See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/325857475

ALGORITHM FOR DETERMINING THE CORROSION RATE OF OIL PIPELINES

USING MODIFIED NORSOK M-506 MODEL: A CASE STUDY

Article · January 2016

CITATIONS READS

0 557

2 authors, including:

Edgar Iyasele
Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike
7 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Finite Element Analysis of the Mechanical Behaviour of Alumina Silicon Carbide Particulate Reinforced Cast Aluminum Alloy Composite View project

M.SC RESEARCH WORK View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Edgar Iyasele on 19 June 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 UMUDIKE JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (UJET), VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 PAGE 170 - 181

ALGORITHM FOR DETERMINING THE CORROSION RATE OF OIL PIPELINES USING

MODIFIED NORSOK M-506 MODEL: A CASE STUDY
NTUNDE, D. I. and *IYASELE, E. O.
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike, Nigeria

ABSTRACT
The problem of carbon dioxide (CO2) corrosion is of primary concern in Nigeria’s oil and gas industry. The work aimed to develop
a Visual Basic Algorithm, implement the algorithm, simulate and validate it against operating field data.
Existing models for CO2 corrosion prediction were accessed. Modification of one of the models; the NORSOK M-506 model was
carried out to suit the Nigerian light crude oil. The entire model was implemented using Visual Basic to create an algorithm. With
the developed computer algorithm, simulation and prediction of CO2 corrosion rate, the analysis of the effects of various parameters
were carried out using the operating field data in the Nigerian oil and gas industry.
The effects of various parameters (e.g. temperature) on corrosion rate along the pipeline length were analyzed using the developed
algorithm. It was observed that the temperature gradually decreased as the oil flows through the pipeline. Other results obtained
were in agreement with similar works done in this field of study. The developed computer algorithm also predicted corrosion rates
that are in agreement with measured corrosion rates from operating field data. In addition, the developed algorithm prediction had
a good agreement with HYDROCOR. It had a standard error (SE) of 0.18. And at 95% confidence level, confidence interval (CI)
of the model was between 0.70 and 1.41 mm/year mean corrosion rate predicted.

Keywords: algorithm, corrosion rate, pipeline, materials and Visual Basic.

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The increasing cost of pipelines failures due to corrosion in
the oil and gas industry has increased interest in corrosion
problems and their solutions. Materials reliability is
becoming ever more important in our society, particularly in
view of the liability issues that develop when reliability is
not assured, safety is compromised, and failure occurs
(Revie and Uhlig, 2008).
The problem of CO2 corrosion is the primary concern in
Nigeria’s oil and gas industry. Corrosion constitutes a
leading cause of pipeline failure and a main component of
the operating and maintenance costs of oil and gas
industries (Oyatogun et al., 2011). Revie and Uhlig (2008)
defined corrosion as the destructive attack of a metal by
chemical or electrochemical reaction with its environment.
Rajput (2010) stated that corrosion usually occurs because
the general tendency of metals is to return to their native
form, which results in the lowering of their free energy and
attainment of a more thermodynamically stable state.
Dynamic and static mechanical equipment like pipelines,
vessels, tanks, turbines and so forth have been periodically
subjected to degradation and failure due to corrosion (Ossai,
2012).
Notwithstanding the many years over which university,
college, and continuing education courses in corrosion have
been available, high-profile corrosion failures continue to
take place (Revie and Uhlig, 2008).
*Corresponding Author: e-mail: edgaromons2003@yahoo.com Tel:
+234-8135359855
There are different forms of corrosion but it is rare that a
corroding structure or component will suffer from only one.
UJET VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 www.ujetmouau.com
Rajput (2010) reported that many corrosion phenomena are
essentially electrochemical (wet) and chemical (dry)
corrosion.
Pipelines transporting crude oil containing components such
as CO2 and H2S have suffered internal corrosion due to the
presence of these gases dissolved in water. One of the most
prevalent internal corrosion problems in Nigerian oil and gas
industry is carbon dioxide corrosion (also called sweet
corrosion). The use of carbon steel for pipework and
equipment with chemical inhibitors still tends to be
favourable choice for the control of corrosion, compared to
changing materials to corrosion resistant alloys
(CRAs).Carbon steel is by far the most important alloy used
in the petroleum industry and it accounts for over 98% of the
construction material, especially oil and gas transportation
pipelines (Bodude et al., 2012).
The use of computational software by engineers for the
analysis of the effect of CO2 corrosion on pipeline materials
both at the design and operational stages has been reported
(Guidelines for Prediction of CO2 Corrosion in Oil and Gas
Production Systems, 2009). However, developed computer
algorithms with the Nigerian content are scarce. Hence, this
study.
The specific objectives of this research are to develop the
algorithms for CO2 corrosion rate prediction; implement the
algorithm developed; and simulate and validate it against
operating field data. This research work is expected to
develop a Visual Basic algorithm that will predict CO2
corrosion rate for the Nigerian oil and gas industry.
2.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS
Page 170
 UMUDIKE JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (UJET), VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 PAGE 170 - 181

The materials used for this work include a HP Laptop The Temperature Distribution Model:
installed with a Visual Basic program and corrosion rate data 𝐓𝐞(𝐱) = 𝐓𝐬 + (𝐓𝐢 – 𝐓𝐬) ×
collected from a multi-national company in Nigeria. 𝐗
𝐓𝐞(𝐋)– 𝐓𝐬 𝐋
The NORSOK STANDARD M-506 corrosion model shown ( (𝐓𝐢 ) (2.2)
– 𝐓𝐬)
in equation (2.1) was obtained from literature (NORSOK
STANDARD M-506, 2005) (CO2 Corrosion Rate The Fugacity Model:
Calculation Model, Rev. 2, 2005).
𝐂𝐎𝟐 = 𝐚 × 𝐏𝐂𝐎𝟐
𝐂𝐊 𝒕 = 𝐊 𝒕 × (𝐜𝐨𝟐)𝟎.𝟔𝟐 ×
𝐒 (𝟎.𝟏𝟒𝟔+𝟎.𝟎𝟑𝟐𝟒𝐥𝐨𝐠(𝐜𝐨𝟐))
( ) × (𝐩𝐇)t (2.1) 𝐚 = 𝟏𝟎(𝐏 × (𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟑𝟏 –
𝟏.𝟒
𝐓
))
𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐏  𝟐𝟓𝟎 𝐛𝐚𝐫 (2.3)
𝟏𝟗
The wall shear stress (S) model was modified. The following
𝟏.𝟒
assumptions were made in developing the wall shear stress 𝐚 = 𝟏𝟎(𝟐𝟓𝟎 × (𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟑𝟏 – 𝐓 )) 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐏 > 250 𝑏𝑎𝑟 (2.4)
model: we assumed only the case of stratified and dispersed
flow of oil-water in the pipeline, the three – layer flow model 2.1 Development of the algorithm:
for horizontal oil-water stratified flow was considered, etc. Figures 1 to 10 below shows the developed algorithms:
PrivateSub Button7_Click(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles Button7.Click
Const Pi AsSingle = 3.142
Dim Density, Velocity, Diameter, Area, MassFlowRate AsDouble
Density = Val(TextBox12.Text)
Velocity = Val(TextBox13.Text)
Diameter = Val(TextBox7.Text)
Area = Pi * (Diameter ^ 2) / 4 'calculate Area
MassFlowRate = (Density * Velocity * Area) 'calculate mass flow rate
TextBox18.Text = Str(MassFlowRate)
Dim OilFlowRate, WaterFlowRate, WaterCut AsDouble, X AsSingle
OilFlowRate = Val(TextBox15.Text)
WaterFlowRate = Val(TextBox14.Text)
WaterCut = WaterFlowRate / (WaterFlowRate + OilFlowRate) 'calculate water cut
X = WaterCut * 100
TextBox20.Text = Str(WaterCut)
TextBox25.Text = Str(X)
Figure 1: The Mass Flow Rate and Water Cut Calculation Algorithm

Dim FugacityCoefficient, Temperature, Fugacity, PCO2, Pressure AsDouble, u AsSingle

PCO2 = Val(TextBox6.Text)
Temperature = Val(ComboBox1.Text) + 273
Pressure = Val(TextBox5.Text)
If Pressure <= 250 Then
u = Pressure * (0.0031 - 1.4 / Temperature)
FugacityCoefficient = 10 ^ u
Fugacity = FugacityCoefficient * PCO2 'calculate CO2 Fugacity at Total System Pressure less or equal to 250 bar.
TextBox23.Text = Str(Fugacity)
ElseIf Pressure > 250 Then
u = 250 * (0.0031 - 1.4 / Temperature)
FugacityCoefficient = 10 ^ u
Fugacity = FugacityCoefficient * PCO2 'calculate CO2 Fugacity at Total System Pressure greater than 250 bar.
TextBox22.Text = Str(Fugacity)
EndIf

Figure 2: The CO2 Fugacity Calculation Algorithm

Figure 3: The Temperature Distribution Model Algorithm

UJET VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 www.ujetmouau.com Page 171

 UMUDIKE JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (UJET), VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 PAGE 170 - 181

Dim TempSurface, TempInlet, TotalPipeLength, TempExit, HeatCapacity, HeatTransferCoefficient AsDouble, G, v AsSingle

TempSurface = Val(TextBox2.Text)
TempInlet = Val(ComboBox1.Text)
Diameter = Val(TextBox7.Text)
MassFlowRate = Val(TextBox18.Text)
TotalPipeLength = Val(TextBox8.Text)
HeatCapacity = Val(TextBox4.Text)
HeatTransferCoefficient = Val(TextBox3.Text)
G = (HeatTransferCoefficient * Pi * Diameter) / ((MassFlowRate) * (HeatCapacity))
v = (-G * TotalPipeLength)
TempExit = (TempSurface - (TempSurface - TempInlet)) * Math.Exp(v) 'calculate Exit Fluid Temperature
TextBox10.Text = Str(TempExit)
Dim XdistanceAlongPipe, Texit AsDouble, n, B AsSingle
TempSurface = Val(TextBox2.Text)
TempInlet = Val(ComboBox1.Text)
TotalPipeLength = Val(TextBox8.Text)
TempExit = Val(TextBox10.Text)
XdistanceAlongPipe = Val(TextBox9.Text)
n = XdistanceAlongPipe / TotalPipeLength
B = (TempExit - TempSurface) / (TempInlet - TempSurface)
Texit = (TempSurface + (TempInlet - TempSurface)) * B ^ n 'calculate fluid exit temperature at distance X
TextBox11.Text = Str(Texit)

Dim Oilviscosityat20degrees, Temperaturekelvin, WaterViscosity AsDouble, Y AsSingle

Oilviscosityat20degrees = 1.002
Temperature = Val(ComboBox1.Text)
Temperaturekelvin = Temperature + 273
Y = (1.3272 * (20 - Temperature) - 0.001053 * (20 - Temperature) ^ 2) / (Temperaturekelvin + 105)
WaterViscosity = (Oilviscosityat20degrees * (10 ^ Y)) * 0.001 'Calculate Water Phase Viscosity.
Dim OilViscosity, TemperatureFahrenheit, OilAPI, MixtureViscosity AsDouble, C, ZX, R AsSingle
TemperatureFahrenheit = (1.8 * Val(ComboBox1.Text) + 32)
OilAPI = Val(TextBox16.Text)
C = 10 ^ (1.67083 - (0.017628 * OilAPI) - (0.61304 * Math.Log10(TemperatureFahrenheit)))
OilViscosity = ((10 ^ C)) * 0.001 'Calculate Oil Phase Viscosity.
WaterCut = Val(TextBox20.Text)
ZX = 1 / (1 + WaterCut)
R = WaterCut / (1 + WaterCut)
MixtureViscosity = OilViscosity * (ZX) + WaterViscosity * (R)
TextBox29.Text = Str(MixtureViscosity) 'Calculate Mixture Fluid Viscosity.

Figure 4: The Viscosity Calculation Algorithm

UJET VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 www.ujetmouau.com Page 172

 UMUDIKE JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (UJET), VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 PAGE 170 - 181

Dim ReynoldsNumberWater, ReynoldsNumberOil, ReynoldsNumberMixture, DensityWater, DensityOil, DensityMixture

AsDouble
DensityWater = Val(TextBox26.Text)
DensityOil = Val(TextBox27.Text)
DensityMixture = Val(TextBox28.Text)
ReynoldsNumberWater = (DensityWater * SuperficialWaterVelocity * Diameter) / (WaterViscosity) 'Calculate Water
Reynolds Number.
ReynoldsNumberOil = (DensityOil * SuperficialOilVelocity * Diameter) / (OilViscosity) ' Calculate Oil Reynolds Number.
ReynoldsNumberMixture = (DensityMixture * SuperficialMixtureVelocity * Diameter) / (MixtureViscosity) 'Calculate
Mixture Reynolds Number.
TextBox31.Text = Str(ReynoldsNumberMixture)

Dim FrictionFactorWater, FrictionFactorOil, FrictionFactorMixture, InterfacialFrictionFactor1, InterfacialFrictionFactor2

AsDouble
FrictionFactorWater = 0.046 / (ReynoldsNumberWater ^ 0.2) 'Calculate Water Friction Factor.
FrictionFactorOil = 0.046 / (ReynoldsNumberOil ^ 0.2) 'Calculate Oil Friction Factor.
FrictionFactorMixture = 0.046 / (ReynoldsNumberMixture ^ 0.2) 'Calculate Mixture Friction Factor.
InterfacialFrictionFactor1 = FrictionFactorMixture 'Friction Factor at the Interface of pure water layer/oil-water mixed
layer.
InterfacialFrictionFactor2 = FrictionFactorOil 'Friction Factor at the interface of oil-water layer/pure oil layer.
TextBox32.Text = Str(FrictionFactorMixture)

Figure 5: The Density Calculation Algorithm

Figure 6: The Superficial Fluid Velocity Calculation Algorithm

Figure 7: The Reynolds Number and Friction Factor Calculation Algorithm

Dim WaterVolFlowRate, OilVolFlowRate, MixedLayerVolFlowRate, TotalWaterVolFlowRate, TotalOilVolFlowRate AsDouble

Dim WaterCutatInversionPoint, SuperficialWaterVelocity, SuperficialOilVelocity, SuperficialMixtureVelocity, Area1 AsDouble
WaterVolFlowRate = Val(TextBox14.Text)
OilVolFlowRate = Val(TextBox15.Text)
Diameter = Val(TextBox7.Text)
Area1 = (Pi * (Diameter ^ 2)) / 4 'Calculate Area
MixedLayerVolFlowRate = (WaterVolFlowRate + OilVolFlowRate)
WaterCutatInversionPoint = 0.5 - 0.1108 * Math.Log10(10 ^ 3 * OilViscosity) 'Calculate Water Cut at the point of phase
inversion.
TotalWaterVolFlowRate = WaterVolFlowRate + (WaterCutatInversionPoint * MixedLayerVolFlowRate)
TotalOilVolFlowRate = OilVolFlowRate + ((1 - WaterCutatInversionPoint) * MixedLayerVolFlowRate)
SuperficialWaterVelocity = TotalWaterVolFlowRate / Area1 'Calculate Superficial Water Velocity.
SuperficialOilVelocity = TotalOilVolFlowRate / Area1 'Calculate Superficial Oil Velocity.
SuperficialMixtureVelocity = SuperficialOilVelocity + SuperficialWaterVelocity ' Calculate Superficial Mixture Fluid Velocity.
TextBox30.Text = Str(SuperficialMixtureVelocity)

UJET VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 www.ujetmouau.com Page 173

 UMUDIKE JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (UJET), VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 PAGE 170 - 181

Dim WaterDensity AsDouble

Temperature = Val(ComboBox1.Text)
WaterDensity = 1152.3 - (0.5116 * Temperature) 'calculate Water Density
TextBox26.Text = Str(WaterDensity)

Dim OilDensity, OilDensityat15degrees AsDouble

Temperature = Val(ComboBox1.Text)
OilDensityat15degrees = 880 'Oil Density at 15 degrees Celsius.
OilDensity = OilDensityat15degrees * (1 - 0.0007 * (Temperature - 15)) 'calculate Oil Density
TextBox27.Text = Str(OilDensity)

Dim WaterCut1, WaterCutofDispersedPhase, DensityofContinuousPhase, DensityofDispersedPhase, MixtureDensity AsDouble

WaterCut1 = Val(TextBox25.Text)
If (WaterCut1 > 50) Then'Determine Which Phase is Continuous or Dispersed.
Label32.Text = "Water is Continuous, Oil is Dispersed"
WaterCutofDispersedPhase = Val(TextBox20.Text)
DensityofContinuousPhase = Val(TextBox26.Text)
DensityofDispersedPhase = Val(TextBox27.Text)
MixtureDensity = ((WaterCutofDispersedPhase) * DensityofContinuousPhase) + ((1 - WaterCutofDispersedPhase) *
DensityofDispersedPhase)
TextBox28.Text = Str(MixtureDensity) 'Calculate Mixture Fluid Density.
Else
Label32.Text = "Oil is Continuous, Water is Dispersed"
WaterCutofDispersedPhase = Val(TextBox20.Text)
DensityofContinuousPhase = Val(TextBox27.Text)
DensityofDispersedPhase = Val(TextBox26.Text)
MixtureDensity = ((1 - WaterCutofDispersedPhase) * DensityofContinuousPhase) + (WaterCutofDispersedPhase *
DensityofDispersedPhase)
TextBox28.Text = Str(MixtureDensity) 'Calculate Mixture Fluid Density.
EndIf

Dim WaterShearStress, OilShearStress, MixtureShearStress, InterfacialShearStress1, InterfacialShearStress2,

MeanShearStress AsDouble
WaterShearStress = (FrictionFactorWater * DensityWater * (SuperficialWaterVelocity ^ 2)) / 2 'Calculate Water Phase
Shear Stress.
OilShearStress = (FrictionFactorOil * DensityOil * (SuperficialOilVelocity ^ 2)) / 2 'Calculate Oil Phase Shear Stress.
MixtureShearStress = (FrictionFactorMixture * DensityMixture * (SuperficialMixtureVelocity ^ 2)) / 2 'Calculate Mixture
Shear Stress.
InterfacialShearStress1 = (FrictionFactorMixture * DensityWater * (SuperficialMixtureVelocity - SuperficialWaterVelocity)
* (SuperficialMixtureVelocity - SuperficialWaterVelocity)) / 2
InterfacialShearStress2 = (FrictionFactorOil * DensityOil * (SuperficialOilVelocity - SuperficialMixtureVelocity) *
(SuperficialOilVelocity - SuperficialMixtureVelocity)) / 2
MeanShearStress = (MixtureShearStress + InterfacialShearStress1 + InterfacialShearStress2 + WaterShearStress +
OilShearStress) 'Calculate Mean Wall Shear Stress of Fluid.
TextBox37.Text = Str(MeanShearStress)

Figure 8: The Mean Wall Shear Stress Calculation Algorithm

UJET VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 www.ujetmouau.com Page 174

 UMUDIKE JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (UJET), VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 PAGE 170 - 181

PrivateSub Button15_Click(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles Button15.Click

Dim UnmitigatedCorrosionRate, TemperatureDependentConstant, MeanWallShearStress, C02Fugacity, pHFactor, Pressure AsDouble, n
AsSingle
Pressure = Val(TextBox5.Text)
TemperatureDependentConstant = Val(TextBox21.Text)
If Pressure <= 250 Then
C02Fugacity = Val(TextBox23.Text)
ElseIf Pressure > 250 Then
C02Fugacity = Val(TextBox22.Text)
EndIf
MeanWallShearStress = Val(TextBox37.Text)
If MeanWallShearStress < 0.0001 Then
MeanWallShearStress = 1
Else
MeanWallShearStress = Val(TextBox37.Text)
EndIf
pHFactor = Val(TextBox40.Text)
n = 0.146 + 0.0324 * Math.Log10(C02Fugacity)
UnmitigatedCorrosionRate = TemperatureDependentConstant * ((C02Fugacity) ^ 0.62) * ((MeanWallShearStress / 19) ^ n) * pHFactor
'Calculate Unmitigated Corrosion Rate.
TextBox38.Text = Str(UnmitigatedCorrosionRate)
TextBox38.Text = Str(Format(UnmitigatedCorrosionRate, ".###")) 'Convert the Corrosion Rate to 4 Significant Figures.
If UnmitigatedCorrosionRate < 0.01 Then'Predict the Severity Level of the Unmitigated Corrosion Rate.
TextBox39.Text = 1
ElseIf UnmitigatedCorrosionRate <= 0.1 Then
TextBox39.Text = 2
ElseIf UnmitigatedCorrosionRate <= 1.0 Then
TextBox39.Text = 3
ElseIf UnmitigatedCorrosionRate <= 10.0 Then
TextBox39.Text = 4
ElseIf UnmitigatedCorrosionRate > 10.0 Then
TextBox39.Text = 5
EndIf
Dim Minimumthickness, LifetimeofPipe, PipeThicknessbeforeDegradation AsDouble
PipeThicknessbeforeDegradation = Val(TextBox17.Text)
UnmitigatedCorrosionRate = Val(TextBox38.Text)
Minimumthickness = Val(TextBox24.Text)
LifetimeofPipe = (PipeThicknessbeforeDegradation - Minimumthickness) / UnmitigatedCorrosionRate 'Calculate Lifetime of Pipe
Material.
TextBox42.Text = Str(LifetimeofPipe)
TextBox42.Text = Convert.ToInt64(LifetimeofPipe)
Dim Inhibitorefficiency, MitigatedCorrosionRate AsDouble
UnmitigatedCorrosionRate = Val(TextBox38.Text)
Inhibitorefficiency = Val(TextBox19.Text)
MitigatedCorrosionRate = UnmitigatedCorrosionRate * (100 - Inhibitorefficiency) / 100 'Calculate the Mitigated Corrosion Rate.
TextBox41.Text = Str(MitigatedCorrosionRate)
TextBox41.Text = Str(Format(MitigatedCorrosionRate, ".###")) 'Convert Mitigated Corrosion Rate to the nearest whole number.

Figure 9: The Corrosion Rate Calculation Algorithm

Figure 10: The Temperature Dependent Constant and pH Factor Calculation Algorithm

UJET VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 www.ujetmouau.com Page 175

 UMUDIKE JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (UJET), VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 PAGE 170 - 181

PrivateSub ComboBox1_SelectedIndexChanged(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles

ComboBox1.SelectedIndexChanged
Dim pH AsDouble
pH = Val(TextBox44.Text)
SelectCase ComboBox1.SelectedIndex
Case 0
TextBox21.Text = "4.762"
If pH > 4.5 Then'calculate the pH factor
TextBox40.Text = (5.1885 - (1.2353 * pH) + (0.0708 * pH ^ 2))
Else
TextBox40.Text = (2.0676 - (0.2309 * pH))
EndIf
Case 1
TextBox21.Text = "4.97025"
If pH > 4.5 Then
TextBox40.Text = (5.1885 - (1.2353 * pH) + (0.0708 * pH ^ 2))
Else
TextBox40.Text = (2.0676 - (0.2309 * pH))
EndIf
Case 2
TextBox21.Text = "5.1785"
If pH > 4.5 Then
TextBox40.Text = (5.1885 - (1.2353 * pH) + (0.0708 * pH ^ 2))
Else
TextBox40.Text = (2.0676 - (0.2309 * pH))
EndIf
Case 3
TextBox21.Text = "5.38675"
If pH > 4.5 Then
TextBox40.Text = (5.1885 - (1.2353 * pH) + (0.0708 * pH ^ 2))
Else
TextBox40.Text = (2.0676 - (0.2309 * pH))
EndIf
Case 4
TextBox21.Text = "5.595"
If pH > 4.5 Then
TextBox40.Text = (5.1885 - (1.2353 * pH) + (0.0708 * pH ^ 2))
Else
TextBox40.Text = (2.0676 - (0.2309 * pH))
EndIf
Case 5
TextBox21.Text = "5.80325"
If pH > 4.5 Then
TextBox40.Text = (5.1885 - (1.2353 * pH) + (0.0708 * pH ^ 2))
Else
TextBox40.Text = (2.0676 - (0.2309 * pH))
EndIf

Implementation of the models was done using Visual Basic,

2.2 Implementation of the Developed Algorithm
and a computational software application was created to run
under Microsoft windows environment.
Figure 11 shows the user’s interface of the computational
CO2 corrosion rate prediction program, Figure 12 The CO2
Corrosion Rate Calculation Flowchart

UJET VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 www.ujetmouau.com Page 176

 UMUDIKE JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (UJET), VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 PAGE 170 - 181

the pipeline and to also analyze the effects of different

parameters.

2.4 Validation of the Developed Algorithm

2.3 Simulation Using the Developed Algorithm The developed algorithm was validated using data taken
The simulation input parameters were obtained from the oil from Nigerian oil and gas industry for pipelines transporting
company operating the Oil Mining License (OML 61) and oil and water against SHELL’S HYDROCORR.
were used as input data to simulate corrosion rate along

Figure 11: The User’s Interface of the Computational CO2 Corrosion Rate Prediction Software

STAR

Input pH, Inlet Temp., Surrounding Temp., Heat Transfer

Coefficient, Heat capacity, Diameter, Density, Velocity, Total
Pipe Length, Distance x along Pipe, pipe thickness, Pressure,
PCO2, API, Water Flowrate, Oil Flowrate, Inhibitor Efficiency.
UJET VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 www.ujetmouau.com Page 177

Water cut =Qw / (Qw + Qo) Mass Flow Rate = VA

Exit temperature at total pipe length and distance x along pipe

 UMUDIKE JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (UJET), VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 PAGE 170 - 181

Figure 12: The CO2 Corrosion Rate Calculation Flowchart

80 PIPE DISTANCE VS TEMPERATURE @ FLUID

66
56 VELOCITY 0.31m/s
Temperature (oC)

60 47
40
34
40 29
24
20 20 20 20
20

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Pipe Distance (m)
Figure 13: A Graph of Pipe Distance Versus Temperature

3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Pipeline Length; Figure 16 shows a graph of comparison of
3.1 Results the developed algorithm with HYDROCOR at different
Figure 13 shows the graph of Distance Versus Temperature operating conditions; and Figure 17 shows a graph of
along the total pipeline length; Figure 14 shows the graph of comparison of the developed algorithm with OML 61 at
Corrosion Rate along the pipeline length; Figure 15 shows a different temperatures.
graph of Corrosion Rate Versus Temperature along the

CORROSION RATE VS DISTANCE ALONG PIPE LENGTH

2.692
3 2.456
2.275
Corrosion Rate (mm/yr)

2.5 1.94
1.51 1.67
2 1.395
1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

Distance (m)
Figure 14: A Graph of Corrosion Rate along the Pipeline Length

UJET VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 www.ujetmouau.com Page 178

 UMUDIKE JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (UJET), VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 PAGE 170 - 181

3
CORROSION
2.692
RATE VS TEMPERATURE, OTHER VARIABLES NOT CONSTANT
2.456 ALONG THE PIPE
2.275
Corrosion Rate (mm/yr)
2.5
1.94
2 1.67
1.51 1.395
1.5 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.18

0.5

0
66 56 47 40 34 29 24 20 20 20 20
Temperature (oC)
Figure 15: A Graph of Corrosion Rate versus Temperature along the Pipeline Length

DEVELOPED ALGORITHM VS
1 DEVELOPED
HYDROCOR
Corrosion Rate (mm/yr)

0.8 SOFTWARE

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
1 2 3
Operating Condition
Figure 16: A Comparison of the Developed Algorithm with HYDROCOR at Different Operating Conditions

DEVELOPED ALGORITHM VS OML 61

DEVELOPED SOFTWARE
1.6 1.436 1.453 OML 61
Corrosion Rate (mm/yr)

1.4
1.2
0.96 0.939
1
0.727 0.729
0.8
0.6 0.494 0.482
0.409
0.4 0.259
0.2
0
46 59 61 64 70
Temperature (oC)

Figure 17: A Comparison of the Developed Algorithm with OML 61 at Different Temperatures

3.2 Discussion of Simulation Results pipelines (where no intermediate heating stations are
It was observed that the temperature gradually decreased installed to warm the oil) and in pipelines without heat
as the oil flows through the pipeline, see Figure 13 This can insulation, the temperature will eventually decline to the
be ascribed to the gradual decrease in temperature from surrounding temperature some kilometres after the inlet
inlet temperature at distance (0 metres) due to heat transfer point depending on many factors such as the surrounding
from the heated oil to the surrounding. In isothermal

UJET VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 www.ujetmouau.com Page 179

 UMUDIKE JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (UJET), VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016
temperature, the overall heat transfer coefficient, velocity,
and fluid heat capacity (Mohyaldin et al., 2011).
From Figure 14, it was noticed that there was a change of
corrosion rate as the fluid flowed via the total pipeline length.
Also, Figure 15 showed a similar result as the temperature
was varied with corrosion rate. It was observed that from
Figure 14 and Figure 15, the corrosion rate increased to a
particular temperature and distance (56oC and 1,000 metres
in this case) and decreased as the fluid flows over the
pipeline distance until it remained constant at a particular
temperature and distance (20 oC and 7,000 metres in this
case). This is in agreement with the findings of (Nesic, 2007)
who found that the peak in the corrosion rate is usually seen
between 60oC and 80oC, depending on water chemistry and
flow conditions.
3.3 Discussion of Validation Results
Figure 16 showed the comparison of the developed
algorithm with SHELL’S HYDROCOR. The results are in
good agreement. To ascertain the statistical accuracy of the
predicted values, standard error (SE) calculation was
performed. HYDROCOR had a SE of 0.08 while the
developed software had a SE of 0.2.
To ascertain the reliability of the predicted values,
confidence interval (CI) calculation was carried out. At
confidence level of 90%, HYDROCOR had a confidence
interval between 0.04 mm/year and 0.32mm/year. This is to
say that at 90% confidence level, it can be said, we are 90%
confident the mean corrosion rate is between 0.04 and
0.32mm/year. At the same confidence level of 90%, the
developed algorithm had a confidence interval between 0.04
and 0.73 mm/year. This is to say also that at 90% confidence
level, it can be said, we are 90% confident the mean
corrosion rate predicted is between 0.04 and 0.73mm/year.
Furthermore, the developed algorithm prediction was
compared with operating field data obtained from a Nigerian
oil and gas company (OML 61). The results are shown in
Figure 17.
To ascertain the accuracy of the model prediction, the
average percent error (APE) and average absolute percent
error (AAPE) of the data source used were calculated. AAPE
is used to evaluate the prediction capability of the model.
The lower the value of AAPE; the better the precision of the
calculated values that can be achieved from the model. The
APE for the developed algorithm was 19.74%, meaning the
model over predicted compared to the operating field data.
Often times, predicted values and measured values are
never exactly the same. The developed algorithm also had
an AAPE of 19.74%. This value cannot be said to be
accurate or not since the range of percentage error where it
is regarded as accurate or not accurate is a function of
application.
To measure the statistical accuracy of the predicted values,
SE was calculated. The developed algorithm had a SE of
0.18. To determine the reliability of the predicted values,
UJET VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 www.ujetmouau.com
PAGE 170 - 181
confidence interval (CI) was calculated. At 95% confidence
level, the developed algorithm had a CI between 0.70 and
1.41 mm/year. This means that we are 95% confident that
the mean corrosion rate predicted is between 0.70 and 1.41
mm/year.
3.0 CONCLUSION
A Visual Basic Algorithm for determining the corrosion rate
of oil pipelines in CO2 environment using modified NORSOK
M-506 model has been developed. The NORSOK M-506
model has been modified to include a temperature
distribution model that predicts the temperature at any point
along the oil pipeline. The entire model has been
successfully implemented using an enhance-able; user
friendly Visual BASIC to create a computational Algorithm
that can run under any Microsoft windows.
Simulation and validation using the developed algorithm was
carried out. The simulation and validation results showed an
acceptable agreement. The validation done by comparing
the Algorithm prediction with SHELL’S HYDROCOR was
satisfactory. The developed computational algorithm when
implemented is user friendly and has a computation time of
less than one minute for the user to input data and see the
output.
REFERENCES
Bodude, M., Adeosun, S. and Ayoola, W. (2012)
“Comparative Studies on Mechanical and Corrosion
Characteristics of API 5LX60 Steel and RST 37-2 Steel”
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied
Sciences (JETEAS) 3(1): 137-143.
CO2 Corrosion Rate Calculation Model, Rev. 2 (2005)
NORSOK standard No. M-
506,http://www.standard.no/en/Sectors/Petroleum/NORSO
KStandard Categories/MMaterial/M-5061, Standards
Norway.(August,2013)
Guidelines for Prediction of CO2 Corrosion in Oil and Gas
Production Systems (2009), Institute for Energy Technology
(IFE). Report No. IFE/KR/E -2009/003, ISSN 0333 – 2039,
Norway.
Mantell, C. (1958) Engineering Materials Hand Book.
McGraw Hill Company, New York (First Edition), pp.37.
Mohyaldin, M., Elkhatib, N. and Ismail, M. (2011) Coupling
NORSOK CO2 Corrosion Prediction Model with Pipelines
Thermal/Hydraulic Models to Simulate CO2 Corrosion along
Pipelines. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology,
Vol. 6, No. 6, 709 – 719.
Nesic, S. (2007) Key Issues Related to Modeling of Internal
Corrosion of Oil and Gas Pipelines – A Review. Elsevier
Page 180
 UMUDIKE JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (UJET), VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 PAGE 170 - 181

Journal on Corrosion Science, Corrosion Science 49, 4308

– 4338.

Ossai, C. (2012) “Predictive Modeling of Wellhead Corrosion

Due to Operating Conditions: A Field Data Approach”
International Scholarly Research Network, ISRN Corrosion,
Volume 2012, Article ID 237025.

Oyatogun, G., Adeoye, M., Olorunniwo, O., and Umoru, L.

(2011) “Failure Analysis of a Ruptured Trunkline” Journal of
Failure Analysis and Prevention, ISSN 1547 –7029 Volume
11, No. 5.

Rajput, R. (2010) A Textbook of Material Science and

Engineering (S.I Units). S.K. KATARIA and Sons, 6, Guru
Nanak Market, Nai Sarak, Delhi, pp. 854 – 866.

Revie, W. and Uhlig, H. (2008) Corrosion and Corrosion

Control: An Introduction to Corrosion Science and
Engineering, Fourth Edition. A John Wiley and Sons, Inc,
Publication, New Jersey.

UJET VOL. 2, NO. 2, DEC 2016 www.ujetmouau.com Page 181

View publication stats