Balikpapan, July 2010
Analysis of Sand Transportability in Pipelines
Laras Wuri Dianningrum
Chemical Engineering Program of Study
Faculty of Industrial Technology
Bandung Institute of Technology
Contents
2 - Reference, date, place
Background of Study
Objectives
Methodology
Main Finding
Recommendation
3 - Reference, date, place
Background of Study
Bekapai pipelines
Surface corrosion by bacteria under sand layers
Sand accumulation
How to manage
?
Analysis of sand
transportability
-WHY
-WHEN
-HOW
Objectives
4 - Reference, date, place
FLOW REGIME
FLOW CRITICAL VELOCITY
SAND BEHAVIOR
Methodology (1)
5 - Reference, date, place
Sand Transportation in Pipeline
(critical flow velocity and sand behavior)
Holdup
Fluid properties
(Vsl,Vsg,ᵨ,σ,
µ)
Inclination
(θ)
Particleproperties
(Dp,ᵨ)
Sand Production
Rates
Pipeline properties
(D,roughness)
Flow regime
Further
analyze in
this study
MULTIPHASE FLOW
Actual liquid and
gas velocity, liquid
holdup comparison
FLOW REGIME
Experimental Correlation
Horizontal Pipe
(Mandhane Map)
Vertical Pipe
(Aziz Map)Beggs & Brill
Mechanistic Model
(all inclinations)
OLGA
SAND BEHAVIOR
Methodology (2)
6 - Reference, date, place
Oil-gas-water flow oil-gas & water-gas flow
VERTICAL and
HORIZONTAL
flow
1 2 3 4
Critical velocity
(Salama, 1989) and
Chien, 1994)
1 3
3
32
4
Vs
Vs
Vs
COMPARATIVE
STUDIES
Particles
Methodology (3)
7 - Reference, date, place
Assumptions used:
a.Steady state flow
b.There is not an inter-phase mass or energy transfer
c.Temperature and pressure are constants along pipeline
OLGA Spesifications:
a. 100 horizontal & 10 vertical sections
b. Run period: 48 hours
c. No slip: OFF
d. Steady-State: ON
Pipeline d (inch) Length (m) Wall thickness
(mm)
BB-BP 12 1660 9.52
BH-BG 6 1900 9.52
BF-BL 6 1000 9.52
BJ-BB 6 850 9.52
BK-BP 8 1900 9.52
BL-BA 6 1530 9.52
Pipeline P(bar) T (oC)Q Oil
(STBD)Q Gas
(MSCFD)Q Water (BWPD)
8 inch BK-BP1 10 60 1 960 68
6 inch BJ-BB 56 60 0 1302 1
12 inch BB-BP1 10 60 339 1608 2152
6 inch BF-BL 11 60 175 1712 1177
6 inch BH-BG 13 60 422 1239 478
12 inch BL-BA 10 60 5011 9540 4263
Beggs & Brill correlation
CL, L1,L2,L3,L4,Fr
Flow regime
(segregated, distributed, intermittent, transition)
Main Finding (1)
8 - Reference, date, place
Mandhane’s Map
Horizontal pipe1 3Vs
vsg (ft/s) vsml (ft/s)Regime
(Mandhane) Regime (BB)
3.64 0.0134 Stratified segregated
1.41 0.0003 Stratified segregated
2.71 0.2126 Stratified segregated
10.48 0.4616 Slug segregated
6.39 0.3074 Stratified segregated
16.09 0.7916 Slug segregated
Sand
Behavior
Ruano,2008
Stratified
Slug
Pipeline
8 inch BK-BP1
6 inch BJ-BB
12 inch BB-BP1
6 inch BF-BL
6 inch BH-BG
12 inch BL-BA
Stratified:
-constant behavior
-high concentration in liquid
phase
-sand dune formation
Slug:
-smaller D pipe, more effective
sand transport
-slug body--turbulence
9 - Reference, date, place
Main Finding (2)
Vertical Pipe32 Vs
Beggs & Brill correlation
CL, L1,L2,L3,L4,Fr
Flow regime
(segregated, distributed, intermittent, transition)
Pipeline
Regime
Aziz
Beggs &
Brill
8 inch BK-BP1 Slug Segregated
6 inch BJ-BB Slug Segregated
12 inch BB-BP1 Slug Segregated
6 inch BF-BL Slug Segregated
6 inch BH-BG Slug Segregated
12 inch BL-BA Slug Segregated
Sand
Behavior
Annular-Segregated
(very high gas-liquid ratio, high gas flow rate, annular film on the wall is thickened
at the bottom of pipe)
Slug-Intermittent
(medium gas-liquid ratio, high liquid flow rate)
Annular:
-Entrained sand in gas and liquid
phase
-Increase pressure drop and
erosion risk
Slug:
-more complex behavior
-depends on slug frequency, slug
length, pipe diameter, etc.
Aziz et al. Map
10 - Reference, date, place
Main Finding (3)
34 VsFlow regime, holdup, fluid actual velocity
50th section
(H)
Riser bottom
(101th section) (R)
Outlet (110th
section) (O)
Pipe geometry
Pipeline H R O H R O
8” BK-BP1 1 1,2,3,4 Mostly 2 1 2 Mostly 2
6” BJ-BB - - - 1 2 2
12” BB-BP1 1 1,2,3,4 Mostly 2 1 1,2,3,4 1,2,3,4
6” BF-BL 1 2 2 1 2 2
6” BH-BG 1 2 2 1 2 2
12” BL-BA 1 2 2 1 2 2
1
2
3
4
Stratified
Annular
Dispersed
Slug
OIL BLOCKAGESLUG 8”BK-BP1 and 12”BB-BP1
WATER BLOCKAGESLUG12”BB-BP1OLGA
Gas-Oil flow Gas-Water flow
50th section(horizontal line)
Beggs & Brill (horizontal)
101th section(riser bottom)
110th section(pipe outlet)
Beggs & Brill (vertical)
FLOW REGIME
Stratified Segregated
Stratified, annular, slug,
dispersed
Mostly annular, slug, dispersed Segregated
HOLDUP 0.2-0.52 (fluctuating)
0.12 0-1 (slug) 0-0.25 (slug) 0. 15
ACTUAL LIQUID VELOCITY
-0.79-2.25 m/s (fluctuating, closer
to zero)0.08 m/s
Too low (assumed zero),
except in slug regime (reach
1.5 m/s
0-(-1.5) m/s 0.14 m/s
ACTUAL GAS VELOCITY
0.8-2.9 m/s(fluctuating)
0.93 m/s(-4)-8 m/s
(back flow)-1.3-2.2 m/s(back flow)
2.18 m/s
11 - Reference, date, place
50th section(horizontal line)
Beggs & Brill (horizontal)
101th section(riser bottom)
110th section(pipe outlet)
Beggs & Brill
(vertical)
FLOW REGIME Stratified Segregated Annular Annular SegregatedHOLDUP 0.17 0.02 m/s 0 0 0.03
ACTUAL LIQUID VELOCITY
Too low, fluctuating, back
flow0.01 m/s back flow
Too low, fluctuating, back
flow 0 m/s
ACTUAL GAS VELOCITY
Too low, fluctuating, back flow
0.57 m/sToo low,
fluctuating, back flow
Too low, fluctuating, back flow
0.58 m/s
Main Finding (4)
12” BB-BP1
(OIL-GAS
FLOW)
6” BJ-BB
(WATER-GAS
FLOW)
12 - Reference, date, place
Main Finding (5)
Critical VelocityHorizontal Pipe--Salama (1989)
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
8.22E-05 9.38E-02 1.41E-01
cri
tical velo
cit
y (
m/s
)
liquid superficial velocity (m/s)
Particle A
Particle B
Particle C
Particle D
Particle E
Particle F
Particle G
Particle H
minimal velocity to avoid sand settling (Vm)
sand settling flow velocity<Vm affected factors:
1. particle properties
2. fluid properties
3. pipe properties
Investigation
by Salama
(1989)
Bekapai case
Sand particle
size
100, 280,
and 500 micrometer
x<38 micrometer until x>600 micrometer
Pipe diameter4 in 6, 8, 12 in
MediaWater, gas
(CO2, N2,
air), oil,
inhibitors, sand
Water, oil, gas, sand
Water cut1%, 10%,
50%, and 100%
46%, 53%, 86%, 87%, 98%, and 100%
Pressures 4 and 8 bara 11, 12, 14 , 57 bara
Temperature Ambient Wall (60oC)
NO SAND SETTLING OCCURS IN ALL INVESTIGATED PIPELINES!
13 - Reference, date, place
Main Finding (6)
Critical VelocityVertical Pipe--Chien (1994)
SAND SETTLING IN 6”
BJ-BB
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50%
weig
ht
critical velocity (m/s)
particle B
particle C
particle D
particle E
particle F
particle G
particle H
38 µm<d<63
µm
355µm<d<600 µm
250
µm<d<355 µm
150
µm<d<250 µm
106
µm<d<150 µm
63
µm<d<106 µm
d>600 µm
d<38 µm
affected factors:
1. particle properties
2. fluid properties
14 - Reference, date, place
Recommendation
take a precaution over sand accumulation, especially at the riser bottom or another
transition section of pipelines due to analysis results. Fluid mixture velocity should be
enhanced until exceed the critical flow velocity to prevent initial sand bed formation.
Routine pigging should be done in pipelines that have been detected to experience sand
settling. Some pipelines which have low fluid mixture velocity (6” BJ-BB, 8” BK-BP1, and 12”
BB-BP1) should be placed at top priority.
Because sand settling phenomena strongly depends on the present data of fluid volumetric
rate in pipelines, this analysis is recommended to be routinely updated.
use OLGA instead of Beggs & Brill and experimental correlation in application to determine
multiphase flow properties, especially flow regime and dynamic behavior of each parameter
included.
do further study and analysis about this topic, especially about the other parameters
correlation that affecting sand behavior (e.g. pipe geometry and fluid properties).
use real model of Bekapai pipelines and fluid in order to be applied in the future.
Balikpapan, July 2010
Thank you for your attention……………
Laras Wuri Dianningrum
Chemical Engineering Program of Study
Faculty of Industrial Technology
Bandung Institute of Technology
Top Related