Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
STUDY REPORT
Author
Check and Verify
07/2010
Laras Wuri Dianningrum
Patria Indrayana
FO/AMB/MTH
ii
LEMBAR PENGESAHAN
Menerangkan bahwa :
Laras Wuri Dianningrum
13007075
Teknik Kimia
Fakultas Teknologi Industri
Institut Teknologi Bandung
Telah menyelesaikan,
Program On the Job Training
Di Departemen FO/AMB/MTH
TOTAL E&P INDONESIE
East Kalimantan District, Balikpapan
Telah disetujui dan disahkan
Di Balikpapan, tanggal 30 Juli 2010
Pembimbing
Patria Indrayana
Head of HRD Department
Bayu Parmadi
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LEMBAR
PENGESAHAN...........................................................................................................................
ii TABLE OF
CONTENTS..............................................................................................................................
iii LIST OF
TABLES......................................................................................................................................
.. v LIST OF
FIGURES................................ ................................................................ ..................................
.. vii CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background of
Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2
Objectives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.3
Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.4
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
...............................................................2
CHAPTER II BEKAPAI
OVERVIEW................................ ................................................................ ............. 5
CHAPTER III LITERATURE
STUDY............................................................................................................. 8
3.1
Multiphase Flow in
Pipeline. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.1.1 Multiphase Flow
Properties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.1.2 Flow Regimes Determination in Multiphase
Flow (Gas and Liquid System). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3.1.3 Experimental
Correlation in Horizontal Pipe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3.1.4 Empirical Correlation in Vertical Pipe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3.1.5
Beggs and Brill Correlation................................................................................................... 17
3.2
Sand Transportability in
Pipe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.3
Critical Flow Velocity in Sand Transport. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 3.3.1 Horizontal Pipe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
..........................................................................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 3.3.2 Vertical
Pipe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
CHAPTER IV BEKAPAI
OBSERVATION................................................................ .................................... 29
4.1
Bekapai Production Network Configuration and Gas Lift.........................................................
29
4 .2
Well Head Data and Maximal Deliverable Potential in Bekapai. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.3
Deposit Particle
Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
CHAPTER V BASIC CALCULATION FOR FLOW REGIME PREDICTION (COMPARISON
OF METHOD)......... 33
5.1
Empirical Correlation(Mandhane, Aziz et al. versus Beggs &
Brill). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.2
OLGA versus Beggs & Brill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
CHAPTER VI RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION................................................................ ................................ 38
iv
6.1 Analysis of Sand Behavior in Correlation with Flow
Regime. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
6.1.1 Experimental Correlation (Mandhane, Aziz et al. versus Beggs &
Brill). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
6.1.1.1 Horizontal Pipe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
6.1.1.2 Vertical Pipe/Upflow Risers....................................................................................... 46
6.1.2 OLGA versus Beggs &
Brill..................................................................................................... 49
6.1.2.1 Oil-Gas Flow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
6.1.2.1.18” BK-BP1................................................................................................. 51
6.1.2.1.212” BB-BP1............................................................................................... 54
6.1.2.1.36” BF-BL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.1.2.1.46” BH-
BG. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
6.1.2.1.512” BL-BA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
6.1.2.2 Water-Gas
Flow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
6.1.2.2.1 12” BL-BA.................................................................................................. 66
6.1.2.2.26 ” BH-BG................................................................................................... 68
6.1.2.2.3 6” BF-
BL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 6.1.2.2.46 ” BJ-BB. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
6.1.2.2.5 8” BK-
BP1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 6.1.2.2.61 2” BB-BP1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
6.1.3 Main
Finding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 6.1.3.1 Experimental
Correlation (Mandhane, Aziz et al. versus Beggs & Brill). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
6.1.3.2 OLGA versus Beggs & Brill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
6.2
Analysis of Sand Settling
Condition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 6.2.1 Horizontal Pipe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
..........................................................................
. . . . . . . . . 83 6.2.2 Vertical
Pipe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 6.2.3 Main Finding. . . . . . .
..........................................................................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
CHAPTER VII CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................ ....... 91
7.1
Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
7.2
Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
= relative molecular weight
3.1.2 Flow Regimes Determination in Multiphase Flow (Gas and Liquid System)
The determination of the expected flow regime allows the proper selection of correlations or mechanistic
model for calculating the pressure gradient and liquid hold-up. In addition, for operating purpose it is
important to know which type of flow regime is predicted at various locations of the pipeline and obviously at
the outlet. Phenomena such as erosion, corrosion and vibration depend on the flow regime.
This object has been studied in wide range of fields and applied in many sectors especially in oil and gas
production. This is not an easy task, however, many researchers must find the exact correlation to relate
[ m/ s] (it is customary to use the superficial velocity instead
the flow rate).
b) The gas superficial velocity,
[
/
].
c) Liquid density,
[
/
].
d) Gas density,
[
/
].
e) Liquid viscosity,
Analysis of Sand Transportability in Pipelines
10
.
].
f) Gas viscosity,
[
.
].
g) Pipe diameter,
[
].
h) Acceleration of gravity,
[
/
].
i) Surface tension,
[N/m].
j) Pipe roughness, e [m].
k) Pipe inclination,
(Taitel, 1999) .
Theoretically, the method used for the prediction of flow pattern can be classified with respect to
two categories:
Experimental correlations
The first approach for the prediction of flow patterns is based on experimental data that are plotted on a flow
pattern map. The earliest flow regime map is attributed to Baker (1954). Many more have since been
suggested for horizontal, vertical and inclined pipes. Then they are divided into three main catagories based
[
Analysis of Sand Transportability in Pipelines
11
Figure 3.1 Experimental correlation catagories
Mechanistic model
In this procedure one should identify the dominant physical phenomena that cause a specific transition.
Then the physical phenomena are formulated mathematically and transition lines are calculated and can be
presented as an algebraic relation or with respect to dimensionless coordinates. It still needs correlation
and closure law for input some parameters to solve the momentum balance equation. However, there is no
guarantee that this method leads always to correct results, but the results based on this method then
extrapolation to different conditions is much safer than those based solely on experimental correlation
(Taitel, 1999).
The mechanistic model developments are divided into three categories:
a.Comprehensive Models (1st generation)
This model priors a separate prediction of flow pattern and pressure gradient prediction, for
example: Taitel & Dukler Flow pattern and Xiao et a.l (Taitel & Dukler modification).
b.Unified Models (2nd generation)
Different from the previous one, this model is considered to consist only one prediction for
determining flow pattern & pressure gradient. For example: TUFFP unified model (Zhang et al.).
c. Integrated Unified Model of Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow
Experimental
correlation
Catagory A
(No slippage and no
flow pattern
consideration)
Pettmann&Carpenter,B
axendel&Thomas,Fanch
er&Brown
Catagory B
(Slippage considered,
no flow pattern
consideration)
Hagedorn&Brown,Gray,
Asheim
Catagory C
(Slippage and flow
pattern consideration)
Dun&Ros,Orkiszewski,A
ziz,etc
Analysis of Sand Transportability in Pipelines
12
This is somewhat called “future generation” of multiphase flow modeling and until this day the
experiments and current studies are still performed.
So far those methods that had been explained are limited to the steady state flow condition. The problem
occurred when they need to be applied in real situation on field which is preferably transient one. The
mechanistic models for this case are developed by many universities and companies like SINTEF, IFE, IFP,
University of Tulsa, etc. Software like OLGA and TACITE are widely known among the practices to solve
The Taitel & Dukler (1976) flow model seems the most accurate one, even if its accuracy is decreasing for
large pipeline diameters. The Taitel & Dukler approach is based on a combination of theoretical
considerations of classical fluid mechanics. But it is more difficult to solve in manual calculation, so that this
model required. Other map commonly used was developed by Gregory, Aziz, and Mandhane for horizontal
flow. It has accuracy about 70% approximately and has considered the liquid hold up and pressure drop
The boundaries between the various flow patterns in a flow pattern map occur because a regime becomes
unstable as the boundary (effect of shear force) is approached and growth of this instability causes
The other side, there are other serious difficulties with most of the existing literature on flow pattern maps,
such Taitel-Duckler’s. One of the basic fluid mechanical problems is that these maps are often dimensional and
therefore apply only to the specific pipe sizes and fluids employed by the investigator. Also there may be
several possible flow patterns whose occurence may depend on the initial conditions, specifically on the
In particular, horizontal flow regime maps must not be used for vertical flow, and vertical flow regime maps
must not be used for horizontal flow. In vertical flow the force gravity opposes the dynamic forces. This
result in slippage therefore it exhibits some different characteristics than horizontal flow and may be more
complicated.
Dispersed
Flow
Bubble
(Small gas -liquid ratio,
continuous phase: liquid,
very low slip velocity)
Mist/Spray
(Very high gas flow rate,
very high gas-liquid ratio,
continuous phase: gas)
Segregated
Flow
Stratified
(high gas-liquid ratio,
medium gas flow rate, the
fraction of each section is
remain constant)
Annular
Intermittent
Flow
Slug
(medium gas-liquid ratio,
high liquid flow rate)
Plug
(more transition regime
wavy)
valid for a wide range of oil and gas mixtures and flow regimes. Although the correlation is intended for
using with dry oil/gas mixtures, it can also be applicable to wet mixtures with a suitable correction. For water
contents less than 10%, the Duns-Ros correlation (with a correction factor) has been reported to work well
in the bubble, slug (plug), and froth regions. The pressure profile prediction performance of the Duns & Ros
Gas-Liquid Ratio (GLR). The pressure drop is over predicted for a wide range of GLR. The
errors become especially large (> 20%) for GLR greater than 5000.
Water-Cut. The Duns-Ros model is not applicable for multiphase flow mixtures of oil, water,
and gas. However, the correlation can be used with a suitable correction factor as mentioned
above (Rao, 1998).
Figure 3.5 Duns and Ros flow regime map
(N = Liquid Velocity Number, RN = Gas Velocity Number based on Eaton Correlation)
In Region I, at low gas numbers and high liquid numbers, one encounters a liquid with gas bubbles in it, as
long as the gas-oil ratio is relatively low and the flowing pressure gradient primarily is the static head plus
For superficial liquid velocities less than 0,4 m/s (1,3 ft/s), increased gas flow causes the bubbles to
combine and form plugs. As gas flow increases further these plugs collapse and form slugs. In these
If Vsl is still less than 0,4 m/s but Vsg is about 15 m/s, or greater, the slug flow of Region II changes to mist
flow in Region III.At this point the gas becomes the continuous phase with the liquid in droplet form and as
film along the wall. In Region III wall friction is a major factor in pressure loss.
Froth flow which occurs across the lines of Regions I and II occurs at high liquid velocities, Duns and Ros
expect it to occur when Vsl is greater then 1,6 m/s. At such rates no plug or slug flow was observed. No set
For manual calculation, Aziz is slightly more accurate than Duns and Ros due to the regime boundaries and
calculation steps. This method is similar with Mandhane et.al because only based on superficial velocity of
gas and liquid except it has been corrected for the fluid property by applying dimensionless numbers.