OE 6007

SLUGGING n CONTROL
July-Nov 2012


SLUGS
Pipelines that transport both gas and
liquids together, known as two-phase flow,
can operate in a flow regime known as
slugging flow or slug flow.
Under the influence of gravity liquids will
tend to settle on the bottom of the pipeline,
while the gases occupy the top section of
the pipeline.
SLUGS
Under certain operating conditions gas
and liquid are not evenly distributed
throughout the pipeline, but travel as large
plugs with mostly liquids or mostly gases
through the pipeline.
These large plugs are called slugs.
Slugs exiting the pipeline can overload the
gas/liquid handling capacity of the plant at the
pipeline outlet, as they are often produced at a
much larger rate than the equipment is designed
for.
The occurrence of slug flow in a
transportation pipeline can cause many
problems in design and operation processes
which include kinetic force on fittings and
vessels,
pressure cycling,
control instability and inadequate phase
separation.
Slugging affects greatly the design of
receiving facilities.
SLUGGING (Ch 18.6)
In gas condensate systems, larger lines
result in more liquid being retained in the
pipeline at low rates.
When the flow rate is increased, much of the
liquid can be swept out, potentially
overwhelming the liquid handling capability
of the receiving facilities.
The facilities can be flooded and damaged if
the slugs larger than the slug catcher
capacity.
SLUGGING
Therefore, quantifying the slug size,
frequency and velocity is necessary prior to
equipment design.
SLUGGING
The pressure at the bottom of the riser can
vary if the holdup in the riser is not about the
same as in the line feeding it.
If the riser holdup is too large and the gas
velocity is too small to provide continuous
liquid lift, too much of the liquid reverses and
flows downward.
Liquid accumulates at the base, causing an
unstable pressure situation. This is relieved
by large liquid slugs periodically leaving the
riser at a high velocity.
SLUGGING
The changes in liquid amount and the
corresponding pressure changes can be
dramatic.
A large "Slug catcher" installation can be
provided onshore, but it is uneconomic to set
on the platform.
This is one of the practical reasons why a
pipeline section immediately ahead of the riser
should be horizontal or have a slightly upward
slope of 2 to 5 degrees.
SLUGGING
The section length probably should be several
times the riser height.
The upward incline eliminates a possible "sump"
effect and serves to decrease pressure/holdup up
instabilities.
Severe slugging in the riser can be enhanced by a
negative pipeline inclination just prior to it.
Actually, severe slugging is unlikely if there is a
positive inclination.
SLUGGING
Figure shows the effect of mass flow rate of two-
phase flow to the flow stability.
SLUGGING
Riser flow stability vs. flow rate.
Higher flow rate helps to decrease slug and
increase flow stability in flowline.
Higher system pressures also increase the
tendency for a stable flow, holding a back
pressure (choking) at the top of the riser can be
used to minimize severe slugging.
The flow in a riser may differ from that in a
wellbore which has a relatively long horizontal
flowline at the end of it.
Holdup and surging from that horizontal flowline is
transmitted to the relatively short riser.
SLUGGING
The riser may have to handle far more liquid than
a well because the flowline can feed it liquid
surges that far exceed those possible by gas-lift or
reservoir mechanisms.
SLUGGING
In many oil and gas developments
incorporating multiphase flowlines, the
possibility of slugs or surges is one of the
most important flow assurance concerns
due to the excessive demands, large
changes in oil/gas flow rates place upon
the processing facilities.
SLUGGING
Flow assurance is a relatively new term in
oil and gas industry.
It refers to ensuring successful and
economical flow of hydrocarbon stream from
reservoir to the point of sale.
Flow assurance is extremely diverse,
encompassing many discrete and
specialized subjects and bridging across the
full gamut of engineering disciplines.
FLOW ASSURANCE
Besides network modeling and transient multiphase
simulation, flow assurance involves effectively handling many
solid deposits, such as, gas hydrates asphaltene, wax, scale,
and naphthenates.

Flow assurance is most critical task during deep water
energy production because of the high pressures and low
temperature (~4 degree Celsius) involved.

The financial loss from production interruption or asset
damage due to flow assurance mishap can be astronomical.


FLOW ASSURANCE
What compounds the flow assurance task even further is
that these solid deposits can interact with each other
[4]
and
can cause catastrophic blockage formation in pipelines and
result in flow assurance failure.

Flow assurance includes thermal investigation of pipelines,
making sure the temperature is above the hydrate's formation
temperature. Another important aspect of flow assurance is
evaluation of erosion due to sand in pipelines and equipment.
FLOW ASSURANCE
Multiphase surges come in three
forms:
1. Hydrodynamic Slugs;
2. Terrain Induced Slugs;
3. Operationally Induced Surges:

SLUGGING
Hydrodynamic Slugs;
formed from the stratified flow regime
due to instability of waves at certain flow
rates.
2. Terrain Induced Slugs;
caused by accumulation and periodic
purging of liquid in elevation changes
along the flowline, particularly at low
flow rates.

SLUGGING
3. Operationally Induced Surges:
formed in the system during operation
transfer between steady state and
transient state; for example, during start-
up or pigging operations.
SLUGGING
Terrain slugging is caused by the elevations in the
pipeline, which follows the ground elevation or the sea bed.
Liquid can accumulate at a low point of the pipeline until
sufficient pressure builds up behind it. Once the liquid is
pushed out of the low point, it can form a slug.

Hydrodynamic slugging is caused by gas flowing at a
fast rate over a slower flowing liquid phase. The gas will
form waves on the liquid surface, which may grow to bridge
the whole cross-section of the line. This creates a blockage
on the gas flow, which travels as a slug through the line.

SLUGGING
Riser-based slugging, also known as severe slugging, is
associated with the pipeline risers often found in offshore
oil production facilities. Liquids accumulate at the bottom of
the riser until sufficient pressure is generated behind it to
push the liquids over the top of the riser, overcoming the
static head. Behind this slug of liquid follows a slug of gas,
until sufficient liquids have accumulated at the bottom to
form a new liquid slug.

Pigging slugs are caused by pigging operations in the
pipeline. The pig is designed to push all or most of the
liquids contents of the pipeline to the outlet. This
intentionally creates a liquid slug.
SLUGGING
Hydrodynamic slugs are initiated by the
instability of waves on the gas-liquid
interface in stratified flow under certain
flowing conditions.
Figure shows a formation process of
hydrodynamic slugging from a stratified flow,
HYDRODYNAMIC
SLUGGING

(a) the interface of gas/liquid is lifted to the top of the pipe
when the velocity difference between gas phase and liquid
phase is high enough.
This wave growth is triggered by the Kelvin-Helmholtz
instability,
(b) once the wave reaches the top of pipe, it forms a slug.
The slug is pushed by the gas and so travels at a greater
velocity than the liquid film, and more liquid is then swept
into the slug,
(c) gas entrainment reduces the average liquid holdup in
the slug, increasing the turbulence within the slug.
HYDRODYNAMIC SLUGGING
A main part of the frictional pressure drop in multiphase
flow is thought to be due to the turbulent region within
the slug.

Thus the size of the turbulent region can have a
significant effect on the frictional pressure losses in a
pipeline.

Two-phase flow pattern maps indicate hydrodynamic
slugging, but slug length correlations are quite uncertain.

Tracking of the development of the individual slugs along
the pipeline is necessary to estimate the volume of the
liquid surges out of the pipeline.
HYDRODYNAMIC SLUGGING
Effect of pipeline topography to
flow pattern

Figure compares the flow patterns of a simple horizontal
topography and one with some undulations.
The multiphase flow in undulate flowline switches
between the stratified and slug flow regimes,
implying that not only could the slug sizes differ
markedly but the pressure drops could be very
different too.
Few pipelines have constant inclinations, most
undulate following the natural terrain.
When modeling multiphase flow in lower flow
rates, it is important to represent these
undulations as faithfully as possible.
At higher flow rates, undulations may not have
much impact on predictions.
TERRAIN SLUGGING
Terrain Slugging

Terrain slugs can be very severe, causing large pressure
variations and liquid surges out of pipeline.
Terrain slugging is a transient situation which requires a
dynamic model to predict and describe.
When the minimum flow rate is defined as the terrain
slugging boundary, a region without severe slugging
should be determined as a function of watercut
(Volumetric flow rate of water /(total volumetric flow rate
of oil and water) and GLR (gas to liquid ratio), including
gas lift.
In cases where the predicted slugging causes liquid or
gas handling problems, the effect of additional choking
upstream of the separator should be determined.
Terrain Slugging

It may be difficult to design a slug catcher to cope with
the magnitude of terrain slugs.
If the transportation system terminates in a vertical riser
onto a receiving platform, the passage of the slug from
the horizontal pipeline to the vertical riser results in cyclic
flow effects.
As the slug decelerates into the vertical riser the
following gas bubble is compressed, compression
continues until sufficient energy is generated to
accelerate the slug from the riser.
When the wellhead pressure is limited, the vertical riser
from the seabed into the platform may form a
backpressure due to slugs, and it will limit well
production.
Terrain Slugging

In such circumstances the vertical pressure
which loss can be reduced if a slug catcher is
located on the seabed, and the gas and liquid
phases are separated; the liquid is pumped to
the surface with the gas free flowing to the
platform through a separate riser.
An alternative is the inject gas at the base of the
riser, which will lighten the fluid column and
minimizes vertical pressure losses
Formation of riser slugging.
Figure shows a slug formation process in a pipeline-riser
system
(a) low spots fills with liquid and flow is blocked;
(b) pressure builds up behind the blockage;
(c) and (d) when the pressure becomes high enough,
gas blows liquid out of the low spot as a slug.

Riser Slugging

Liquid accumulates at the base of the
riser, blocking the flow of gas phase.
This liquid packet builds up until the gas
pressure is sufficient high to overcome the
hydrostatic head and blow the liquid slug
from the riser.
Slug lengths can be 2-3 times the riser
height.
Start-up Slugging
Start-up Slugging
Slugs forms in the start-up operation process because of
transformation from a steady-state to a transient process.

The start-up simulations should be performed starting from shut-in
conditions at representative operating conditions throughout the field
life.

A range of start-up rates, consistent with reservoir management
constraints, should be evaluated.

If necessary, artificial lift to mitigate start-up slugs should be
evaluated.

For gas lift, the required gas lift rate should be determined.

If lift gas is unavailable until it is obtained from the production, this
operating constraint should be included in the simulations.
Pigging

Pigging
Figure shows the flowrate variations of liquid and gas at
a riser base due to pigging.
When the slug is big enough, the full riser base will be
filled with liquid phase.
The simulations of the pigging operation should be
performed where pigging is required.
The time for the pigging operation and the pig velocity as
a function of time should be reported.
For a round trip pigging, the inlet and outlet
temperature, pressure and flow rate as a function of time
should be analyzed.

Flowrate variations due to pigging.

Slug Detection and Control
Systems
Although slug control is very important to avoid facility
damage and upsets, control options are limited.
Facility design must be considered for slug handling and
control.
The potential impact of slugging on the topsides system
operation must be addressed and then analyses of the
subsea system carried out to assess the effects.
Usually there is a trade off between the design of slug
catchers and the optimization of the flowline to reduce
slugging.
Slug Detection and Control
Systems
Slugs have been successfully detected using gamma
densitometers located on the riser, acoustical
measurements, and measurements of pressure at the
base of the riser.
Slug detection systems should be considered when
predicted slugging is expected to give operational
difficulties and/or when an advanced control system is to
be used for slug mitigation.
In this case, the slugging simulations should include the
advanced control to test the control algorithm. Flow
assurance and process disciplines should demonstrate
advanced controls critically dampen predicted slug
volumes and frequency.
Slug Detection and Control
Systems
Slug Catcher Sizing
Slug catchers should be sized to dampen surges
to a level that can be handled by downstream
processing equipment.
Before dynamic models of the topsides facilities
are available, the level of acceptable surging is
unknown and designers are often forced to
make assumptions vis--vis surge volumes,
such as designing for the 'one in a thousand'
slug.
Slug Detection and Control
Systems
Surge volume for gas condensate requirements are
determined from the outlet liquid rates predicted in the
ramp-up, startup, and pigging cases.
Ramp up - increase in production ahead of anticipated
increases in product demand.
The required slug catcher size is dependent on liquid
handling rate, pigging frequency, and ramp-up rates.
An iterative process may be required to identify optimum
slug catcher size, pigging frequency, liquid handling rate,
and acceptable ramp-up rates.
For this optimization, the results of the simulations
should be presented as surge volume requirements as a
function of liquid handling rate for representative ramp-
up rates and pigging frequencies
Slug Detection and Control
Systems
Separator volumes for black oil systems
are typically set by separation
requirements rather than liquid slug
handling capacity.
Consequently, the ability of the separator
to accommodate the slugs from all
operations should be confirmed based on
the results of the slugging simulations.
Slug reduction/elimination techniques
Design changes
Slug catchers and separators
Rate/GOR change or pressure change
Pipe diameter regulation (use of many smal lpipes) (Yocum, 1975)
Gas injection at riser base (Hill, 1990)
Pipe insertion (self induced gaslift) (Sarica & Tengesdal, 2000)
Venturi tubes
Dynamic simulation (Xu et al, 1997)
Operational changes
Choking (Schmidt et al., 1979, Taitel, 1986, Jansen et al., 1996)
Feed-forward control of separator level
Dynamic simulation (Xu et al., 1997)
Pigging operations
Use of flow-improver
Foaming (Hassanein et.al., 1998)
Artificial gas lifts
Optimise well production
Increase gas injection in well
Feedback control
Miniseparators
Active choking
Model based regulation
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Slug reduction/elimination techniques
Design changes
Slug catchers and separators
Rate/GOR change or pressure change
Pipe diameter regulation (use of many smal pipes) (Yocum, 1975)
Gas injection at riser base (Hill, 1990)
Pipe insertion (self induced gaslift) (Sarica & Tengesdal, 2000)
Venturi tubes
Dynamic simulation (Xu et al, 1997)
Operational changes
Choking (Schmidt et al., 1979, Taitel, 1986, Jansen et al., 1996)
Feed-forward control of separator level
Dynamic simulation (Xu et al., 1997)
Pigging operations
Use of flow-improver
Foaming (Hassanein et.al., 1998)
Artificial gas lifts
Optimise well production
Increase gas injection in well
Feedback control
Miniseparators
Active choking
Model based regulation
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Robust design -
Gas injection at riser base
(Hill, 1990)
+
Reduced static head (weight of liquid)
Prevent severe slugging
Smoothen start-up transients
Qgas
-
Large amounts of injection gas needed
Extra injection pipe needed
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Robust design -
Self gas lifting
(Sarcia & Tengesdal, 2000)
+
Reduced static head (weight of liquid)
Prevent severe slugging
Smoothen start-up transients
No extra injection gas needed
-
Extra injection pipe needed will be expensive
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Robust operation
Choking
(Schmidt et al., 1979, Taitel, 1986, Jansen et al., 1996 )

+
Higher pressure and smaller severe slug flow
regime
Easy and cheap technique
-
Manual work
Lower capacity of pipe
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Feedback control
Active Choking
(Statoil, 2003)

+
Reduces the slug length by opening the hock valve
when the slugs starts to develop sucks the slug up.
Easy and cheap technique
-
Lower capacity of pipe
Can be a problem for deep waters
1.stage
separator
PIC


SP
D
PT


MV
PT


Used as
regulation valve
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Robust operation
Optimize Well Production
(ABB)

OptimizeIT Active Well Control
- stabilizes the oil production
from the well by active
control of the production
and/or injection choke
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Robust operation
Increased/controled gas injection rate in gas lifts
+
Increased gas flow rate and GOR (less chance for severe
slugging)
Less static head
-
Increased frictional losses
Joule-Thomson Cooling
Need injection gas
Annulu
s
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Feedback control -
Miniseparators
(Hollenberg, 1995, S3
TM
)

Principle is to keep the mixture flow rate
constant through the operation with a control
vale.
Difficulty in measuring flowrates is solved by
using minisparators
-
Lower capacity of pipe
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Slug reduction/elimination techniques
Design changes
Slug catchers and separators
Rate/GOR change or pressure change
Pipe diameter regulation (use of many smal pipes) (Yocum, 1975)
Gas injection at riser base (Hill, 1990)
Pipe insertion (self induced gaslift) (Sarica & Tengesdal, 2000)
Venturi tubes
Dynamic simulation (Xu et al, 1997)
Operational changes
Choking (Schmidt et al., 1979, Taitel, 1986, Jansen et al., 1996)
Feed-forward control of separator level
Dynamic simulation (Xu et al., 1997)
Pigging operations
Use of flow-improver
Foaming (Hassanein et.al., 1998)
Artificial gas lifts
Optimise well production
Increase gas injection in well
Feedback control
Miniseparators
Active choking
Model based regulation
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
1. Introduction to flow control and multi-phase flow
2. Slug flow
3. Stabilization of flow in Oil/Gas wells and pipelines
4. Examples of flow control on some oil and gas
fields
5. Conclusions
Outline
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
4700m
Slugg Control at Heidrun Nordflanken
Use of active slug control

Simulation before startup indicated slugging
Field measurements after startup proved slugging
Continuous slug regulation since startup
Also in use under startup of new wells
D

Elevation -355m
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Slugging in riser Heidrun D-line

Trykk toppside oppstrms choke
Large pressure variations
Periods ca. 17 minutes.
Disapears when chocking
upstream
Tetthet toppside
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Active Well Control at Brage A-21
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
2 2.5 3 3.5 4
76
78
80
82
84
86
88
Days
Brage WellCon data (Day 0 = 24-Aug-2001 07:59:00)
PT -13-217
Pres. [bar]
Downhole pressure
Optimize
IT
Active Well Control on Brage A-21
Starting Active Control
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Conclusions
Introduction to flow control
Unstable multiphase flow what, why
Severe slugging in gas/oil pipelines
Methods for control of severe slugging
Still an unresolved problem for deep waters
Successful practical examples
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines

Horizontal Two-Phase Flow
Segregated flow
Stratified
Annular
Wavy
Intermittent
Slug flow
Plug flow
Distributive flow
Bubble/mist flow
Froth flow
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines

Example horizontal slug flow
From Multiphase Flow Laboratory, Trondheim
Movie provided by John-Morten Godhavn,
Statoil
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines

Inclined flow
Waves!
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Horizontal Flow Map
Flow pattern map for
horizontal flow
Often specified in terms
of superficial velocity of
the phases liquid and
gas




Similarly for Gas
Annular
Slug
Stratified Wavy
Stratified
Bubble
-1
+1
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines

Vertical flow
Bubble flow
Continuous liquid phase with
dispersed bubbles of gas
Slug flow
Large gas bubbles
Slugs of liquid (with small
bubbles) inbetween
Churn flow
Bubbles start to coalesce
Up and down motion of liquid
Annular flow
Gas becomes the continuous
phase
Droplets in the gas phase
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Annular flow is a flow regime of two-phase gas-liquid flow (see gas-
liquid flow).

It is characterized by the presence of a liquid film flowing on the
channel wall (in a round channel this film is annulus-shaped which
gives the name to this type of flow) and with the gas flowing in the gas
core.

Churn flow (), also referred to as froth flow and semiannular flow is a
highly disturbed flow of gas and liquid.

It is characterized by the presence of a very thick and unstable liquid
film, with the liquid often oscillating up and down.

As an established flow regime, it appears only in vertical and near-
vertical tubes and is usually bounded by the slug and the annular flow
regimes.

In contrast to annular or slug flow regimes, both of which have a well-
defined structure, churn flow appears chaotic and is one of the least
understood of gas-liquid flow regimes.
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines

Example - vertical flow
From Multiphase Flow Laboratory, Trondheim
Movies provided by John-Morten Godhavn,
Statoil
Slug flow Bubble flow
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Vertical Flow Map
Partly dependent
on upstream
geometry
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Slug Flow
-
A fascinating but unwanted and damaging flow pattern
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Consequences of Slugging
Variations in flowrate to 1.stage
separator
Shutdowns, bad separation, level variations
Pressure pulses, vibrations and tearing on
equipment
Flow rate measurement problems

Variations in gasflow
Pressure variations
Liquid entrainment in gas outlet
Flaring
Flow rate measurement problems
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Normal steady slugs Hydrodynamic slugging
Unaffected by compressibility
Incompressible gas (high pressure) or high liquid rate
Normally not an operational problem
Short period
Slugs generated by compressibility effects
Severe slugging in a riser system (riser induced)
Hilly terrain slugs (terrain induced)
Other transient compressible effects
Long period
Transient slugs
Generated while changing inlet rate
Reservoir induced slug flow
Slug Flow Classification
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Slug flow generation
(Oliemans 1994)
Wave growth due to Kelvin
Helmholtz
instabilities
Slug growth criteria (the
slug has to
grow to be stable)
Hydrodynamic slug
growth Two criteria:
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Hydrodynamic slugging

Formed when waves reach the upper pipe wall; the
liquid blocks the pipe, and waves grows to slugs
Short slugs with high frequency
Gas rate, liquid rate and topography influences
degree of
slugging
Triggers riser slugging
Eksempel fra flerfaseanlegget p Tiller.
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Slugs from Gas Lift
Annulus
Gas lift is a technology to
produce oil and gas from wells
with low reservoir pressure
Gas lifts can result in highly
oscillating well flow
Casing-heading instabilities
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Slug formation in pipeline/riser
1. Initiation and Slug formation
Gas velocity too low to sustain liquid
film in riser
Liquid blocking
Gas pressure increases in pipe
No/low production
2. Slug production
Gas pressure equals liquid head
Liquid accelerates when gas enters
riser
Large peak in liquid flow rate
3. Gas blow down
Pressure drops as gas enters riser
Gas bubbles become continuous, liquid
film at wall
Gas velocity too low...
4. Liquid fallback
Liquid film flows down the riser


Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Conditions for severe slugging
Flow maps for pipe/riser
Conditions from literature
Be 81, Taitel et al 90,
Schmidt et al 85, Fuchs 87
Pressure limits
Depend on pipe geometry
Based on steady state analysis
Inaccessible variables
Dynamic simulation
When does slugging occur?
Pipelines with dips and humps
Low gas-oil ratio
Decreasing pressure
Long pipelines
Deep water production
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Important Severe Slugging Parameters

Gas and oil flowrate
Pipeline pressure
Upstream geometry
Graph from Fuchs
(1997)
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Important Severe Slugging Parameters
Gas and oil flowrate
Pipeline pressure
Upstream geometry
Pressur
e:30 bar
Pressur
e:
50 bar
Figures from
Fuchs (1997)
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Important Severe Slugging Parameters
Gas and oil flowrate
Pipeline pressure
Upstream geometry
S
t
r
i
g
h
t

p
i
p
e

u
p
s
t
r
e
a
m

P
i
p
e

b
u
c
k
l
i
n
g

u
p
s
t
r
e
a
m

Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
1. Introduction to multi-phase flow
2. Slug flow
3. Stabilization of flow in Oil/Gas wells and pipelines
4. Examples of flow control on some oil and gas
fields
5. Conclusions
Outline
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Thanks
Institute for Energy and Process Technology,
NTNU
Statoil
Norwegian Research Council
People who have helped my with this trial lecture
Lars Imsland, Elling Sletfjerding, John Morten Godhavn
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Flow control in petroleum production
Noise suppression
Drag reduction
Water-oil flow
Flow assurance
Slug control
Multiphase flow simulation
Flow Control in Oil/Gas
Wells and Pipelines
Drag reduction
Internal flows (pipes, ducts)
~100% skin friction
Increased throughput
Reduced pumping power
Reduced pipe/duct size
Wall modifications
Smoothing (paintings, coatings, pigging)
Riblets (shark-skin)
Compliant walls, flexible skin
MEMS (Micro-electromechanical systems)
Additives
Particles, dust, fibres
Polymers, surfactants (Drag reducing agents)
Micro-bubbles, fluid films