use as 50 – 1500 ‐ Simple and economical primary ‐ Space and weight limitation
skimming tanks first stage oily treatment for offshore use
water separator ‐ Acts as a buffer between
continuous and batch treatment
processes
API interceptor ‐ General purpose 50 – 100 ‐ Simple and economical ‐ Space and weight limitation
primary treatment maintenance and operation for offshore use
CPI ‐ General purpose 40 – 100 ‐ Simple operation ‐ Difficult to use with waxy
PPI primary treatment ‐ Modular installation crudes
‐ Reasonable space and weight ‐ Performance depends on
requirement temperature
‐ Economical ‐ Periodical cleaning maybe
necessary
Flotation (possible ‐ Secondary 15 - 40 ‐ Very effective with chemical ‐ Needs a buffer tank
to combine with treatment for finely aids upstream
flocculation) dispersed oil ‐ Dissolved air/gas flotation ‐ High operating weight
handles high solids contents ‐ Chemical handling is
necessary
‐ Possible sludge disposal
problem
Enhanced gravity ‐ Potentially 15 - 40 ‐ High removal performance ‐ Centrifuges not proven yet
(hydrocyclones, applicable as very possible ‐ Hydrocyclones require feed
centrifuges) effective ‐ Compact, very suitable for water pressure at more than
secondary stage offshore application 6 bar to avoid pumping
both offshore and
onshore
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 242

7.3.3 Equipment sizing
As mentioned in Section 7.1, in deoiling processes relatively large quantities of water are being handled,
containing relatively small amounts of oil. The dispersion is therefore very dilute and the oil-water
separation behaviour is reasonably well described by Stokes' Law, which therefore can be successfully
applied for the sizing of deoiling equipment. This is illustrated further in Appendix 7.1, where it
isdemonstrated that the sizing of the equipment is based on the removal of oil droplets with a minimum
size, at certain conditions of temperature and flow rate.
In the following paragraphs a brief process description and some guidelines are given for the sizing of the
following pieces of deoiling equipment:
1) Skim tanks
2) API interceptors
3) Plate interceptors
4) Flotation units
5) Flocculation units
6) Hydrocyclones
Design and sizing of hydrocyclones is proprietary information of the manufacturer BWN Vortoil. The brief
technical data on hydrocyclones given in Section 7.3.3.6 is taken directly from the BWN Vortoil brochure.
7.3.3.1 Skim tanks
Skim tanks are often used as first stage oily water separator. They operate in a similar manner as
continuous dehydration tanks, but here we are concerned with the removal of oil droplets rather than
water droplets. Skim tanks are capable of removing free oil droplets and slugs of free oil (which may
occasionally inadvertently enter the water treating system). The oil concentration level at the tank outlet
will be very dependent on the oil droplet size and type of crude and may vary between 50 and 1500 g/m³.
There are no recognised guidelines for the sizing of skim tanks. The design approach usually followed is
based on the selection of the minimum size of oil droplet to be removed, which is typically 150 µm as for
an API interceptor (see section 7.3.3.2).
7.3.3.2 API interceptors

The design of an API separator is based on the removal of oil droplets larger than 150 µm. The efficiency,
expressed in terms of oil removal or residual oil, will therefore depend on the nature of the feed,
particularly the oil droplet size distribution. With some effluent water the oil content may be reduced to
50100 g/m³ at the outlet, however, if the oil is present in the form of a fine dispersion, little change can be
anticipated between the inlet and outlet oil contents. In those cases the oily water should be treated first
with a deoiler, before it is fed to the interceptor.
For sizing of API interceptors the following procedure can be followed.
The rizing velocity v of an oil droplet relative to the water-continuous phase is given by Stokes’ Law.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 243

gd w
v (m/h)
w
Where g = acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s²)
d = diameter of oil droplet (150 x 10-6 m for standard API design)
ρw = density of water kg/m³
ρo = density of oil kg/m³
ηw = viscosity of water Pa.s (see Figure 7.2)
Alternatively, the nomograph shown in Figure 7.3 can be use to evaluate vt.
Fig. 7.2 ‐ Viscosity of water
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 244

Fig. 7.3 ‐ Nomograph: Particle size/specific gravity difference/settling velocity in water at different temperatures
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 245

A maximum value is imposed on the horizontal water flow vh with the condition:
Vh ≤ 15 Vt or 55 m/h (which is the smaller)

This restriction is to avoid turbulent flowing conditions.
The minimum allowable vertical cross sectional area Av is specified as
AV ≥ qw/vh (m²)
Where qw is the water flow rate m³/h.
The minimum allowable horizontal cross sectional area AH is defined by
AH ≥ Fqw/vt (m²)
Where F is an empirical factor to allow for turbulence and shortcircuiting. A suitable value for F can be
found from Figure 7.4.
Fig. 7.4 – Derivation of empirical factor F
Having specified the cross sectional areas it is possible to specify the depth d and breadth b, which
should fall within the following ranges:
1.0 ≤ d ≤ 2.5 m
2.0 ≤ b ≤ 6.0 m
0.3 ≤ d/b ≤ 0.5
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 246

It may be necessary to split the interceptor into a number of channels. The number of channels can be
determined (taking into account that the largest vertical cross section of a channel is 6.0 x 2.5 = 15 m²) by
calculating n = Av /15 = qw/15Vh (rounded up to the nearest whole number). Installing more channels has
the operational advantage of allowing one channel to be taken out of service for maintenance without
stopping the flow through the other channels.
The interceptor length may be specified to give the required horizontal cross sectional area.
7.3.3.3 Plate interceptors

Plate interceptors were initially developed by installing a series of parallel plates in an API separator. An
interceptor with plate internals can be considerably smaller than an API interceptor to achieve the same
performance.
The performance of a plate interceptor can be adjusted by varying the plate spacing. In so far as there is
standard, plate interceptor for effluent water clean-up are often designed to remove about 95% of oil
droplets larger than 60mm, although this value can be varied by choosing different plate spacings. The
normal range for plate spacings is 20 – 40 mm. Larger spacings should be used when fouling from
suspended soilds or wax build-up is a potential problem. Inclination of the plates is normally in the range
45-60°, the steeper angles being employed when fouling from solids can be anticipated.
As to the sizing of plate interceptor, the rising velocity Vt of the smallest oil droplet which is required to be
removed from the water (typically 60mm) is determined using Stokes’ Law or the nomograph in Figure
7.3.
When A is the effective area of the plates (m²)
q is the total waterflow (m³/h)
α is the plate inclination from horizontal (rad)
q
then A=
vt · cos α
For a ‘standard’ corrugated plate pack with dimensions 1.0 m x 1.0 m x 1.75 m with 20 mm plate spacing
and an angle of inclination of π/4 rad (45°) (assuming 80% of the plate area is effective), the capacity of
the plate pack q p is given by
qp = 50 Vt m³/h
The number of ‘standard’ plate packs (n) required for a total water flow rate q w m³/h is given by
n = q w/qp
(Note that the additional plate area due to the corrugations in the plates is not included in the
calculation and may be considered a ‘safety factor’).
Generally, each standard CPI pack is designed to handle a normal effluent flow of approximately30 m³/h
and maximum flow of 60 m³/h.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 247

7.3.3.4 Flotation units
Flotation units separate oil and water using the principle that rising gas bubbles distributed throughout the
water will attach themselves to oil droplets and carry them to the surface where they will tend to coalesce
and can be separated. The flotation process is enhanced by upstream injection of chemical demulsifiers
and deoilers, and by chemicals which promote the formation of a stable froth on the surface. Current units
commercially available fall into two categories;
i) Induced gas units; gas is injected into the water by means of a rotating impeller.
ii) Dissolved gas units; gas is dissolved into water under pressure, then released as bubbles by
pressure reduction.
A typical dispersed or induced gas flotation (IGF) unit is the Wemco depurator (Fig. 7.5) of which several
units have been operated successfully in E & P locations since 1970
Fig. 7.5 - Induced gas flotation unit
The induced gas flotation unit is divided into four cells operating in series, with a design residence time of
1 minute per cell. Induced gas flotation units are typically designed to remove 95% of all droplets down to
a size of 15 µm.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 248

For many applications, IGFs are used in combination (downstream) with some form of gravity separator
(API, CPI) and an oil removal efficiency of 70 to 90% is then achieved. Typical figures for oil
concentration in the outlet stream are 20 to 50 g/m³ for an inlet stream with 100-500 g/m³ of oil. Some
cases of low deoiling efficiency have been correlated with waters having a high suspended solids
concentration. This is probably due to solid particles attaching to oil droplets or being enveloped with an
oil film.
A list of standard sizes and capacities for Wemco units is given in Table 7.4.
Table 7.4 - Wemco specifications
Model Number Capacity m3/hr Dimensions Connected Power

Length Width kW
m m
36 11.5 4.4 1.1 9.0
44 34 6.4 1.5 9.2
56 68 8.0 1.7 15.1
66 102 9.3 2.0 22.4
76 170 10.8 2.4 29.8
84 255 9.5 2.4 44.5
120 510 12.3 3.4 73.9
120x 681 16.1 3.4 73.9
144x 1131 19.5 3.4 88.6
As to the sizing of dissolved gas flotation (DGF) units, the cross-sectional area of the flotation basin is
usually based on an overflow rate (superficial velocity) of 5 m/h - which results in a retention time of 15 to
40 minutes. For example, a unit capable of processing 400 m³/h would have a cross-sectional area of 80
m². The pressurisation pumps should be sized assuming a recycle rate of 30% and the size of the
saturation vessel should be base on approximately two minutes retention time.
DGF units up to 150 m³/h capacity can be purchased as skid mounted packaged units. Larger units, up to
500 m³/h, can be built from prefabricated steel sections. The largest units, up to 1500 m³/h, are usually
constructed in concrete.
When typical residence times of 15-40 minutes are considered, it is immediately evident that the DGF
process has a serious drawback in comparison to the IGF process (typically four minutes residence time)
where weight and/or space is critical (e.g. offshore)
7.3.3.5 Flocculation units

Suspended liquid and solid matter can be removed from water by chemical flocculation. A typical
flocculation scheme is shown in Fig. 7.6.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 249

Figure 7.6 - Typical flocculation scheme
A flocculation unit usually consists of a mixing section followed by a floc growth section. In the first
chamber chemical coagulants are mixed with the feed. These chemicals destabilise suspended particles
and encourage them to coagulate and form microflocs. In the floc growth chamber the micro-flocs are
given the opportunity to collide and form larger flocs. These are subsequently removed from the water by
either gravity separation (sedimentation) or dissolved air flotation.
To-date the use of flocculation within EP has been restricted to the treatment of water for re-injection
purposes
Flocculation-sedimentation
The sizing of a flocculation/sedimentation unit will depend on the particular conditions for any duty. As a
guide, the following criteria can be used.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 250

Retention time (min) Mixing intensity (W/m³)
Mixing section 5-10 20-200 (variable)
Floc growth section 10-25 2-5
The cross-sectional area of the sedimentation section is usually based on an overflow rate (superficial
velocity) of 2.5 m³/h - which results in retention times of 1 to 2 hours. In general, suspended oil removal
efficiencies of 80 to 95% can be achieved.
Complete assembled packages can be purchased from several manufacturers. Factory assembled units
for flows up to 100 m³/h are available. Larger units, if constructed in steel, are generally shipped in
'knocked down' form and assembled on site. Unit basins or chambers constructed in concrete can be built
by the purchaser with mechanical internals and ancillary equipment being supplied by the manufacturer
for installation on location. Complete flocculation-sedimentation units can also be purchased and installed
on a turnkey basis.
Flocculation-flotation
The flocculation and flotation steps are normally carried out in separate units, i.e. a flocculation unit and a
DAF unit. The flocculation process cannot be used in combination with the induced gas flotation process
because the high mixing intensity generated by the impellers would destroy the fragile precipitates.
The advantage in using flocculation-flotation instead of flocculation-sedimentation, is the overall reduction
in space requirements and chemical consumption (weighting agents not required).
Performance
The flocculation-flotation process is capable of achieving oil removal efficiencies of 80 to 95%, or even
higher. Consequently, the oil and solids concentrations in the treated water are often lower than 15 g/m³,
and 2 g/m³ has been achieved. As with the flocculation-sedimentation unit, good operation requires
reasonably constant feed conditions and buffer tanks are therefore desirable. The clarified water from the
unit is suitable for media filtration without any further treatment.
Sizing
The sizing of a flocculation unit will depend on the individual characteristics of the stream and
contaminants, however, the following can be used as a guide:
Retention time (min) Mixing intensity (W/m³)
Mixing section 15 20-200
Floc growth section 5 15
The flotation basin should be sized to the guidelines given in Section 7.3.3.4
For efficient clarification of produced water it is advisable to determine optimum conditions for
destabilisation, flocculation and flotation by testing in the laboratory, e.g. pH, operating temperature, order
of addition of chemicals, etc.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 251

7.3.3.6 Hydrocyclones
Design and sizing of hydrocyclones is proprietary information of the manufacturer BWN Vortoil. For
design/sizing of hydrocyclones advice has therefore to be sought from BWN Vortoil. Pilot plants can also
be supplied by the manufacturer for on-site testing.
Below follows a brief technical data summary of BWN Vortoil hydrocyclones, taken directly from their
brochure
35 mm and 60 mm diameter units
BWN Vortoil hydrocyclones are available in two basic sized: 35 mm and 60 mm with the 60 mm unit
capable of handling approximately 2½ times more flow than the 35 mm unit. Performances for both units
are comparable and choice of size is dependent on the main factors listed below.
Configurations
35 mm and 60 mm hydrocyclones are available in 4-in-1 configuration. The 35 mm hydrocyclone is also

supplied as 1-in-1 unit.
Differential pressure
The critical differential pressure is inlet to reject, and this governs the capacity of the hydrocyclone. Some
degree of freedom is possible by using different sized reject nozzles. Minimum differential pressure
required is 4 bar for 35 mm units and 6 bar for 60 mm units.
Temperature
Separation efficiency is affected by temperature; a higher temperature results in better separation.
Density
The greater density differential between the oil and the produced water the better is the separation
Minimum flow requirements
Low initial flows can be accommodated because of the modular construction of hydrocyclones; complete
units can be taken off line or even individual cyclones blocked off for periods of low flow
Droplet size
Hydrocyclones can remove much smaller droplets than any conventional system; even with 5-10 micron
droplets the efficiency is still significant.
Reject flow
This is typically 2% of the main water flow and results in a considerably reduced flow to the recovered oil
system. Systems can be designed to give nil nett output of oily water.
Reject flow ratio control
For large flow rates it is usual to control the reject flow at a constant ratio of the feed flow. This can be
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 252

done by differential pressure ratio control being used to control a flow control valve in the reject line where
the additional pressure drop is not significant or to control the speed of reject pumps for low differential
pressure applications.
Gas break-out
Gas break-out is not of significance in deoiling because gas/liquid equilibrium is not achieved. This is due
to the very short residence time of the fluid in the hydrocyclone. Gas in considerable quantities is
released once the liquid leaves the cyclone. It may be necessary to fit small flash tanks on the clean
water stream before it flows to the disposal caisson.
Typical capacity and weight data
ANSI rating (lb) 150 300 600

Max. design pressure bar 18 48 91
Typical differential pressure bar 10 20 30

Flow rate in BWPD
Operating weight kg
Hydrocyclone only
35 mm 1‐in 1 1225 1700 2050 200
35 mm 4‐in‐1 4800 6800 8200 700
60 mm 4‐in‐1 12,400 18,300 23,000 1400
Typical performance The performance of the hydrocyclone one the sites tested and operating is
summarised below:
Oil inlet concentration ppm 100 400 3000

Particle size micron 5-15 10-30 50 +
Separation efficiency % 70 90-95 99 +
Clean water outlet conc. ppm 30 30-40 30-40
Hydrocyclones are not affected by changes in inlet concentration or flow rate.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 253

A 7.1 - APPLICATION OF STOKES' LAW
APPLICATION OF STOKES' LAW FOR SIZING OILY WATER SEPARATORS
The use of Stokes' Law for the sizing of deoiling equipment is best illustrated by the example below.
A simple oily water separator is shown in Figure A 7.1.1. The separator consists of a rectangular tank
(length 'L', breadth 'b' and height 'h') through which the oily water flows under conditions approximating
laminar flow and leaves via a bottom outlet. Oil droplets rise to the surface to form an oil layer which is
continuously removed through a separate outlet at the top of the unit.
Consider an oil droplet of given diameter 'd' (in m) which starts life at the bottom of the separator. If we
know the physical properties of the oil and water (density, viscosity) then the rising velocity 'v' t of the oil
droplet can be calculated using Stokes' Law:
g
Vt ρw ρo m/s (1)
ηw
If this droplet is to be removed from the water it must reach the surface before it reaches the end of the
separator (and is swept away with the main water flow). The time ‘t 1’ taken by the droplet to rise to the
surface is:
h
t s
vt
and the time ‘t2’ for the water to pass through the separator is given by:
L· b ·h
t s where q = throughput in m³/s
q
The droplet will be intercepted if t 2 > t 1
L· b ·h h
i.e. if
q vt
q
or Lb ≥ vt
m2 (2)
Thus we have developed a method for sizing the oily water separator, namely:
Step 1
Select the size of droplet which is required to be removed. This can be determined by analysis of
the oil droplet size distribution in the inlet stream. Alternatively, we can select a droplet size
which, from experience, gives a reasonable deoiling efficiency.
Step 2
Calculate the rising velocity of the oil droplet using Stokes' Law (equation (1)).
Step 3
Select length and breadth of the separator which satisfy equation (2).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 254

It is apparent from the analysis above that the settler only requires horizontal cross-section area (Lxb) - its
height is of no consequence. However, in practice the settler must have a finite height so that the water
can be withdrawn without entrainment of the oil layer.
FIGURE NO. A7.1.1 – SCHEMATIC OF A SIMPLE OILY WATER SEPARATOR.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 255

APPENDIX 7.2 - EQUIPMENT SIZING CURVES AND TABLES
FIGURE NO. A7.2.1 – ALLOWABLE LIQUID FLUX RATES FOR TWO FWKO TANKS AND
SEPARATORS
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 256

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 257

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 258

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 259

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 260

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 261

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 262

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 263

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 264

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 265

FIGURE NO A7.2.9 - ALLOWABLE WATER FLUX RATES FOR PLATE SEPARATORS
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 266

FIGURE NO A7.2.10 – ALLOWABLE FLOW VELOCITIES FOR PLATE SEPARATORS
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 267

FIGURE NO A7.2.11 – STANDARD VERTICAL TANK SIZES
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 268

FIGURE NO A7.2.12 – ALLOWABLE OIL FLUX RATES FOR ELECTROSTATIC COALESCERS
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 269

FIGURE NO A7.2.13 – STANDARD SIZE ELECTROSTATIC COALESCERS
FIGURE NO A7.2.14 – STANDARD SIZE ELECTROSTATIC COALESCERS (INTERGRAL HEATERS)

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 270

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 271

APPENDIX 7.3 – EQUIPMENT DRAWINGS SHOWING INTERNALS
FIGURE NO A7.3.1 – LIQUID-LIQUID SEPARATOR

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 272

FIGURE NO A7.3.2 – SEPARATOR WITH A SMALL GAS HANDLING FACILITY (Cg < 0.85)
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 273

FIGURE NO A7.3.3 – THREE PHASE SEPARATOR (Cg < 0.85)
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 274

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 275

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 276

FIGURE NO A7.3.6 – THREE PHASE PLATE SEPARATOR (Cg < 0.85)
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 277

FIGURE NO A7.3.7 – CONCENTRIC DEHYDRATION TANK
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 278

FIGURE NO A7.3.8 – CONVENTIONAL DEHYDRATION TANK

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 279

APPENDIX 7.4 – DETAILS OF INTERNALS

FIGURE NO A7.4.1 – SEPARATOR INLET DEVICES
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 280

7.4.1 Half open pipe inlet device
The required size of the inlet nozzle and inlet device can be calculated as follows:
Step 1
Evaluate the mean density of the feed:
qg g qo o qw w
ρm kg/m3
qg qo qw
Step 2
Calculate the allowable velocity in the feed nozzle:
.
vm m/s
m
Step 3
Select a suitable size of inlet nozzle
.
qg qw qo
d m
Vm
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 281

FIGURE NO A7.4.2 – SCHOEPENTOETER
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 282

7.4.2 Schoepentoeter
The detailed design procedure for the Schoepentoeter inlet device is covered in the PTS and the
‘schoepentoeter’ design manual. The required size of the inlet nozzle can be calculated as follows:
Step 1
Evaluate the mean density of the feed:
qg g qo o qw w
ρm kg/m3
qg qo qw
Step 2
Calculate the allowable velocity in the feed nozzle:
.
vm m/s
m
.
vg m/s
g
Step 3
Select a suitable size of inlet nozzle:

.
qg qw qo
d m
Vm
.
· qg
d m
Vg
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 283

FIGURE NO A7.4.3 – DOUBLE PERFORATED PLATE
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 284

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 285

FIGURE NO A7.4.5 – PLATE PACK MATERIAL
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 286

FIGURE NO A7.4.6 – CONVENTIONAL DEHYDRATION TANK GAS BOOT
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 287

FIGURE NO A7.4.7 – DEGASSING TANK
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 288

7.1.1 Degassing tank – Sizing
The following data is required at the minimum operating temperature:
ηo, q1
Step 1
Find the maximum allowable liquid flux rate, (q1/A), from Figure A7.2.5.
Step 2
Calculate the minimum required horizontal cross-sectional area:
Ah min = q1/(q1/A) m2
Step 3
Select a tank of suitable size to satisfy the Ah min requirement. Standard tank sizes are given in
Figure A7.2.11

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 289

FIGURE NO A7.4.8 – CONVENTIONAL DEHYDRATION TANK INLET DISTRIBUTER
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 290

FIGURE NO A7.4.9 – CONCENTRIC WASHTANK EMULSION TRANSFER PORTS
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 291

FIGURE NO A7.4.9-DETAILS OF THE CONCENTRIC WASHTANK TRANSFER PORTS
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 292

FIGURE NO A7.4.10 – WASHTANK WATER OUTLET
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 293

FIGURE NO A7.4.11 – WASHTANK OIL COLLECTOR
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 294

APPENDIX 7.5 -LEVELS AND LEVEL CONTROL
FIGURE NO A7.5.1 – SEPARATOR LIQUID LEVELS

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 295

SEPARATOR LIQUID LEVELS

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 296

FIGURE NO A7.5.2 – MINIMUM LEVEL CONTROL REQUIREMENTS FOR SEPARATORS
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 297

FIGURE NO A7.5.3 – CONTROL ARRANGEMENTS FOR SEPARATORS WITH GAS CAP

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 298

FIGURE NO A7.5.4 – CREST HEIGHTS OVER WIERS

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 299

FIGURE NO A7.5.5 – TYPICAL VESSEL CONTROL SYSTEMS
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 300

FIGURE NO A7.5.6 – LIQUID AND INTERFACE LEVELS WASHTANKS
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 301

FIGURE NO A7.5.7 – LIQUID AND INTERFACE LEVELS CONCENTRIC WASHTANKS
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 302

FIGURE NO A7.5.8 – TYPICAL WASHTANK CONTROL SYSTEMS
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 303

FIGURE 7.5.9 – CONVENTIONAL WASHTANK WATER LEG
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 304

CONCENTRIC WASHTANK – LIQUID LEVELS
– Hi and ho are fixed by the height of the oil collector (or liquid level controller) and the emulsion
transfer ports respectively.
– hi can be varied by means of the interface controller, and this will result in variations in Ho
– The height of the free liquid level in the outer tank, Ho, can be calculated using the following
equation:
hl ho w Hl hl o ho ρe
Ho
ρe
– Ho will be at maximum in the (unlikely) event that the inner tank is full of water (i.e. hi = Hi) and the
outer tank is full of dry oil (i.e. ρe = ρo). For this case:
Hl ho w ho ρo
Ho
ρo
– The liquid height in the outer tank will always be higher than the liquid height in the inner tank,
thus subjecting the inner tank to external load. Tanks are usually only designed for internal load
and, consequently, stifferners will be required to cater for the external loading condition. In order
to avoid excessive external load a number of overspill ports should be installed 0.5 – 1 m above
the normal inner tank liquid level.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 305

8 SYSTEM INTEGRATION
8.1 General
The preceding chapters have given details of the equipment types available for dehydration and deoiling,
together with empirical equipment sizing guidelines. However, equipment selection and sizing must
always be carried out within the framework of an integrated system design. System definition must firstly
be base on a clear understanding and knowledge of fluid properties, together with target specifications for
gas, oil and produced water. Process design will then proceed to identify the intermediate operations
required between production well and product outlet.
For relatively high GOR reservoirs from which a significant quantity of associated gas in addition to crude
oil is produced, system design will be largely driven by the processing steps needed to meet the
hydrocarbon specifications for products leaving the facility, i.e. crude TVP and gas quality. The number of
separation stages, together with the pressures and temperatures at which they operate will be influenced
by, for example, compression requirements for optimum gas recovery. In such a case, system design for
crude oil dehydration and deoiling of production water must be made in combination with the other
processing requirements and they cannot be considered in isolation. On the other hand, for relatively low
GOR reservoirs, producing smaller amounts of associated gas, system design will be largely driven by
requirements for crude oil dehydration and deoiling of production water.
A good example of the interaction between dehydration and crude processing requirements is the Sirikit
field (Thailand) experience (Section 8.5.8). To maintain the required BS & W content of the export crude
with increasing watercuts, the operating temperature had to be increased to about 65 °C. This resulted in
overstabilisation and loss of crude export, since vapour recovery systems were inadequate. Plant
modifications were then required to reduce crude losses. These events therefore illustrate that it is
important to integrate processing requirements for crude dehydration and stabilisation at the design
stage, taking account of changing production conditions over the field life. This may involve not only the
provision of properly sized equipment, but also an assessment of the alternative locations for water
removal in the processing train.
It is most common in the design of a system to incorporate the final or polishing dehydration step at a low
pressure stage, following crude stabilisation. This remains a sensible approach, in particular for onshore
can proceed unhindered by gas break-out. However, opportunities to begin dehydration at an earlier
stage in the process should always be considered. Such an approach could have the following
advantages:
i) It will minimise the size of the final dehydration facilities and associated equipment (pipelines,
pumps, heaters, etc.).
ii) It will provide a dehydration step upstream of system control valves and pumps where liquid
shearing is minimised, giving larger dispersed phase droplet sizes. In some cases, for instance
gas reservoirs with small amounts of liquid production, it may well be possible to achieve the
required water-in- condensate specification directly from a three- phase wellhead separator. The
size (diameter) of such a separator would be dictated by gas flow requirements and sufficient
cross-sectional area may well then be available for effective condensate dehydration.
iii) Upstream separators may be operated at higher temperatures, where fluid viscosities are lower
than in the lower temperature final stage.
iv) It will provide a production water stream also at higher pressure. This could extend and simplify
the choice of deoiling equipment, for example, to hydrocyclones which require a certain inlet
pressure for maximum efficiency.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 306

In the end, however, it is the field location, whether onshore or offshore, whether remote or within an
existing production infrastructure, that will influence system selection and integration most. Where space
and weight considerations are overriding factors for offshore systems design, these are of less
importance for onshore installations and here ease of maintenance and dependability/robustness may be
prime factors to be considered, especially in remote locations.
8.2 Design considerations for offshore systems
It is particularly important in offshore system design to minimise space and weight requirements of
production systems. Design should follow the prime objective of 'fitness for purpose'. To simplify and
reduce equipment installation as much as possible, processing requirements should generally be kept to
a minimum. Final polishing of product specifications can often be achieved onshore at the receiving
terminal.
Many new offshore developments now involve the production of smaller, marginal fields where this
concept of minimum facility definition is imperative to ensure acceptable economics. In this context, any
opportunity to use existing facilities at a nearby platform, either in part or in whole, should be investigated.
A recent example of satellite production is the new Shell Expro Eider field, where facilities at the nearby
North Cormorant platform will be utilised to provide final stabilisation and export of crude oil. Processing
at the Eider platform is limited to initial three-phase separation at high pressure (15 bar), followed by
crude dehydration to less than 5 % water. The operating pressure of the crude dehydration step (plate
separator) will be kept just above 15 bar by locating the vessel at a slightly lower elevation than the
production separator. The dehydration vessel is then operated above the liquid bubble point and gas
break-out is thus avoided (see also Section 8.5.2).
For offshore systems the use of three-phase separators in the processing train should always be
considered. The first stage of separation is normally a good location for water removal since shearing
between oil and water phases is then kept to a minimum. Water removal efficiencies can be enhanced by
the installation of a plate pack, if this is deemed suitable with respect to potential waxing tendencies
and/or sand (solids) production. Processing requirements may dictate the need for a heater between
separation stages to control, for example, crude TVP. Further water removal following such a heating
step should also be considered, since crude viscosities are lower at higher temperature, thus facilitating
gravity separation.
Deep crude dehydration will normally be required offshore to meet the water specification for:
i) pipeline transport to an onshore terminal, for which typically less than 5% vol. water in the crude
is required, or
ii) direct tanker loading from the platform facilities, for which the specification is less than 0.5% vol.
water.
For this final dehydration stage the use of a plate separator or an electrostatic coalescer should be
considered, if platform design does not include crude storage cells. For case ii) an electrostatic coalescer
would represent the preferred choice.
For offshore platforms, produced water discharges are normally required to meet a specification as set by
legislation, which is typically 40 ppm oil-in-water for the North Sea. (Requirement to latest approved
Malaysian regulation to be complied) At present, an efficient means of deoiling to this level is provided by
hydrocyclones, especially if a differential pressure of about 10 bar (minimum) can be accommodated
between inlet and reject streams.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 307

Note that high-pressure dehydration is then most compatible with the application of hydrocyclones. Best
results will be achieved by locating the (interface) level control valve from the separator downstream of
the hydrocyclone. This again reduces 'shear' and preserves droplet sizes of oil-in-water.
If dehydration water is removed at lower pressures, it can then:
i) either be pumped to a pressure consistent with hydrocyclone operation. Care should be taken to
ensure that pump selection is such that potential 'shear' is minimised, for example, by an
eccentric screw 'mono' type pump, or
ii) be treated via a plate separator and/or gas flotation unit prior to discharge.
8.3 Design considerations for onshore systems
Similar principles apply to the design and integration of equipment for onshore systems, as those
discussed for offshore systems in the preceding section. However, space and weight considerations for
equipment design are not often as critical as for offshore systems. The use of tanks for dehydration is
thus more widely employed. Deoiling equipment requirements may be more extensive, however, since
specifications for coastal or inland surface water disposal are more stringent.
In all cases, however, dehydration and deoiling equipment remain integral parts of the produced fluid
processing system. Each process step must be compatible with the preceding and subsequent steps, and
equipment items need to be matched in terms of capacity, performance and mode of operation. In
practice this means, for example, that:
i) Production separators upstream of continuous dehydration tanks should have adequate capacity
to completely degas the crude oil.
ii) Skim or buffer tanks are always required when linking a continuous water treatment process to a
batch dehydration system, to avoid step changes in flow rate, especially during pigging, and in
water quality.
iii) The sequence of equipment, particularly for deoiling, should be based on an understanding of
performance against an expected mean droplet size for the dispersed phase. An API or PPI
interceptor will not be effective, for instance, if oil droplet sizes at the inlet are smaller than 150
µm and 50-60 µm respectively.
Emulsion formed in the flow system upstream of the manifold can, in general, not be controlled. However,
emulsions created in pumps and control valves can be minimised by careful design of the production
facilities. A gravity-fed dehydration and produced water treatment system is therefore preferred. Should
this be impractical, then consideration should always be given to low shear type pump and to a gradual
reduction in system pressure. A good example of such gradual pressure reduction is the Oman pipeline
system, described in Section 2.4.4
A further feature which often impairs performance of both dehydration and water treatment plants is the
recycling of skimmings from oily water separators and residual sludges from sludge treatment plants.
They are often heavily contaminated with solids and chemicals and lead to a build-up of untreatable
sludge, giving poor system performance. Wherever possible, separate disposal routes should be
evaluated and treatment steps incorporated prior to recycle.
Depending on the nature and location of the operation, there could well be various water streams for
disposal such as formation/production water, process water (cooling water, oily condensate, slops water)
and rain water. It is often common practice to mix these various water streams for treatment prior to
disposal. This practice, however, can lead to fluctuations in both quantity and quality of the feed water
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 308

streams and to inconsistent performance of the treatment facilities. Wherever possible, consideration
should be given to segregation/simplification of treatment facilities to avoid such problems.
The advantages of pilot testing for water treatment facilities should be emphasised. In this way proof of
performance prior to full scale installation can be confirmed, as was done e.g. by BSP at the Seria
Terminal.
8.4 Factors affecting oil/water separation efficiency
From the review of Group operated dehydration and deoiling systems presented in Section 8.5 it appears
that dehydration and deoiling facilities do not always perform optimally. The detailed reasons for the non-
optimum performance differ. The chemical-physical process of the separation of oil and water is
extremely complex and still not fully understood, in spite of many years of research at Group laboratories
and by others. However, some of the main factors affecting the oil-water separation behaviour can be
identified and pertain to the following operational aspects:
• demulsifier chemicals
• physical properties of oil and water
• flow conditions
• solids
• pumps and control valves
• SRB
• recycling of skimmings and sludges
• mixing of disposal water streams
The aspects listed above are discussed briefly in the following sections.
8.4.1 Demulsifier chemicals

The oil-water emulsions we encounter in our EP production systems always have a certain stability.
Without treatment oil and water cannot be separated fully. Demulsifiers play a key role in all dehydration
and deoiling systems as they destabilise (break) the emulsion. Destabilisation is always required prior to
the coalescence of small droplets into larger ones and the settling of the larger drops into a single phase.
Hence chemicals injection should always be the first (but not the only) step in any oil-water separation
process.
The optimum demulsifier can only be selected by "trial and error", initially in the laboratory (bottle tests)
and later in the field. Changes to the type of chemicals and injection tests are required as production
characteristics change and more suitable chemicals are marketed, and therefore the effectiveness of the
demulsifiers in use and dosages applied, should be checked regularly (say once every 1-2 years).
8.4.2 Physical properties of oil and water

Oil and water can only practically be separated by virtue of their different densities. The controlling
parameters are:
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 309

• droplet size
• acceleration
• density of the water and oil
• viscosity of the continuous phase.
Droplet size
The terminal velocity is proportional to the square of the droplet diameter (Stokes' Law). Therefore, it is
desirable to have relatively large dispersed phase droplets. Which can be achieved by either minimising
the degree of mixing or by promoting coalescence. In several water treatment plants where oil droplets
sizes have been measured it is found that these were relatively small (1-20 µm). Since API and
corrugated plate interceptors have been designed for removing droplets larger than 150 µm and 60 µm
respectively it is not surprising that these units are rather ineffective.
In this respect it is also noted that settling tanks, which provide sufficient time for the smallest droplets to
be separated, will usually discharge dry oil and clean water. Consequently APIs and plate separators will
hardly be effective on the bulk of the water drained from settling tanks.
Acceleration
For gravity settling acceleration is due to gravity. This can be increased using cyclones (up to 100 g) or
centrifuges (up to 400 g). Separation by hydrocyclones or centrifuges is thus orders of magnitude faster
than by normal gravity settling and consequently their sizes are much reduced, thus making them very
attractive in particular for offshore applications.
The use of centrifuges for oil/water separation has yet to be commercialised. Group experience is limited
to testing by NAM at the Berkel site in the Netherlands. Hydrocyclones, however, are now fully proven in
operation and there are many applications worldwide.
Density difference and viscosity
Large density differences between oil and water and low continuous phase viscosities are favourable for
fast separation. Generally the heavier the crude the greater the viscosity and of course the lower oil-water
density difference. Consequently, heavy crudes are much more difficult to dehydrate than light crudes.
Heat treatment can be used to accelerate the dehydration of a heavy crude because an increase in
temperature results in a decrease in viscosity.
8.4.3 Flow conditions

From literature, Group research work and field experience it is clear that the hydrodynamics inside
vessels and tanks play a key role in the separation process. To ensure effective oil-water separation it is
essential that the following operating condition are fulfilled:
• laminar flow inside separators

• minimum flow variations (surges)
• constant quality feed stream
It is obvious that these conditions are best met in static settling tanks. Once tanks have been filled and
degassed, the (gravity) separation of water from oil and oil from water proceeds unhindered.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 310

For continuous deoiling and dehydration there is no single recipe for the best system design, but the
following basic principles should be adhered to:
1) Dehydration and deoiling equipment are integral parts of the produced fluid processing system.
Each process step should be compatible with the preceding and subsequent steps. In practical
terms this means that e.g. production separators upstream of continuous dehydration tanks
should have adequate capacity to completely degas the crude oil and to smooth any flow surges
and that skim/buffer tanks are always required to enable batch dehydration to be performed with
continuous water treatment.
2) The vessel and tank dimensions and internals should provide laminar flow under all operating
conditions.
3) The internals of separators and tank should be designed so as to minimise the effects of
turbulence, short circuiting and gas break-out.
A survey of existing dehydration and deoiling facilities reveals a variety of internal devices and
accessories (baffles, spreaders, spiders, gas boots, etc.), many of unique design. Greater uniformity in
future equipment design should result in more efficient dehydration and deoiling performances with less
upsets of a circumstantial nature.
8.4.4 Solids
The fine solids, which are either produced together with the crude oil, e.g. sand, clay, silt, wax, insoluble
asphaltenes or which are introduced by the crude/water processing facilities, e.g. corrosion products and
scales have a stabilising effect on the emulsions. This means that oil and water are more difficult to
separate and produced water is likely to be highly contaminated. In some cases, solids cause residual
sludge at the tank/vessel bottom or at the oil-water interface. Special heat and/or chemical treatment is
required to break this sludge.
Solids play an important role in oily water separators. In many installations we see that solids are coated
with oil and are almost neutrally buoyant. This means that gravity separation by conventional equipment,
e.g. API, CPI, TPI, etc. is ineffective. Flocculation/flotation water treatment methods are then
required.However, the widely used induced gas flotation units are inadequate. Their performance is
adversely affected by the presence of solids. When the oily water contains more than say 50 ppm solids,
dissolved gas flotation units and flocculation agents should be used rather than IGF (Wemco) units.
8.4.5 Pumps and control valves

To produce and emulsion of oil and water the two immiscible liquids must be subjected to a degree of
agitation, which imparts sufficient energy to disperse one liquid into the other. Emulsions will therefore be
formed in sections of the flow system where 'large' pressure drops and thus violent agitation occurs, i.e. in
perforations, tubing (particularly in gas lift wells), christmas trees, flow beans, manifolds, pumps and
control valves.
Emulsions formed in the flow system upstream of the manifold cannot be controlled. However, emulsions
created in pumps and control valves should be minimised. This requires careful design of the production
facilities. A gravity fed dehydration and production eater treatment system is therefore preferred. This is
not always practicable and pumps or pressure reduction valves may be required. In this case it is
recommended that positive displacement pumps rather than centrifugal pumps are used and that
pressure is gradually reduced.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 311

8.4.6 SRB
Most surface waters are likely to contain SRB. When these waters are mixed with the produced fluids,
SRB colonies could well develop in tanks and pipeline systems. This SRB growth will result in H 2S
production causing corrosion and FeS. These solids will adversely affect dehydration and deoiling
performances as explained above. FeS will also result in a dark coloured water. Disposing of this water in
urban areas is a problem.
It is thought that in Sarawak SRB are introduced as a result of draining of the offshore sump piles. In
Gabon SRB are introduced through wash water which is drawn from a fresh water lake.
8.4.7 Recycling of skimmings and sludges

Skimmings of oily water separators and residual sludges from sludge treatment plants are often reinjected
into the incoming stream to the dehydration or water treatment plants. However, skimmings contain
9098% water and are often heavily contaminated with solids and chemicals. Residual sludges from
sludge treatment plants are apparently untreatable and will also contain a large amount of solids.
Recirculation of these skimmings and sludges may lead to a build-up of solids and untreatable sludges,
which will adversely affect dehydration and deoiling performance. Therefore recirculation of skimmings
and sludges should be avoided and they should be disposed of either into the crude export stream,
provided sufficient dilution exists to achieve the crude export specifications, or they should be processed
in a dedicated sludge treatment plant (see Section 5.7).
8.4.8 Mixing of disposal water streams

Depending on the nature and location of the operation there are various water streams for disposal, e.g.
displacement/ballast water, rain water, process water (cooling water, oily condensate, slops water) and
formation/production water. Mixing of the various water streams will give a fluctuating feed stream in both
quality and quantity to the water treatment plants. However, for all water treatment plants steady state
feed conditions are necessary to maintain a consistent system performance.
8.5 Review of field installations
In the following sections a brief review is given of several dehydration and deoiling systems installed or
planned in various Group operations, with comments and suggestions on performance improvement. This
review with comments may well be helpful in avoiding pitfalls for future designs.
8.5.1 Shell Expro

A variety of dehydration and produced water treatment systems are used on Shell Expro's North Sea
platforms. Schematics of these installations are given in Fig. 8.1 - 8.5. The production from Brent, Dunlin
and Cormorant is transferred to Sullom Voe where it is dehydrated to refinery specification (BS&W é
0.5%).
It is interesting to note that the oily water treatment and dehydration systems are different for each
platform. Nevertheless the target water-in-oil (5% (vol.) for Brent, Dunlin and Cormorant and 0.5% (vol.)
for Fulmar and Auk) and oil-in-water (40 g/m³ measured by IR) of the export crude and disposal water
respectively are met.
The produced water rates in all fields are increasing and at present the average watercut is some 3035%.
The crude oil discharge into the Brent pipeline has a water content of 0.1 to 0.9% (vol.). The crude
discharged into the Fulmar FSU contains less than 0.5% (vol.) water, after treatment in electrostatic
coalescers.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 312

Fig. 8.1 – Shell Expro – Brent/Dunlin, Typical production facilities.
Fig. 8.2 – Shell Expro – Fulmar Alpha, Typical production facilities.

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 313

Fig. 8.1 - Shell Expro - Auk, typical production facilities
Fig. 8.2 - Shell Expro - Cormorant Alpha, typical production facilities

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 314

Fig. 8.3 - Shell - Expro - North Cormorant, typical production facilities
The relatively low density, high production temperature (70-90 °C) and consequently low oil viscosity (<
lcSt) of the North Sea crudes provide favourable conditions for effective oil-water separation. During
recent tests with the Fulmar test separator and the North Cormorant first stage separator it was
confirmed that dehydration is relatively easy. In spite of loading the separators beyond the usually
adopted design capacity, the residual water content in the oil from the first stage separators was found
to be in the order of nil - 0.5% (vol.). The injection and proper mixing of demulsifier chemicals upstream
of the first stage separators however, proved to be essential for good dehydration performance.
It was also found that the oil-in-water content of water drained from the first stage North Cormorant
separator was in the order of 50g/m³, which was surprisingly low. Furthermore the oil droplet size was
very small, with a mean diameter of 15-20 µm. This fully explains why the oily water separators and
corrugated plate packs designed for removing oil droplets of 50 µm and larger, are hardly effective.
During 1987, hydrocyclones, were installed at North Cormorant for produced water treatment following
successful field trials. These trials showed that oil droplets with a diameter of 10 µm and larger could be
removed with very high efficiencies (l95%). Oil concentrations during tests were reduced from 450 to 20
g/m³. Hydrocyclones are now permanently installed on North Cormorant as from late 1987.
During the Fulmar tests it was found that water quality deteriorates with increasing pressure drop over
the chokes. This confirms the general understanding that higher pressure drops create smaller
droplets, which require more time to settle, or if too small, will not settle at all.
8.5.2 New North Sea platform designs

Some of the interesting aspects associated with new North Sea platform designs are discussed below:
a) Eider (see Fig. 8.6)
Eider has been designed by Shell Expro as a satellite platform to North Cormorant. Crude is partially
stabilised and dewatered at about 15.0 bar in the production separator. This pressure was chosen to
ensure that hydrates would not form in the export oil under minimum temperature and maximum pressure
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 315

conditions in the pipeline. Final dewatering to about 3% water will be achieved in a plate pack coalescer,
which is operated at slightly higher pressure (above liquid bubble point), to avoid gas break-out. Crude
export is then metered and routed, via a subsea pipeline, to the second stage separator at North
Cormorant for final stabilisation.
Fig. 8.4 - Shell Expro - Eider production facilities
The deoiling system chosen for Eider consists of a gravity separator with plate internals followed by an
induced gas flotation unit (Wemco). Hydrocyclones were not considered at the design stage since
insufficient operating experience existed at that time.
b) Tern
Tern has also been designed by Shell Expro in parallel with Eider. It is a gas lift platform but contains
similar crude oil dewatering and deoiling concepts to those described for Eider.
c) Kittiwake
One of the original Gannet clusters - Kittiwake - has now been designed by Shell Expro as a stand-alone
platform development. A schematic of the produced water treatment facilities is shown in Fig. 8.7
Stabilised crude will be loaded directly into an export tanker and associated gas will be compressed to
enter the Fulmar gas line to St. Fergus.
The processing facilities include three stages of separation with final crude dehydration to 0.5% BS&W in
an electrostatic coalescer (to be supplied by Petrolite). Water will be fed directly from the first stage
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 316

separator and pumped from the coalescer to a system of hydrocyclones. Pump selection has recognised
the need for reduced shearing, and a mono type eccentric screw pump, manufactured by Seepex in
Germany, will be installed.
d) Draugen
Draugen is being developed by Norske Shell and like Tern, will be a gas lift platform. Hydrocyclones are
being considered for water clean-up, certainly for that water removed in the first (high pressure) stage of
separation. To maximise water removed in this separator, it has been suggested to install a plate pack.
Water separated at lower pressure stages will either be pumped to the hydrocyclone inlet or treated via a
separator (with plate pack) followed by induced gas flotation. Storage cells will be provided for crude oil
dehydration.
e) Troll
The Troll Field is located some 80 km west-north-west of Bergen (Norway) in a water depth of 300-340 m.
The eastern province of the field which contains around two-thirds of Troll's recoverable gas reserves of
1290 billion Sm³ will be the location of the first development phase consisting of a concrete substructure
with topsides designed to process around 66 million Sm³/d of gas to hydrocarbon dewpoint specification
of -3 °C at 70 bara and below, and a water dewpoint of 31 mg/Sm³ which will permit transportation in the
existing Norpipe system and sale in Europe without further treatment. The Troll gas contains 93%
methane and is relatively lean such that only 35 m³ of condensate will be produced for every 1 million
Sm³ of Troll gas. The gas will be exported via the existing Statpipe/Northpipe system and the proposed
new Zeepipe system to landing points at Emden and Zeebrugge, Belgium respectively. The condensate
will be stabilised and exported via pipeline to Oseberg "A" for spiking into the crude pipeline to shore at
Sture.
The optimum process scheme for producing a pipeline quality gas is based upon a turbo expansion
process, with the incoming gas precooled by heat exchange with cold gas from the dewpoint control
separator. The process configuration (see Fig.8.8) provides a product gas which meets the hydrocarbon
dewpoint specification (-3 °C at 70 bara and below) at an export pressure of 165 bara using gas turbine
driven pipeline compressors at a design end plateau wellhead pressure of 60 bara. A glycol contacting
dehydration process is proposed to maintain the water content of the gas below 31 mg/Sm³ (2 lbs/MMscf)

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 317

Fig. 8.5 - Kittiwake Project, produced water treatment
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 318

Fig. 8.6 - Troll topsides (conceptual)
An interesting feature of condensate/water separation will be the provision of a three-phase inlet gas
separator (Fig.8.8). Separator sizing is governed by gas load, but sufficient cross-sectional area exists to
also provide for water/condensate separation. Such a scheme has the following advantages over
dehydration of the separated condensate:
i) Separation of water and condensate is achieved before condensate is transferred into the
stabilisation system (with a pressure reduction of 90 bar to approximately 30 bar), thus avoiding
additional shearing between the phases.
ii) Mixing of 'wet' condensate form the first stage separator with 'dry' condensate from the gas
chilling train is avoided
It is presently planned to use hydrocyclones for water clean-up prior to disposal.
8.5.3 Gabon-Gamba/Ivinga fields

a) Description of dehydration and deoiling facilities
The Gamba and Ivinga fields together produced about 2400 m³/d (15,000 b/d) waxy crude oil (po = 850
kg/m³) and some 11,925 m³ (75,000 b/d) highly saline (275,000 g/m³ NaCl) water. The crude oil is
degassed and treated with chemicals for emulsion breaking at the Gamba and Ivinga stations prior to
dehydration at the Gamba terminal. A schematic of the terminal's dehydration and waste water treatment
scheme is shown in Fig. 8.9.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 319

Fig. 8.7 - Gamba terminal dehydration/desalting/deoiling system
Degassed crude oil and skimming from the API oil interceptors (and retention basin) are dehydrated in
Tank T170.As the crude oil salt specification cannot be met by this single step continuous dehydration
fresh water is added to the crude from T170, thus reducing the salt concentration. The crude is
dehydrated again in T180. Tank T170 and T180 are identical 7950 m³ (50,000 bbl) continuous
dehydration tanks, equipped with flow distribution internals (spreaders) and vortex breakers at the oil and
water outlets. Final dehydration and desalting is achieved in four export tanks (A, B, C and D).These
operate in a batch mode and water is drained off intermittently.
The effluent water streams from T170 and T180 are discharged into two parallel oil-water (API)
separators. The piping arrangement is such that streams can either be combined, or be disposed of
separately. Water from the four export tanks A, B, C and D is drained into an open gutter system. Rain
water, cooling water and spillages, e.g. from pigging or tank sampling operations, are collected in the
same open drain system, which is also tied into the API interceptors.
The effluent water from the API oil interceptors is disposed of into a retention basin from where it
overflows into the Vevy lagoon.
b) System performance
In 1981 the distribution spreaders of T170 and T180 were modified to improve the flow pattern inside the
tanks. Since that date dehydration/deoiling performance of T170 has shown marked improvement.
The dehydrated oil from T170 contains less than 0.3% water and the separated water contains 20-40
g/m³ oil (by IR method) and 20-50 g/m³ suspended solids. The size of the solids and oil droplets is very
small (2-9 µm). Suspended solids appear to be attached to the oil and oil/solid conglomerates are almost
neutrally buoyant. Large variations in T170 effluent water quality and a build-up of an interfacial sludge
layer are occasionally observed, most likely introduced by the recycled skimmings from the API oil
interceptor and holding basin.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 320

Usually T180 is operated with an oil-water interface about 3 m above the bottom and thus provides three
days residence time for the water and oil to separate. During normal operations the oil contains 0.1%
water and the effluent water contains some 40-50 g/m³ oil. However, during upsets oil-in-water
concentrations increase and an interfacial sludge layer builds up. The resulting dispersion of oil-in-water
then becomes difficult to separate.
It is thought that these high oil levels are caused by FeS, which is dispersed as very fine solids and acts
as an ideal emulsifier. The FeS is generated by Sulphur Reducing Bacteria (SRB) activity, introduced
through the wash water, which is taken from a nearby pond. Wash water quality is not constant and a
potential source for process upsets.
As part of the terminal extension to process Rabi crude, this source of wash water will be replaced by
aquifer water. Process upsets of this nature should therefore be reduced in future
The API oil interceptors have a nominal capacity of approximately 250 m³/h. With a continuous
throughput of 520 m³/h (T170, T180 export tanks and cooling water) and an additional 190 m³/h during
rain storms, the API oil interceptors are often overloaded. As oil/solids from the dehydration tanks are
very finely dispersed and neutrally buoyant, the API oil interceptor is ineffective. In fact the water quality
sometimes deteriorates from the pick-up of oil from the separator walls.
Final dehydration and desalting is achieved in the four export tanks. The water content in the exported oil
is 0.01-0.1% (vol.).
Note:
Dehydration of salty crude oils, as at Gamba, can alternatively be achieved using electrostatic coalescers
rather than continuous dehydration tanks. This is typically the method employed at refineries to reduce
salt (water) content of incoming crude oil. It is also employed at the Thayyem Production Facilities in
Syria. It therefore represents a proven operational system and choice will depend upon local factors such
as availability of sufficiently skilled operation and maintenance support.
8.5.4 PD Oman
Production in Oman originates from three geographical areas.
A schematic of typical North and Central Oman crude oil-water processing facilities is shown in Fig 8.10.
Gas is separated in the fields in two-phase separators and atmospheric tanks. Dehydration is carried out
in floating roof tanks. The dehydration process is continuous and to create ullage tanks are operated at
the 55-65% level. The dehydration tanks have a tangential inlet and a floating suction. An interface level
of 1.5-2 m is usually maintained. The water from the dehydration tanks is fed by gravity to skim tanks. The
dehydration water in the northern area is reinjected for reservoir pressure maintenance, whilst in Central
Oman water is injected into a disposal aquifer.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 321

Fig. 8.8 - Typical North and Central Oman production facilities
In South Oman the crude is heavier and more viscous. Heating to 60-70 °C is required for dehydration.
A schematic of typical production processing facilities is shown in Fig. 8.11. Gas liquid separation
takesplace at about 200 kPa. Further degassing and dehydration is achieved in concentric (dynamic)
wash tanks. Dehydration water is pumped to skim tanks from where it is discharged into disposal wells.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 322

Fig. 8.9 - Typical South Oman production facilities
The more recently developed fields have corrugated plate interceptors installed downstream of the skim
tanks.
The (partly) dehydrated crude gathered in the three main areas is pumped to the coastal terminal at Mina
al Fahal crossing a mountain which is 680 m above MSL. The terminal receiver is at 80 m above MSL. To
provide back pressure for the 600 m oil column a pressure control valve and three kilometres of small
diameter (6", 8", 10") pipes have been installed to gradually reduce pressure and thus avoid
emulsification of the oil and water. Tanks are filled in sequence giving time to settle residual water. This
water is drained from the tanks and gravity fed to an API oil interceptor and corrugated plate interceptor
from where it flows via a small stream into the sea.
North Oman
The dehydration performance is generally good. Dehydration efficiencies as gauged by BS&W in the
discharge vary: 0.1-0.3% (vol.) for summer conditions (35-50 °C) and 0.2-0 5% (vol.) for winter conditions
(15-35 °C).
The quality of the dehydration water, expressed in terms of oil-in-water content is rather poor and varies
from 100-400 g/m³. The quality of the water from the skim tanks is hardly improved. (The superficial water
velocities in these skim tanks are almost twice the downward water velocities in the dehydration tanks).
However, the dehydration water can be injected without problems.
Central Oman
Dehydration performance in the Qarn Alam area is comparable to that in North Oman. No particular
problems are experienced. The tank capacity is more than adequate, thus providing long residence times
and small upward oil velocities.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 323

A large difference is found in dehydration water quality. Whereas the effluent water of some tanks
contains very low amounts of oil (0-20 g/m³ range), others discharge water with an average oil content of
1000 g/m³, though with frequent excursions above 2000 g/m³. Tank loading and physical water/oil
properties are almost identical, but the sourness of the water is different. Significant quantities of iron
sulphide solids are present in the sour production water, leading to poor water quality.
Severe surges in the high watercut producers are observed. This results in fluctuating water loadings.
The tanks which experience these load variations show a poor deoiling performance and support the
general opinion that "steady" flow conditions are a pre-requisite for effective oil-water separation.
South Oman
Concentric wash tanks have been in use since February 1981 in Marmul and October 1982 in Rima.
Dehydration performance of the tanks has been good (0.5-1% BS&W). Even at twice the design
throughput dehydration performance has been very good with just over 1% (vol.) residual watercut in the
dehydrated oil discharge.
Recently FWKO tanks have been installed in front of the concentric dehydration tanks in Marmul and
Rima to cater for the higher watercuts. In Marmul this has resulted in a higher oil content in the disposal
water despite the installation of CPI units. In the recent Nimr development FWKO tanks were installed
from the start. Indications are that these FWKO tanks are removing only 10% of the free water which is
rather disappointing. Modifications are under way to improve this situation.
Mina al Fahal
Crude salinity rather than water in the export crude oil is of main concern at the PDO export terminal.
Residual water is removed in batch wise operated tanks. The water separation is almost complete and
therefore salinity is less than the maximum export figure of 70 g/m³ NaCl.
Upon separation the tanks are drained until a capacitance probe senses dry oil. Water and interfacial
sludge are therefore completely drained from each tank. The sludge is treated in a sludge treatment plant
and the recovered oil is spiked into the export stream. The water is treated in CPI's and disposed into the
sea.
8.5.5 SPDC - Nigeria

Production in Nigeria is from two areas. The production processing is the same for both areas. Wet crude
is separated from the associated gas at the flow stations in the field, treated with demulsifying chemicals
and transferred to either the Ughelli Quality Control Centre (UQCC), the Forcados Export Terminal or the
Bonny Export Terminal. The dehydrated crude of the UQCC is pumped to either the Forcados Terminal or
to the Warri refinery. The crude oil is relatively light with a density around 850 kg/m³.
Dehydration is achieved by batch settling in tankage. The settling times to reach the oil export quality are
in the order of 4 - 6 hours for the light crudes and some 72 hours for the somewhat heavier Bonny-
Medium crude. After setlling the produced water at Forcados and Bonny is drained into corrugated plate
interceptors which overflow via an API oil interceptor into the coastal waters. To avoid overdrainage of the
tanks and to prevent oil slugs entering the water treatment plants, the elevation of the oil-water interface
in the tank is monitored by sample nozzles on the tank wall. A small water leg is maintained.
At UQCC the production water is drained into two sludge/skim tanks. These tanks are operated in series.
The water drained from these tanks is pumped to the Rapele River where it is discharged without further
treatment.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 324

The dehydration performance at the three production centres is good and after batch dehydration crude
export specifications (BS&W » 0.1%) are met without problems. However, the water handling capacity of
all terminals is limited and bottlenecking is required for future water disposal volumes. At present, the
quality of the disposal water is within the self-imposed limit of 50 g.m³ oil-in-water. It is expected that in
future the government will impose a more stringent legislation and a limit of 20 g/m³ oil-in-water is
expected. A more advanced water treatment method will then probably be required.
As part of a recent study on the revamping of the Ughelli quality Control Centre, it was demonstrated that
the oil-in-water content downstream of the settling tanks varied from 30 - 130 g/m³, with an average value
below 50 g/m³.
Measurements of oil-in-water droplet size distribution after 6 hours settling indicated that 85% of the
droplets were smaller than 10 µm.
Further reduction in oil-in-water by using e.g. corrugated plate interceptors would therefore be ineffective,
as these are typically designed to remove oil droplets larger than 60 µm.
8.5.6 BSP
Dehydration and water treatment facilities are centralised in the Seria Terminal. The wet crude is fully
degassed in the field where demulsifier chemicals are also added. The field production is gathered in five
trunk lines, which discharge in batch wise operated dehydration tanks. When a particular tank is full and
water has settle out for 3-6 hours, the water is either drained to the API oil interceptor or pumped to tanks
T22/36 (see Fig. 8.12) and the dry oil is pumped to the export tanks.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 325

Fig. 8.10 - Seria Terminal, dehydration and production water treatment facilities
After the normal settling time water and oil have not separated fully and an emulsion layer is sandwiched
between the dry oil (0.1% BS&W) and the water. The emulsion of the land heavy and land light
production is pumped to the next receiving tank, where in time the emulsion will break down into separate
oil and water phases. The emulsions associated with offshore light production are rather stubborn and
require special treatment.
This interfacial emulsion is collected in two emulsion holding tanks (T41/42, see Fig. 8.13) together with
API, Wemco and DAF skimmings for further batch wise treatment, which consists of heating, acetic
acid dosing (800 g/m³) and oil-water separation. The separated water is drained into the API oil
interceptor via the dirty water tank T34. The oil from the separators is still relatively wet and is therefore
routed through the batch wise operated dehydration tanks T45/46.
Part of the land heavy water (LHW) is treated in the RE*A water treatment plant, which comprises a
flocculation unit, a dissolved air flotation (DAF) unit and dual media filters. A mixture of land light water
(LLW), offshore light water (OLW) and the balance of LHW are routed through a Wemco induced air
flotation unit.
The remaining terminal effluent water, i.e. production water, storm water, water ex emulsion treatment
plant and the water from the condensate tanks (CHPS water) is routed via the API oil interceptor and
the Sungai Bera Holding Basin into the sea. The water leaving the basin has an oil content below BSPs
self imposed target of 35 ppm which is mainly achieved by the settling in the basin in combination with
disc skimmers. An upgrade of the water treatment is planned to be completed in 1992 which will ensure
the 35 ppm target for the water leaving the API separator.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 326

The dehydration efficiency is good and in general export crude contains less than 0.1% (vol.) water.
However, the quality of the produced water can be affected by the following factors:
a) Quantities of emulsion/oil entering the water treatment facilities during draining cycles.
b) Relatively small volumes of water (CHPS and slops water) which contribute significantly to the
overall oil-in-water content of the terminal effluent. Special treatment of this water would improve
overall system performance.
The performance of the Wemco and DAF units is generally good with efficiencies in the order of 80-95%.
The recycling of sludges from T45/46 and skimmings (DAF, Wemco and API) impact on the performance
of the emulsion and sludge treatment plant (Fig. 8.13). This recycling tends to result in a build-up of
solidsand tight emulsions within the system.
The performance of the DAF/filter system at the plant at the Seria Terminal is remarkably good mainly
due to the backwashing of filters with Nonidet LE (1%) and regular clean out of sludge from the DAF and
floc tank. The oil content of the milky water (LHW), 1500 g/m³ very finely dispersed oil, is reduced to 20
g/m³ (total oil). It should be noted that this plant was installed following extensive pilot testing. Note: A
new demulsifier will shortly be introduced which, in a field trial, reduced the oil content of the milky water
from 1500 g/m³ to less than 400 g/m³. The DAF unit requires extensive operator attention to achieve good
results (more so than the Wemco).
The current batch dehydration system for land light and land heavy consisting of six tanks has been
replaced by two new 6000 m³ Continuous Dehydration tanks, T120 for land heavy crude and T130 for
land light crude in March 1988.
As a result to their satisfactory operation, it is proposed to convert the remaining dehydration facilities
from batch to continuous operation.
In the case of the condensate stream, this will be dehydrated in three-phase separators in the new
condensate stabilisation plant presently (1988) being designed.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 327

Fig. 8.11 - Seria Terminal, emulsion treatment facilities
8.5.7 SSB/SSPC
The offshore oil fields in Sarawak and Sabah produce light, waxy crude. In the field the crude is fully
degassed and demulsifier chemicals are added. Wet crude is dehydrated in the Lutong, Labuan and
Bintulu terminals prior to export by tanker. At these terminals the producing water is treated and disposed
of into the sea. The facilities at each terminal are essentially the same as at the Lutong terminal, which is
described below.
The atmospherically stabilised oil production enters the terminal via four different trunklines. The streams
are passed through FWKO vessels and discharged into crude receiving tanks, which are used as batch
dehydration tank as. Water is drained from the tank bottoms immediately after a particular tank has been
filled. Subsequently, interfacial emulsion is pumped to the emulsion hold-up (T41). The water drained
from the FWKOs and the crude receiving tanks is passed through the water treatment plant (see Fig.
8.14). Interfacial emulsions together with skimmings of the API, CPI, Wemco and holding basin are further
treated in the emulsion and wax treatment plant (EWTP).
The oily water from FWKO vessels, crude-receiving tanks, storage tanks, tank T41, EWTP and the sump
pit is drained into the API oil interceptor , from where it flows through a corrugated plate interceptor (CPI-
1), induced gas flotation (Wemco) and holding basin. At present the water from the holding basin is
pumped through 4 x 12" pipelines (redundant product/crude oil export lines) to discharge points 1525 m
(5000 ft) beyond the low-low water mark to make it a truly offshore disposal (Figures 8.14 refers).
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 328

The waterflow through the effluent treatment plant (ETP) is by gravity. The skimming of the API and TPI
interceptors as well as from the Wemco are collected in a sump pit. The top layer of this pit is periodically
(level control) pumped via TPI-2 sump to T-41, the emulsion holding tank, for processing in the emulsion
and wax treatment plant (EWTP). Skimmed oil and water from the holding basin follows the same route.
Fig. 8.12 - Lutong water treatment plant
Dehydration efficiency in all three terminals is good and export specifications of less than 0.3 to 0.5% v
(depending on the terminal) water are always met. However, the quality of the effluent water is relatively
poor, although in the offshore discharge situation the oil content criteria (measured by IR method) is met
most of the time. It is noted that water discharge in all three terminals were only recently relocated to an
offshore location (as from January 1988). Before this modification criteria for inshore disposal (Bintulu,
Labuan) and onshore disposal were always exceeded because of the stringent statutory requirements.
-3
These included limits for oil content (10 g.m ), BOD/COD, phenols, sulphide and total suspended solids.
Free water knockout vessels are used in two terminals (Bintulu has none). The design capacity is 12,000
m³/day (75,000 bbls/day). Performance under normal operating conditions at present shows efficiencies
as high as 70%. This is a marked improvement from the 20-30% efficiencies recorded before the (three)
vessels at Lutong terminal were modified. These vessels were installed for three phase separation with a
weir. At present, the service is for two phase (oil/water) separation only with slotted baffle plate and
improved inlet nozzle to distribute flow over the full cross section of the vessel. Water is drained through
an (enlarged) bottom nozzle, whereas the residual emulsion leaves the vessel at the top.
The performance of SSB/SSPC's water treatment and emulsion/wax treatment plants is inadequate for
the following reasons:
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 329

• Flow surges in the ETP. A continuous stream of FWKO water (some 5000 m³/day) is passed to
the ETP. Water from the dehydration tanks, operating batch-wise, however, causes large surges
into the ETP.
• Over draining of dehydration tanks. Frequent over draining of the dehydration tanks causes
overload to the ETP of emulsion and crude oil. This is inherent to the operating practice to drain
the tanks till emulsion is observed at the API separator, only than routing further (emulsion)
draining to the emulsion holding tank (T-41). This leaves the common drain line to the API
separator full of emulsion which is swept into the ETP when the next dehydration tank
commences draining.
• Recycling of skimmings to the EWTP (via T-41) and subsequent routine of oil discharge
(containing solids/sludge) to the incoming crude oil stream.
-3 -3
• Routine of poor quality EWTP water (up to 2000 g.m oil, 800 g.m solids) to ETP. This is further
aggravated by the presence of acetic acid which is used as demulsifier for the EWTP treated
sludge.
The poor performance of the Wemco unit is attributed to flow surges, solids content of the feed, low oil
droplet size (distribution) and, in particular, the poor level control in the unit.
4 5
SRB activity in the trunkline is relatively high (commonly populations of 10 to 10 per cm³ are recorded)
-3
resulting in sulphide levels of some 15 g.m in the water. Reaction of sulphide with corrosion products in
dehydration tanks and ETP produces FeS which stabilises an oil/water emulsion and also causes the
"black water". Furthermore, oleophilic FeS is covered by oil and has an almost neutral buoyancy.
8.5.8 Thailand-Sirikit field

The output from the Sirikit field originates from some 40 production strings, ranging in productivity from 13
to 175 m³/d and FTHPs ranging from 400 to 10,000 kPa. The crude is of a waxy nature (18% wax
content) with a density of 850 kg/m³ and Wax-Drop-Out-Point of about 55 °C. The wells are located at
nine locations where they are choked and manifolded into 6" flowlines to the Lan Krabu production
station. Depending on their FTHP, the wells produce either into a high pressure (HP), low pressure (LP)
or low-low pressure (LLP) flowline. At the Lan Krabu production station the flowlines from the various well
sites are manifolded and routed to an HP, LP and LLP gas/liquid separator operating at 2000, 550 and
140 kPa respectively (see Fig. 8.15a).
The lengths of the flowlines vary from 350 m to ± 7 km. Pressure drops of 70-700 kPa are experienced
over the flowlines.
With increasing watercuts in producing wells, problems were experienced at the Lan Krabu production
station with crude oil dehydration. In order for Thai Shell to meet the contractual obligation of 0.5%
maximum BS&W in the crude export, the operating temperatures of the LLP separator and stock tank had
to be increased above the cloud point to about 65°C. Because of the limited LLP compressor capacity
and flashed gas from the stock tank, an oil loss of about 64 m³/d was estimated, i.e. a loss in revenue of
6
some US $2.9 x 10 /year at the crude price of US $20/bbl.
An investigation was made to identify possible means of recovering the oil losses, which resulted in
recommendations to:
i) reroute the condensate recycles from the compressor discharge to the LP and LLP separators to
reduce flaring of the gas;
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 330

ii) cool the export crude to 45 °C and reroute the condensates from compressor discharges into the
crude storage tanks (see Fig. 8.15b).
Fig. 8.13 - Lan Krabu production station
Fig. 8.15b - Lan Krabu production station, proposed modification

PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 331

REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
The following gives a selection of EP reports and other notes/reports of relevance for the contents of this
Manual. References have been grouped according to a specific subject heading, but many are
appropriate to other headings as well. It goes without saying that the listing of references is not
exhaustive, and references given in a particular note or report may also be usefully consulted.
Headings used are as follows:
1. Dehydration/deoiling/emulsion - general
2. Dehydration/deoiling/emulsions - field specific.
3. Laboratory studies/methods
4. Fact-finding studies
5. Dehydration equipment and processes
6. Deoiling equipment and processes
7. Produced water and sludge disposal
1. DEHYDRATION/DEOILING/EMULSIONS - GENERAL
Bansbach, P.L.
THE HOW AND WHY OF EMULSIONS
The Oil and Gas Journal, pg. 87, 7 September 1970
Barnea, E.and Mizrahi, J

SEPARATION MECHANISM OF LIQUID-LIQUID DISPERSIONS IN A DEEP-LAYER GRAVITY
SETTLER:
Part I - The structure of the dispersion band
Part II - Flow patterns of the dispersed and continuous phases within the dispersion band
Part III - Hindered settling and drop-to-drop coalescence in the dispersion band
Part IV - Continuous settler characteristics
Trans. Instn. Chem. Engrs., Vol. 53, 1975.
Becker, P. (editor)
ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF EMULSION TECHNOLOGY
Volumes I and II, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 1983.
Berger, P.D.; Hsu, C. and Arendell, J.P.
DESIGNING AND SELECTING DEMULSIFIERS FOR OPTIMUM FIELD

PERFORMANCE BASED ON PRODUCTION FLUID CHARACTERISTICS SPE 16285, February 1987.
Clay, P.H.
THE MECHANISM OF EMULSION FORMATION IN TURBULENT FLOW
Proc. Royal Acad. Sci. (Amsterdam), Vol. 43, 1940, pgs. 852 and 979.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 332

Daalen, van
DEHYDRATION OF CRUDE OIL AND DEOILING OF EFFLUENT WATER Report EP-44311, April 1973.
EP/23.22
INTRODUCTION TO DEHYDRATION AND DEOILING
SIPM Report, January 1985
Hartland, S
COALESCENCE IN LIQUID-LIQUID DISPERSIONS
Separation Processes Service, State of the Art Report,
November 1985. Report MF 86-0853
Hinze, J.O
FUNDAMENTALS OF THE HYDRODYNAMIC MECHANISM OF SPLITTING IN DISPERSION
PROCESSES
A.I.Ch.E. Journal, September 1955, 289-95
Hodgson, T.D
COALESCENCE DEVICES FOR LIQUID-LIQUID SYSTEMS
Separation processes service, state of the Art report, April 1976 Report MF80-0697.
Martin, P.D. and Hartland, S.

DESIGN OF SIMPLE GRAVITY SETTLERS FOR THE COALESCENCE OF LIQUID-LIQUID
DISPERSIONS
Separation Processes Service Report, March 1985.
Meijs, F.H.
SUMMARY ON CRUDE-OIL DEHYDRATION
KSEPL report, February 1969.
Meijs, F.H. and Mitchell, R.W

STUDIES ON THE IMPROVEMENT OF COALESCENCE CONDITIONS OF OIL FIELD EMULSIONS
SPE 4356, May 1973.
Mitchell, R.W.
DEOILING CHEMICALS FOR CRUDE OIL-IN-WATER EMULSIONS
Report EP-45055 (rkgr.0073.73), April 1973.
Poelgeest, F. van and Meijs, F.H.

STUDY OF OIL-IN-WATER EMULSION IN CONNECTION WITH DEHYDRATION OF HEAVY CRUDE
OILS
Report EP-42194 (RKGR. 0071.70), December 1970
Shinnar, R. and Church, J.M

PREDICTING PARTICLE SIZE IN AGITATED DISPERSIONS
Ind. and Eng. Chem., March 1960, 52, 253
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 333

SIPM Water Injection Panel
WATER INJECITON MANUAL
Report EP-63600, August 1965
SIPM Production Division

PRODUCTION HANDBOOK
Sleicher, C.A
MAXIMUM STABLE DROP SIZE IN TURBULENT FLOW
A I.Ch.E. Journal, Vol. 8, September 1962, p.471
Ward, J.P. and Knudsen, J.G

TURBULENT FLOW OF UNSTABLE LIQUID-LIQUID DISPERSIONS: DROP SIZE AND VELOCITY
DISTRIBUTIONS
A.I.Ch.E. Journal, Vol. 13, No. 2, March 1967, p. 356.
2. DEHYDRATION/DEOILING/EMULSION - FIELD SPECIFIC
Aberson, G.; Kuyvenhoven, C.A.T. and Bohm, J.T.C.

DEHYDRATION AND VISCOSITY OF RIMA AND JALMUD CRUDE OIL
EMULSIONS. Report EP-53135 (RKOR).80.216), December 1980
Bieshaar, S.C.A
A LABORATORY STUDY IN CONNECTIION WITH ABU DHABI CRUDE OIL
DEHYDRATION/DESALINATION PROBLEMS
Report EP-45684 (RKTR. 0096.74), April 1974
Bohm, J.T.C. and Glas, J

INTERIM REPORT ON THE CHEMICAL DESTABILISATION OF S.W. AMPA
CRUDE OIL EMULSIONS
Report EP-48389 (RKOR. 0017.77), April 1978
Bohm, J.T.C.
DESTABILISATION OF S.W. AMPA CRUDE OIL EMULSIONS
Report EP-50014 (RKOR.0050.78), December 1978
Bohm, J.T.C
DEHYDRATION, AND VISCOSITY AMAL/MARMUL CRUDE OIL EMULSIONS
Report EP-50567 (RKOR.0050.78), December 1978
Bohm, J.T.C.
DEHYDRATION, AND VISCOSITY OF SOUTH OMAN CRUDE OIL EMULSIONS
Report EP-51562 (RKOR.79.062), October 1979.
Hamersma, P.J. and Ankone, J.W.

DEHYDRATION, DEOILING AND SAMPLE CHARACTERISATION TESTS OF TERN CRUDE OIL
(210/25A-5) Report EP-60616 (RKOR.84.008), April 1984.
RABI AND GAMBA/IVINGA COMMINGLED DEHYDRATION/DESALINATION (BOTTLE TEST

PROCEDURE)
Report EP 87-0503, January 1987.
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 334

Kuyvenhoven, C.A.T. and Mandersloot, W.A.J
FOAMING AND EMULSION CHARACTERISTICS OF TROLL CRUDE OIL
Report EP-58438 (RKOR. 83.025), May 1983.
Kuyvenhoven, C.A.T. and Mandersloot, W.A.J.

COMPARISON BETWEEN THE DEHYDRATION BEHAVIOUR OF LABORATORY- PREPARED AND
ACTUALLY PRODUCED TROLL CRUDE OIL EMULSIONS Report EP-61159 (RKOR.84.027), August
1984.
Kuyvenhoven, C.A.T.
BOHAI BAY BZ-28-1-7/BZ-34-2-2, DEHYDRATION STUDY
KSEPL Note for File, September 1985
Kwant, J.W.H.
DEHYDRATION OF SLUDGE SEPARATING CRUDE WITH ACID AND NON-ACID DEMULSIFIERS
Report EP-52118 (PE note No.80.03,BSP), February 1980
Linden, B.H.J. van and Mandersloot W.A.J.

DEHYDRATION, DEOILING AND VISCOSITY OF TERN AND EIDER CRUDE OIL EMULSIONS
Report EP-57982 (RKOR. 83.011), April 1983.
Mandersloot, W.A.J.
VISCOSITY OF NIMR/RUNIB CRUDE OIL EMULSIONS
Report EP-57479, November 1982.
Mandersloot, W.A.J.
DESALINATION AND DEHYDRATION OF LUCINA CRUDE OIL EMULSIONS
Report EP-57479, January 1983.
Mandersloot, W.A.J.
DUNLIN FIELD TESTS: A DESCRIPTION OF THE PRODUCED EMULSIONS
Report EP-63932 (RKOR.85.036), June 1986.
Mandersloot, W.A.J. and Stadt, M.E. van de

DEHYDRATION TESTS AT THE AUK-A PLATFORM, PERFORMANCE OF FACILITIES AND
CORRELATION WITH THEORY AND LAB-TESTS Report EP-65632 (RKOR.85.036), June 1986.
Michels, A.M. and Eijlander, J.G.R

INVESTIGATION INTO THE STABLISING FACTORS OF S.W. AMPA/FAIRLEY CRUDE OIL
EMULSIONS
Report EP-52955 (RKGR.80.049), July 1980
Mitchell, R.W.
LABORATORY STUDY OF DEHYDRATION AND DESALTING PROBLEM ASSOCIATED WITH GAMBA
AND IVINGA CRUDES
Report EP-43754 (RKTR. 0058.72), April 1972
Mitchell, R.W. and Glas, J

A LABORATORY STUDY OF POSSIBLE DEHYDRATION AND WATER-TREATMENT PROBLEMS IN
HANDLING BRENT OIL WITH THE SPAR UNIT
Report EP-44632 (RKTR.0119.73), April 1973
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 335

Molenaar, H.J. and Stadt, M.E. van de
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS FROM DEHYDRATION TESTS OF DRAUGEN CRUDE OIL (WELL 6407/9-
3) EMULSIONS
Report EP 87-2044 (RKER.87.245), August 1987
Smit, W.H.
DYNAMIC COALESCER EXPERIMENTS WITH SCHOONEBEEK CRUDE-OIL EMULSION, THE
NETHERLANDS
Report EP-45659 (NAM-TM Report no.5559), April 1974.
3. LABORATORY STUDIES/METHODS
Aberson, G.
REVIEW OF MAIN TECHNIQUES FOR PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS APPLICABLE TO EMULSIONS
Report EP-50355 (RKSR.0039.78), December 1978
Annual Book of ASTM Standards

Section 5: PETROLEUM PRODUCTS, LUBRICANTS AND FOSSIL FUELS
ASTM, 1916 Race Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103, USA
Annual Edition of IP Standards for Petroleum and its Products, Methods for Analysis and Testing
The Institute of Petroleum, London
Hamersma, P.J. and Ankone, J.W

A THREE-PARAMETER FUNCTION DESCRIBING THE EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS OBTAINED FROM
DEHYDRATION AND SOME PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY RELATED TESTS IRN 334, KSEPL, July
1984.
Int. Math. and Stat. Library (IMSL), Col., Routine name ZXSSQ, Houston, Texas
Karabeles, A.J.
TURBULENT PIPE FLOW OF DILUTE LIQUID-LIQUID DISPERSIONS, DROP SIZES AND CRITERIA
FOR HOMOGENEOUS BS&W DISTRIBUTION
Report EP-48081 (Technical Progress Report WRC 197-76, Shell Development Company), December
1976.

INSTRUCTION MANUAL TRANSPARENT PRESSURE-SAMPLING BOTTLE FOR ON-LINE STABILITY
TESTS OF OIL/WATER MIXTURES IN PRODUCTION SYSTEMS
Report EP-63911 (RKMR.85.012), August 1985

GUIDELINES FOR LABORATORY DEHYDRATION TESTS
Report EP-64496 (RKGR.85.131), November 1985.
Meijs, F.H and Beest, W.J. van

FLOW-INDUCED COALESCENCE IN CHEMICAL DEHYDRATION
Report EP-42848 (RKGR. 0055.71), July 1971
Meijs, F.H. and Poelgeest, F. van

A NEW DEMULSIFIER TEST METHOD BASED ON THE DYNAMIC COALESCER
Report EP-42848 (RKGR. 0055.71), July 1971
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 336

Mitchell, R.W. and Glas, J.
INSTRUCTION MANUAL - OPERATION OF THE DYNAMIC COALESCER
RKSR. 0013.72, June 1972.
Molenaar, H.J
PRESSURE-REGULATED EMULSIFICATION - A NEW EMULSIFICATION METHOD
KSEPL Note RKRS.87.04., April 1987
Nederveen, N
WATERCUT SAMPLING FROM MULTIPHASE FLOWLINES
Paper 5/08, prepared for the 1986 SIPM Production Technology Conference.
Scheers, A.M.
SHORT EVALUATION OF THE HORIBA OCMA 25 OIL-IN-WATER
MONITOR
Report EP-60787 (RKTR. 84.152), May 1984
4. FACT-FINDING STUDIES
A STUDY OF EFFLUENT QUALITY IN SPDC WESTERN DIVISION (NIGERIA)

Report EP 87-1313, June 1987
Bakels, R.A. and Wit, H.P. de

REPORT OF A VISIT TO N.V. TURKSE SHELL IN CONNECTION WITH DEHYDRATION PROBLEMS
FROM 12 TO 21 JANUARY 1981
Report EP-53259, February 1981
Bakels, R.A. and Wit, H.P. de

REPORT OF VISIT TO PETROLEUM DEVELOPMENT (OMAN) IN CONNECTION WITH
DEHYDRATION/DESALTING PROBLEMS 6-22 JULY 1981
Report EP-55261, July 1981
CRUDE OIL DEHYDRATION AND DISPOSAL OF PRODUCED WATER IN PDO, AN OVERVIEW

Report 86-0393 (PDO report), July 1986
Deenen, W.H.
NOTES ON DEHYDRATION TESTS CARRIED OUT IN BACHAQUERO TERMINAL AND PROPOSALS
FOR MODIFICATIONS
Report EP-55292, November 1980
Mandersloot, W.A.J.
EVALUATION OF THE PERFORMANCE OF MARMUL ANDRIMA CONCENTRIC WASH TANKS
Report RKTR. 83.007, March 1983
Mandersloot, W.A.J.
VISIT TO SPDC NIGERIA: FEASIBILITY STUDY INTO CONTINUOUS DEHYDRATION AT BONNY
TERMINAL
Report EP-62025 (RKOR.84.048), May 1984.
Mandersloot, W.A.J.
SIRIKIT CRUDE OIL DEHYDRATION, A FIELD STUDY
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 337

Report RKOR. 85.044, June 1986
Mandersloot, W.A.J.
DEHYDRATION IN PDO's EARLY DEPLOYMENT FACILITIES
Paper 5/07, prepared for the 1986 SIPM Production Technology Conference.
Meijs, F.H.
A VISIT TO VENEZUELA IN CONNECTION WITH CRUDE OIL DEHYDRATION PROBLEMS FROM
9.5.68 to 24.5.68
Report EP-39679 (RKOR.0048.68), September 1968
Schrameijer, F.M.W. and Velden, J. van der

DEHYDRATION AND EFFLUENT WATER TREATMENT AT SSB/SSPC TERMINALS (Visit Report)
Report EP-65420, April 1986.
Scoot, G.J.
INVESTIGATIONS INTO REDUCING THE OIL CONTENT OF THE KAPUNI PRODUCED WATER
Report EP-51637 (PTN/1/1980, Shell BP and Todd), January 1980
Velden, J.van der

GROUP OPERATED DEHYDRATION AND DEOILING SYSTEMS - EVALUATION OF SYSTEM's
DESIGN AND PERFORMANCES
Paper presented at the SIPM Field Engineering Workshop (PW10), 29/9-10/2/1986, The Hague
Velden, J. van der and Schrameijer, F.M.W.

Brunei Shell Petroleum Co. Ltd.
SERIA TERMINAL DEHYDRATION AND EFFLUENT WATER TREATMENT
(Visit Report),
Report EP-65410, April 1986
5. DEHYDRATION EQUIPMENT AND PROCESSES
Aberson, G and Bohm, J.T.C.

FIELD TESTS FOR THE DESIGN OF AMAL/MARMUL DEHYDRATION AND GATHERING FACILITIES
Report EP-49788 (RKOR.0044.78), August 1978
Aberson, G and Bohm, J.T.C.

FIELD TESTING OF A CONCENTRIC WASH-TANK MODEL AND SOME OBSERVATIONS ON THE
PERFORMANCE OF SETTLING TANKS PROCESSING WEST-LUTONG CRUDE OIL
Report EP-51751 (RKOR. 79.079), December 1987
Arnold,K. and Stewart, H.Jr.

DESIGNING OIL AND GAS PRODUCING SYSTEMS - DETERMINING HEATER-TREATER SIZES AND
HEAT REQUIREMENTS
World Oil, 1 February 1985
Bieshaar, S.C.A. and Glas, J.

PIPELINE COALESCER DESIGN FOR IRAN
Report EP-46177 (RKOR. 0018.74), October 1974.
Bohm, J.T.C and Lea, R.H.

CHEM-ELECTRIC VERSUS CHEMICAL DEHYDRATION
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 338

An evaluation of field tests carried out in the Fenn-Big Valley Field, Alberta, Canada.
Report EP-49727 (RKGR. 0043.78), July 1978.
Bohm, J.T.C.
FIELD TESTS ON OFFSHORE CHEM-ELECTRIC DEHYDRATION OF S.W. AMPA CRUDE OIL
Report EP-50897 (RKOR. 0016.79), June 1979
Bos, R. and Glendinning, D.R.

CONTINUOUS DEHYDRATION WITH A CENTRIFUGAL SEPARATOR
Report EP 86-0553 (NAM Report), August 1098
Cornelissen, A.E. and Visser, H.P.

DRYING OF NATURAL GAS CONDENSATE BY STRIPPING WITH DRY GAS
II - MODEL EXPERIMENTS
Report AMER.83.211 (1983)
Cornelissen, A.E.
DRYING OF NATURAL GAS CONDENSATE BY STRIPPING WITH DRY GAS III - A TRAY-TO-TRAY
COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR STRIPPER COLUMN DESIGN Report AMGR.83.211 (1983)
Cruijsberg, E.A.A
STUDY ON CRUDE OIL DEHYDRATION IN PARTITIONED WASH TANKS CMFE/33
Note, 6 December 1983.
Deenen, W.H.
DYNAMIC CRUDE DEHYDRATION METHOD
Dries, H.W.A. and Klein Nagelvoort, R.

DESIGN AND REQUISITIONING OF SCHOEPENTOETER (VANE-TYPE) INLET DEVICES
Report EP 86-0225, August 1986
Dijkhuis, E
DEHYDRATION AND DEOILING PROBLEMS WITH STEAM AFFECTED CRUDE (MARAVEN
S.A.)
Paper 5/02, presented at the 1986 SIPM production Technology Conference
Echenhausen, M.R.
NOTES ON THE COALESCER PIPE AND DEHYDRATION PERFORMANCE IN THE MINA AL FAHAL
TERMINAL OF PETROLEUM DEVELOPMENT (OMAN) LIMITED
Report EP-40514, June 1969
Eigner, M.R.P., Kwant, J.H.W. and Callaghen, D

ROXANA FLUID TREATMENT STUDIES. BATCH TANK VERSUS CONCENTRIC WASH TANK,
DEHYDRATION FIELD TRIAL
PE Note no. 71/19 (BSP), August 1981
GAS/LIQUID SEPARATORS, SELECTION OF TYPE AND RULES OF DESIGN

PETRONAS Technical Standard, PTS 31.22.05.11, February 1982
Hamersma, P.J.
CROSS-FLOW MEMBRANE FILTRATION: A LITERATURE REVIEW
RKGR. 83.131, January 1984
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 339

Hamersma, P.J. and Ankone, J.W.
IN-LINE DEHYDRATION OF CRUDE OILS KSEPL Note RKRS. 85.09,
September 1985
Hoek, P.J. and Konijn, G

DRYING OF NATURAL GAS CONDENSATE BY STRIPPING WITH DRY GAS IV – FIELD
EXPERIMENTS ON THE NAM-K15-FB-1 PLATFORM
Juttner, F.K.
FIELD TESTS WITH A CONCENTRIC WASH TANK MODEL AT BEB's OSTERWALD PRODUCTION
STATION BEB
Report, July 1984
Kruka, V.R. and Chin, R.W.

HEAVY OIL DEHYDRATION, COMPARISON OF EXISTING DEHYDRATION VESSELS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY
Report EP 86-0865 (Technical Progress Report WRC 188-86, Shell Development Company),
October 1986
Mandersloot,W.A.J.; Linden, B.H.J. van der and Bohm, J.T.C.

PILOT TESTS WITH THE CONCENTRIC WASH TANK AT NAM's PRODUCTION STATION
BRIENENOORD
Report EP-58450 (RKGR. 83.034), June 1983
Marriot,K.A. and Dries, H.W.A

EIDER PROJECT, DESIGN OF THE GAS-OIL-WATER SEPARATORS Report EP-63360, March 1985.
Marriot, K.A.
BONNY TERMINAL CONTINUOUS DEHYDRATION STUDY
Report EP-62590, April 1985
Meijs, F.H.
DESIGN OF COALESCER PIPES FOR THE DEHYDRATION OF CRUDE-OIL EMULSIONS AND
DEOILING OF OIL/WATER EMULSIONS
Report EP-40340 (RKGR.0070.71), October 1971
Molenaar, H.J. and Stadt, M.E. van de

A HYDROCYCLONE AS FREE-WATER KNOCK-OUT DEVICE - EFFECT ON PERFORMANCE OF
FREE AND DISSOLVED GAS
Report EP 87-1084 (RKGR. 87.020), March 1987
A GUIDE TO THE SELECTION AND DESIGN OF OILFIELD DEHYDRATION EQUIPMENT

Report EP 86-870, November 1986
Spaninks, J.A.M. and Cornelissen, A.E

DRYING OF NATURAL GAS CONDENSATE BY STRIPPING WITH DRY GAS I - SIZING OF THE
STRIPPER COLUMN FOR THE NAM-F3-PROJECT
Weve, D.N.M.M.
COMPACT EQUIPMENT FOR DEHYDRATION AND DEOILING
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 340

Paper no. 5/04, prepared for the 1986 SIPM Production Technology Conference
Wit, H.P. de
NEW DESIGN WASH TANK FOR DEHYDRATION AND DESALTING OF LARGE
VOLUMES OF CRUDE OIL
SPE 4848, May 1974
Zeff, E. and Visser. H.P

ELECTROSTATIC BOTTLE TESTS
KSLA Research note EE/542/87, October 1987
Zeef, E. and Visser, H.ELECTROSTATIC CRUDE OIL DEHYDRATION

Paper presented at the International Conference on Offshore Separation Processes, Edinburgh,
Scotland, 14-16 October 1987
Zemel, B. and Bowman, R.W.

RESIDENCE TIME DISTRIBUTIONS IN GRAVITY OIL-WATER SEPARATORS
J. Pet. Tech., February 1978
6. DEOILING EQUIPMENT AND PROCESES
Angelidou, C. et al
THE REMOVAL OF EMULSIFIED OIL PARTICLES FROM WATER BY FLOTATION
Industrial Engineering Chemistry, Process Design Development
(1977) 16, 436-41
Arnold, K.E. and Stewart, M. Jr

DESIGN CONCEPTS FOR OFFSHORE PRODUCED-WATER TREATING AND DISPOSAL SYSTEMS
Journal of Petroleum Technology, February 1983
Arnold, K.E. and Stewart, M. Jr.

DESIGNING OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION SYSTEMS
How to size and select produced water treating equipment World Oil, March 1985.
SELECTING A WASTE WATER TREATING SYSTEM
World Oil, May 1985
Bieshaar, S.C.A. and Glas, J.

LABORATORY EVALUATION OF COALESCER BEDS FOR EFFLUENT WATER DEOILING
Report EP-47842 (RKGR.0057.76), September 1976
Bieshaar, S.C.A; Deconick, D. and Glas, J

LABORATORY STUDY OF COALESCER PIPE SYSTEMS
A. Design for optimum deoiling

B. Development of tapered coalescer pipe systems Report EP-47971 (RKGR.0051.76), December 1976
Bohm, J.T.C.
AN EXPANDABLE FIBROUS BED COALESCER FOR DEOILING OIL FIELD PRODUCTION WATERS
Part I: Description of a laboratory model and some preliminary observations Report EP-52293
(RKGR.80.036), April 1980
Choufoer, F.R.
EXPERIENCE WITH VORTOILS IN THE MURCHISON FIELD
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 341

Paper 5/03, presented at the 1986 SIPM Production Technology Conference
DEOILING INDUSTRIAL WASTE WATER; DESIGN AND OPERATION OF THE "CPI"

(CORRUGATED PLATE INTERCEPTOR)
Report MF 81-0700, May 1981
E & P Forum
TREATMENT OF PRODUCTION WATER - STATE OF THE ART
May 1979
E & P Forum
TREATMENT OF PRODUCTION WATER - A REVIEW OF CURRENT ERFORMANCE
Report No.2.29/111, October 1985
Fang, C.S. and Lin, J.H

AIR STRIPPING FOR TREATMENT OF PRODUCED WATER
Journal of Petroleum Technology, May 1988.
Grimes, W.D.
USE OF A EMSH INTERCEPTOR FOR WASTE CLARIFICATION
Paper No. TMI2, presented at the Facilities/Chemical Engineering Conference, Houston, Texas,
April 18-20, 1988
Hamersma, P.J. and KUYVENHOVEN, C.A.T.

A LABORATORY INVESTIGATION OF CROSS-FLOW MEMBRANE FILTRATION
RKOR.84.045, October 1984
Hayes, J.J.; Carrol, W.C.; Fothergill, D.W.J. and Prendergast, G.J.J.

HYDROCYCLONES FOR TREATING OILY WATER: DEVELOPMENT AND FIELD TESTING IN BASS
STRAIT
th
Paper OTC 5079, presented at the 17 annual OTC in Houston, Texas, May 6-8, 1985
Kuyvenhoven, C.A.T. and Mandersloot, W.A.J.

EXPANDABLE FIBROUS BED COALSESCER
Part III: Field tests with a laboratory model of the expandable fibrous bed coalescer with emphasis on
fouling and cleaning
Report EP-59158 (RKGR.83.071), September 1983
Kuyvenhoven, C.A.T
EXPANDABLE FIBROUS BED COALESCER
Part IV; Effect of the superficial velocity, type of crude oil and water salinity
Report EP-62767 (RKGR. 85.043), March 1985
Mandersloot, W.A.J. and Kuyvenhoven, C.A.T AN EXPANDABLE FIBROUS BED COALESCER FOR
DEOILING OIL FIELD WATERS Part II: Optimisation of process parameters Report EP-56926
(RKGR.82.068), August 1982
Mandersloot, W.A.J. and Kuyvenhoven, C.A.T.
HYDROCYCLONE FOR OIL/WATER SEPARATION
KSEPL Note RKRS. 85.05, May 1985
Matovick, M.A. and McGuire, D.P. (Shell Oil Company)

AN EVALUATION OF THE OIL REMOVAL CAPABILITIES OF THE STANDAR DESIGN OF PRODUCED
BRINE TREATING FACILITIES
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 342

Report EP-49651, January 1978
Meldrum, N.
HYDROCYCLONES: A SOLUTION TO PRODUCED WATER TREATMENT
th
Paper OTC 5594, presented at the 19 Annual OTC in Houston,
Texas, April 27-30, 1987
Mitchell, R.W. and Meijs, F.H

DEOILING OF CRUDE OIL EFFLUENT WATERS RKGR.0067.72, June 1972.
Mitchell, R.W.
THE USE OF FIBROUS-BED COALESCERS IN THE DEOILING OF EFFLUENT WATERS
RKGR.0075.73, September 1973.
Molenaar, H.J.
ANALYSIS OF FLUID FLOW IN A CROSS-FLOW CORRUGATED PLATE SEPARATOR WITH THE
COMPUTER PROGRAM FLUENT
Report EP 88-0388 (RKGR. 87.110), October 1987
Staa, R. van
SEPARATION OF OIL FROM WATER
Paper Eur 278, presented at the European Petroleum Conference, London, 25,28 October 1982
Strickland, W.T. Jr.

GAS FLOTATION OF PRODUCED WATER
Technical progress Report BRC-EP 26-75-P
Report EP-47155, November 1975
Strickland, W.T. Jr.

LABORATORY RESULTS CLEANING PRODUCED WATER BY GAS FLOTATION
Velden, J. van der

GENERAL REVIEW OF SHELL's PLANTS AND FACILITIES FOR PRODUCTION WATER TREATMENT
Paper presented at the 'Oily Water Separation' Workshop of the Institute of Chemical Engineers, Scottish
Branch, Aberdeen, 23 September 1986
Weve, D.N.M.M
COMPACT EQUIPMENT FOR DEHYDRATION AND DEOLING
Paper no. 5/04, prepared for the 1986 SIPM Production Technology
Conference
Zemel, B
EFFICIENT SEPARATORS SHOW GOOD HYDRAULIC BEHAVIOUR
Oil and Gas Journal, December 1977
7. PRODUCED WATER AND SLUDGE DISPOSAL
CONCAWE
DETERMINATION OF HYDROCARBON IN AQUEOUS EFFLUENTS FROM THE OIL INDUSTRY BY
INFRARED ANALYSIS
Report No. 1/84, March 1984
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 343

E & P Forum REVIEW OF DISCHARGES FROM OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION
PLATFORMS INTO THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT
March 1979
E & P Forum, Sub-committee F

THE ESTIMATION OF OIL-IN-WATER WITH PARTICULAR EMPHASIS ON PRODUCTION ON WATER
DISCHARGES
June 1979
E & P Forum THE NATURE, TREATMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS OF GAS

PLATFORM DISCHARGES
Report No. 2.4/144, December 1987
MF-3.48
COURSE ON EFFLUENT WATER TREATMENT
i) An introduction to waste water treatment definitions and glossary.
ii) Handling and disposal of refinery sludges
NEN 6674 (Nederlandse Norm)

WASTE WATER-DETERMINATION OF MINERAL OIL BY INFRARED SPECTROPHOTOMETRY
January 1981
Oldham, G.F.
METHODS OF ANALYSIS AND SAMPLING OF OIL-IN-WATER
E & P Forum paper, presented at the Seminar or Aspects of the Prevention of Oil Pollution in the
Mediterranean Sea, Athens, 11-13 February 1985
Read, A.D. and Blackman, R.A.A

OILY WATER DISCHARGES FROM OFFSHORE NORTH SEA INSTALLATIONS:
A PERSPECTIVE
Marine Pollution Bulletin, Vol. 11, pp, 44-47, February 1980
Read, A.D. (E & P Forum)

THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCOM PROVISIONAL TARGET STANDARD
Report No. 2.43/143, December 1987
SIPM EP/23.5
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT OF E&P ACTIVITIES - GENERAL GUIDELINES
Report EP-61240, March 1986
Somerville, H.J. et al.

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT OF PRODUCED WATER FROM NORTH SEA OIL OPERATIONS
Marine Pollution Bulletin, Vol. 18, No. 10, pp. 549-558, 1987
Tan, G.P.B.
PILOT SLUDGE FARMING PROJECT - First cultivation cycle
PTS 10.01.00.19
February 2011
Page 344

COMMITTEE REPRESENTATION
Acknowledgement is made to the following contributors.
No Name Designation OPU/HCU

1 W Sobri B W Abdullah Principal (Water Technology) GTS
2 Wahida Bt Hazmin Engineer (Water Technology) GTS
3 Awang B Botok Prinicipal (Analytical Tech) GTS
4 Mona Liza Bt Anwar Staff (Analytical Tech) GTS
5 Suhaimi B Tajuddin Staff (Analytical Tech) GTS
6 Hemadevi Balasubramaniam Engineer (Analytical Tech) GTS
7 Nur Fazliana Bt A Rahman Engineer (Analytical Tech) GTS
8 Anida Bt Hamzah Engineer (Treating & Liquefaction) GTS
9 S Karthikeyan Staff (Ammonia) GTS
10 Siti Balqis Bt Mansor Engineer (Environmental Design) GTS
11 Pattahil Suresh Staff (Process Safety) GTS
12 Bijay Kumar Nepak Principal (Hydrotreating & Conversion) GTS
13 M Rosdi Naim B Mat Principal (Process Design) GTS
14 Hasinah Bt M Hanafi – Omar Staff (Process Design) GTS

Dehydration Deoiling Manual PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Dehydration Deoiling Manual PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

PETRONAS TECHNICAL STANDARDS

The right to use PTS rests with three categories of users:

1) PETRONAS and its affiliates.

Salt: 42 - 72 g/m³ (15-25 lb/1000 bbl).

Clause Changes Reason

3.1, Para 7 Delete “are currently” Redundancy

3.3.1 Added “Repeat Formation Test” To improve sentence

3.4.2.3 Replaced “if” with “of” (line 3) To improve sentence

Replaced “when a local requirement” with Strengthens the sentence

3.4.2.3 Replaced “If a low mixing intensity is Strengthens the sentence

3.4.2.4 Deleted “additional of” To improve sentence

Deleted API 2548

3.4.2.4 Deleted “(no highly skilled labour required). “ Not applicable

Replaced “The separated quantity of water As per the standard method.

3.4.3.3 Added “water” (line 3) “Water” was missing

3.5.3 Deleted the whole para Para is a specific statement

3.7.1 Added “should be” and deleted “ could be Improve sentence

Deleted “IP248-ASTM D2547;” Specific statement

Appendix 3.2 Deleted “SMS 2384” Use standard method only

Shell Method Series (SMS) 1769

Parrafin Wax Content of Petroleum Oils and

Light, clear oils are analyzed as received.

Appendix 3.4 Deleted “gauge” Improve sentence

Appendix 3.4 Deleted “(Mitsubishi moisture meter).” To make general statement.

Old section New Section Change

‘During discharging the cleanest oil…’

Table 1.1: Total oil and water production rates (1986)

Opco Production in Oil '000 m³/d Water Watercut % (vol.)

BSP, Brunei 26.2 16 38

Shell, Gabon 4.5 13 75

BEB, Germany 4.8 60 95

NAM, Holland 4.0 51 95

SSB/SSPC, Malaysia 38.2 20 35

SPDC, Nigeria 120 50 30

TSEPCO, Thailand 3.5 2 35

NVTS, Turkey 2.9 10 80

Shell Expro, UK 120 55 30

TOTAL 408 342 46

(2.56 Mbpd) (2.15 Mbpd)

Salt: 42 - 72 g/m³ (15-25 lb/1000 bbl).

1.2 Purpose and summary of the Manual

i) To provide engineers/operators with a basic understanding of the principles of oil/water

A fundamental understanding of the coalescence mechanism of liquid droplets in a destabilised emulsion

1.3 Structure of the Manual and acknowledgement

2.2.1 Definition and types

• Water dispersed in crude oil, water-in-oil (w/o) normal emulsion.

Figure 2.1 show a photomicrograph of a water-in-oil emulsions.

2.2.3 Stability of emulsions

Fig. 2.3 – Examples of surfactant stabilisation.

These solids include:

2.2.3.3 Electrical charges

2.2.4 Bulk properties of oil-water mixtures

• relative quantities of oil and water

2.2.4.3 Rheological properties

• the viscosities of oil and water

Fig. 2.6 – Basic characteristics of Newtonian and non-Newtonian liquids.

where: η = dynamic viscosity, Pa.s = 10³ cP = 10³ mPa.s

2.2.4.4 Wax Drop-Out Point (cloud point)

2.2.4.5 Droplet size distribution

2.3 Destabilisation of emulsions

1) Droplet must collide.

The processes are enhanced by higher temperatures.

2.3.1 Chemical nature of emulsion breakers